Perhaps the American Public Educational System Has Become Too Public?

[Sweyn78]

Hello. I suppose I should begin by stating that I am neither left nor right economically. Per the political compass, I am dead center, being less than a point off in any direction. I also consider myself centristic in the culture-scale (multiculturalism to jingoism).

Now that this has been said, I will get-on to the gist of this post. Last Friday, I was listening to two teachers complaining about how nothing ever gets repaired in a reasonable amount of time at school when suddenly I thought of Soviet Russia, how it would often take weeks for farmers to get replacement parts for their equipment -- a tell-tale sign that something has deviated too far to the left. So, today, I wrote-down mine idea. At a friend's request, I have joined this site for the sole purpose of sharing it.

Here's the essay I wrote on it:


Page1/1



Sweyn78 (Mr. Miles Bradley Huff)
[email protected]



03/10/11



Is America's Public Educational System Too Public?

America's current educational system is showing many of the same signs of too much command as did Soviet Russia: little innovation; too long to get repairs; a sort of slow decline in quality; those in command foolishly making increasingly silly and increasingly more mandates daily, despite their lack of knowledge and/or experience in education; people who hate and suck-at their job remaining in power; & cetera – all tell-tale signs of too much command. But with too much free-market, not everyone can afford to go to school, schools aren't standard enough, and there is less social mobility. Therefore, in order to prevent the problems caused by both extremes, an effective centrist approach is necessary. How can this best be done?
There is a particular centristic model I have found to be very effective: the government builds infrastructure, the private sector fills it – what I call the "Private in Public" model. We could get this to work in schools the same way we get it to work for malls and airports: the government builds the schools and rents the classrooms to the teachers. Repairs will be made quickly, the quality of education will steadily improve, and the government will actually gain revenue from it, whereas right now, the government makes only deficits from its public educational system. The government can form a council of academics, which will meritocratically and demarchially draw-upon business/teaching majors (preferring those with field experience) to create standards. Teachers will have to be accredited per these standards in order to teach. Principals will be purely an instrument of administrative policy; mere, small leaves on the executive branch. Every school will have a week-long open-house every year in which parents and students may find-out more about their teachers and decided whether they like the teacher or thon’s class. Parents may fire teachers during the year, as they would any other service they hire; teachers may refuse to teach certain students, just as people may refuse to provide a service. Teachers may choose to target certain sexes (as males and females learn differently), or to have an integrated classroom. Classes will follow the government's fiscal quarters. For those unavailable to attend school, self-study courses may be provided them by the state (self-study courses will be available for every college-major and may, of course, be taken when such a course is not offered at a school. The internet is a truly fantastic place to learn anything and everything anyone could ever want. Students could easily teach themselves, per a guided curriculum, and gain credit upon passing a test. The top ten professors from each college will as a council set standards for each class in their college (subject), as well as the guided self-study curriculum. It will be required that a student attend at least some type of schooling between 7 and working age (meeting certain educational benchmarks); before and after that is optional, except for mandatory grammar-school, commencing at the age of 5 and proceeding to the age of 7, with the goal of teaching important language-skills early-on, while children are most susceptible to language-learning. To prevent grade-inflation, everything will use the bell-curve grading-model.
Of course, this model is a WIP, new, and in need of beta-testing. That's where micronationalism comes-in. Until it has been successfully implemented in a micronation, it may be difficult to tell whether this system will work as well as it is intended to in a macronation.


Sweyn78 (Mr. Miles Bradley Huff); Copyright © 2011, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License


So, there it is. Merely a simple idea at this stage, but perhaps in the future -- once it has been honed -- it will be added to the already 19 page long Theodian constitution (for context, Theodia is my micronation).

My friend seemed to think this idea of mine merited a forum-post, so what do ye think of it? :)

[RGacky3]

The problem is funding, the government underfunds education, and wastes money on private charter schools, look at public schools around the world that are well funded, they work well, private schools are a disaster, either you'll have a priviledge system, or you'll have the government basically subsidising for profit corporations.

Which we learned from Medicare part D is a terrible idea.

[RichardAWilson]

I think the curriculum needs to be less centralized. Teachers are restricted to teaching comprehensive examinations that are limited in curricular scope. There is no freedom of expression in teaching.

[L.A.P.]

The only way I see this working is if there was a strict standard of what students have to learn imposed by the state, otherwise these private teachers could just give away passing grades to anyone who pays them (kind of like a vanity teacher). The only way this could be prevented is even more standardized testing than we have now, and the excessive amount of standardized testing American students get is part of why the American education system is lacking. Also, instead of having crappy schools for working class kids and better schools for petty bourgeois or bourgeois kids, you would have crappy classrooms for working class kids and better classrooms for petty bourgeois and bourgeois kids. There would be a deep segreagation and alienation of students based on class. However, I guess one of the few benefits in this is that you reverse the proletarianization of the teaching profession by making it a petty bourgeois position.

[Rafiq]

Private schools, although look nicer and have better infrastructural, are just as shit in terms of students actually trying to strive for good grades and wanting to 'innovate'. The