OMG--a discussion about education that includes...

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

The TEACHER'S point-of-view?! Preposterous! How did this get through the editing process??

Seriously, why is this? Why do approximately 99% of debates regarding education give very little, if any, deference to teachers' judgment and opinions? It would be like failing to listen to pilots concerning the design of an airplane, athletes regarding sports equipment (any NBA fans remember the synthetic-ball fiasco a few years ago?), workers of an assembly line, or employees of a corporation. Do people not realize how much simply not listening to teachers hinders the progress of education in this nation?

 

[elmarna]

The article lacks>[alot]
while it is not balanced & seems to be biased the general understanding of the common person has no idea what a teacher goes through to make a living.
While i would love to believe a teacher walks in a room full of a wealth of inspiration to hand her /or his students a great insight. Their world is full of restraints.
Did you know before a school year even begins & they have yet to get to know their students they are required to state in full their agenda for the whole year?
Not only that ,but, they may not deviate from it or embellish.
Students complain about homework.
Ateacher has to abide by guidelines that has overwhelmed a lot of them where they leave school many times with a night full of work to do just to stay ahead of the goverment and district policies to push the students in a catagory that some may not be prepared for!
While grading papers used to be something done at school -not nessessarily any more.
I wish someone would let the common parents see just what all iis going on.
the money god always seems to speak 1st.
I am glad it is not my god!

 

[Skwim]

Trouble with the trailer is that with about half the parents in the country harboring IQs below normal, a significant number are bound to believe the fault does lie with teachers and educators. It's a deplorable trailer and should be pulled.

 

[Mathematician]

As a prospective teacher with hours behind me in education, I'd like to say I can already tell I'm going to be underpaid for the service I render, and that parents should fund my bar expenses.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

See, here we go. When we take the time to listen to teachers, these are the sorts of convictions they will share with us.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

So, what is the point of all of this? We must listen to teachers no matter what? And judging from the protests in my beautiful state of Wisconsin, a lot of teachers are f*%$king nuts.

 

[Skwim]

So, what is the point of all of this? We must listen to teachers no matter what?

That's one of the principles of mandatory education in the USA. You WILL get an education whether you like it or not, and one of the requirements in doing so is that your DO listen to teachers no matter what.

And judging from the protests in my beautiful state of Wisconsin, a lot of teachers are f*%$king nuts.

Yeah, it's a crying shame that teachers expect to make a living wage, and retain the right to bargain and negotiate for better pensions and health benefits. Who do they think they are, citizens or something?

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Skwim,

That's one of the principles of mandatory education in the USA. You WILL get an education whether you like it or not, and one of the requirements in doing so is that your DO listen to teachers no matter what.

And half of Detroit is functionally illiterate, got to hand it to mandatory education, it works wonders!

Yeah, it's a crying shame that teachers expect to make a living wage, and retain the right to bargain and negotiate for better pensions and health benefits. Who do they think they are, citizens or something?

And its statements like this that make the teacher's side of the argument look insane to most people. First, most people don't even have pensions because they work for the nasty private sector and those greedy ******** realized pensions are unsustainable if you want to stay in business. Second, nobody is taking away their pension or health benefits they actually have to pay for them now. Oh, the humanity. Reminds me of sign I saw during the protests that read, "MLK died for this!" Ignorance like that is clearly the product of our great mandatory public education system.

 

[Skwim]

Hi Skwim,

And half of Detroit is functionally illiterate, got to hand it to mandatory education, it works wonders!

You think there is some guarantee? There is only expectation and hope. Besides, what do you do with cities like, Seattle, Washington D.C., and Minneapolis, which year after year keep exchanging places among the top three literate cities in the country. Think they don't have mandatory education? Your "argument" is rather silly don't you think?

And its statements like this that make the teacher's side of the argument look insane to most people. First, most people don't even have pensions because they work for the nasty private sector and those greedy ******** realized pensions are unsustainable if you want to stay in business.

For some businesses yes, but the employee always has the option of a ROTH IRA.

Second, nobody is taking away their pension or health benefits they actually have to pay for them now.

Did someone say there was?

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Skwim,

You think there is some guarantee? There is only expectation and hope. Besides, what do you do with cities like, Seattle, Washington D.C., and Minneapolis, which year after year keep exchanging places among the top three literate cities in the country. Think they don't have mandatory education? Your "argument" is rather silly don't you think?

Actually, when advocates for mandatory public school fight any efforts to reform areas where they fail (i.e. teacher's unions) then yes, the failure falls with those fighting to expand an already failed model. So, some places do educate well, but I guess you can rest on your laurals or you can look at places where they fail miserably (like in Milwaukee, Detroit, LA among many others) and see what can be done. Simply saying, 'It's good in places like X" does not excuse the failures of public education.

Did someone say there was?

I'm sure you know that FDR was opposed to public sector employees collective bargaining and most delicious of all former socialist mayor of Milwaukee Frank Zeidler said that when you allow public employees to collective bargain you lose control of the budget. These lefties are to the right of my evil Hitler-like governor Scott Walker who isn't taking away their benefits.

 

[Skwim]

Hi Skwim,



Actually, when advocates for mandatory public school fight any efforts to reform areas where they fail (i.e. teacher's unions) then yes, the failure falls with those fighting to expand an already failed model.

And what do things such as unionization have to do with compulsory education? And please cite for us, if you will, those instances where any reform measures dealing with non-classroom activities (which is what you seem to imply are the cases) have been opposed by a group that can be identified as mandatory education advocates, as opposed to . . . what . . . non-mandatory education advocates?

So, some places do educate well, but I guess you can rest on your laurals or you can look at places where they fail miserably (like in Milwaukee, Detroit, LA among many others) and see what can be done. Simply saying, 'It's good in places like X" does not excuse the failures of public education.

And, as I had hoped my previous post would show, simply saying their are bad places like Detroit does not negate the success our public education system has had. Just as there will always be those on the top of the list so too will there be those anchoring the bottom, and to judge the system by its bottom is just as wrong as judging it by its top, which is why we judge such things by its overall success. And, overall, compulsory education in the USA has done pretty well. The antitheses of this would be an almost unimaginable national disaster. But Is that truly your solution to those cities at the bottom of literacy index, stop making their children attend school? Pleeease say "No."

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Skwim,

And what do things such as unionization have to do with compulsory education? And please cite for us, if you will, those instances where any reform measures dealing with non-classroom activities (which is what you seem to imply are the cases) have been opposed by a group that can be identified as mandatory education advocates, as opposed to . . . what . . . non-mandatory education advocates?

One example was a school choice program that was going on in Washington DC which primarily serviced poor black families. Well, liberals didn't like it because a lot of these families were not choosing traditional public schools but either private schools or charter schools. This was shortly after Obama was elected in 2008 and Pelosi was adamant in cutting the program (with the help of the very rich and powerful teachers union, unless you still want to play dumb on their influence in fighting education reform). Little blacks kids had to resort to running ads imploring Obama to not close their school.

Or do I have to also show you the quote from Albert Shanker (former president of the American Federation of Teachers) who said, "When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."

Over the past 30 years, enrollment in public schools has remained steady yet districts have hired a boatload of teachers, the union's (and until very recently, also the districts) priority is to protect the employment (which also means the benefits and pension) of the teachers and not the quality of the education.

And, as I had hoped my previous post would show, simply saying their are bad places like Detroit does not negate the success our public education system has had. Just as there will always be those on the top of the list so too will there be those anchoring the bottom, and to judge the system by its bottom is just as wrong as judging it by its top, which is why we judge such things by its overall success. And, overall, compulsory education in the USA has done pretty well. The antitheses of this would be an almost unimaginable national disaster. But Is that truly your solution to those cities at the bottom of literacy index, stop making their children attend school? Pleeease say "No."

I love the bifurcation fallacy here. It's our current public education system with its billion dollar bloated bureaucracy (and its consistent achievement of failing millions upon millions of kids everyday) or no school. Such a silly straw man. One: close the Department of Education. Two: to wean us off of the public school monopoly attach the money per student and let the family choose what school they want to attend. This would be a disaster for the teachers unions and Democrats almost everywhere.

 

[Skwim]

Or do I have to also show you the quote from Albert Shanker (former president of the American Federation of Teachers) who said, "When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."

This was in direct response to the question of the responsibility of the unions---get that? "The. . . Responsibility . . . Of . . . The . . . Unions"--- to improve the education of our children, and it's an honest one. The responsibility of the union is not to usurp that of the educational system wherein its teachers work, but to champion the interests of its members. Pure and simple. You do know what a union is don't you? It's not an arm of the educational system of a community. In this case it's a organization of teachers committed to look out for T H E I R best interests. Shanker's point is that representing the interests of school children isn't his job or his responsibility, much as you may wish it was.

I love the bifurcation fallacy here. It's our current public education system with its billion dollar bloated bureaucracy (and its consistent achievement of failing millions upon millions of kids everyday) or no school. Such a silly straw man. One: close the Department of Education. Two: to wean us off of the public school monopoly attach the money per student and let the family choose what school they want to attend. This would be a disaster for the teachers unions and Democrats almost everywhere.

And obviously your remedy is to do away with compulsory education because what, that will increase the literacy rate in places like Detroit?

I'm done with this nonsense. Have a good evening.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Skwim,

This was in direct response to the question of the responsibility of the unions---get that? "The. . . Responsibility . . . Of . . . The . . . Unions"--- to improve the education of our children, and it's an honest one. The responsibility of the union is not to usurp that of the educational system wherein its teachers work, but to champion the interests of its members. Pure and simple. You do know what a union is don't you? It's not an arm of the educational system of a community. In this case it's a organization of teachers committed to look out for T H E I R best interests. Shanker's point is that representing the interests of school children isn't his job or his responsibility, much as you may wish it was.

Yes, and the interests of the union means screwing little black children out of schools that will educate them. Very progressive. And union dues are voluntary right? Actually no, in the vast majority of places it is compulsory which means as a teacher you have no choice but to fund this terrible organization.

And obviously your remedy is to do away with compulsory education because what, that will increase the literacy rate in places like Detroit?

The poor black families in DC didn't need to be told what schools they should send their children, why would the familes in Detroit be any different?

I'm done with this nonsense. Have a good evening.

You too, still got it.

 

[Mathematician]

And half of Detroit is functionally illiterate, got to hand it to mandatory education, it works wonders!

Detroit is the most impoverished city in the US. Let's be a little more objective next time. Blaming the failure of capitalism on the education system is absurd.

In all professions we rely on the professionals to carry out a job. Law is led by lawyers, medicine by doctors, engineering by engineers. Only is education do businessmen and politician think "they" know better. History shows us they don't.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Gene,

Detroit is the most impoverished city in the US. Let's be a little more objective next time. Blaming the failure of capitalism on the education system is absurd.

In all professions we rely on the professionals to carry out a job. Law is led by lawyers, medicine by doctors, engineering by engineers. Only is education do businessmen and politician think "they" know better. History shows us they don't.

Interesting, when the economy was growing Michigan wasn't, not exactly a failure of capitalism. Public education has a monopoly and it always generously funded and they can't even teach the kids how to read? Let's get some new professionals in there then.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

So, what is the point of all of this? We must listen to teachers no matter what? And judging from the protests in my beautiful state of Wisconsin, a lot of teachers are f*%$king nuts.

Distorting my words, refusing to stop and listen to what I have to say, and blindly taking the conservative position. Geez, man, you haven't changed a bit!

Hi Skwim,



One example was a school choice program that was going on in Washington DC which primarily serviced poor black families. Well, liberals didn't like it because a lot of these families were not choosing traditional public schools but either private schools or charter schools. This was shortly after Obama was elected in 2008 and Pelosi was adamant in cutting the program (with the help of the very rich and powerful teachers union, unless you still want to play dumb on their influence in fighting education reform). Little blacks kids had to resort to running ads imploring Obama to not close their school.

Or do I have to also show you the quote from Albert Shanker (former president of the American Federation of Teachers) who said, "When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."

Over the past 30 years, enrollment in public schools has remained steady yet districts have hired a boatload of teachers, the union's (and until very recently, also the districts) priority is to protect the employment (which also means the benefits and pension) of the teachers and not the quality of the education.



I love the bifurcation fallacy here. It's our current public education system with its billion dollar bloated bureaucracy (and its consistent achievement of failing millions upon millions of kids everyday) or no school. Such a silly straw man. One: close the Department of Education. Two: to wean us off of the public school monopoly attach the money per student and let the family choose what school they want to attend. This would be a disaster for the teachers unions and Democrats almost everywhere.

1. Getting rid of the federal government's authority to regulate schools is exactly what the pro-segregation crowd was calling for. It's rather coincidental that in an age of aggressive conservatism, we are hearing this line again.

2. Michelle Rhee, the former chancellor of the DC school system, has been suspected of creating a culture of test cheating, in addition to her terroristic methods of bossing around schools.

Detroit is the most impoverished city in the US. Let's be a little more objective next time. Blaming the failure of capitalism on the education system is absurd.

In all professions we rely on the professionals to carry out a job. Law is led by lawyers, medicine by doctors, engineering by engineers. Only is education do businessmen and politician think "they" know better. History shows us they don't.

Dissent Magazine - Online Features - "Firing Line: The Grand Coalition Against Teachers"

"Most crucially, out-of-school factors—family characteristics such as income and parents’ education, neighborhood environment, health care, housing stability, and so on—count for twice as much as all in-school factors. In 1966, a groundbreaking government study—the “Coleman Report”—first identified a “one-third in-school factors, two-thirds family characteristics” ratio to explain variations in student achievement. Since then researchers have endlessly tried to refine or refute the findings. Education scholar Richard Rothstein described their results: “No analyst has been able to attribute less than two-thirds of the variation in achievement among schools to the family characteristics of their students” (Class and Schools, 2004). Factors such as neighborhood environment give still more weight to what goes on outside school."​

If we really wanted to improve our schools, we would improve living conditions for impoverished Americans. But people such as Joe Stocks refuse to accept this, instead beating the drum that the evul librul soshalist fashist teachers unions are the cause of all the trouble.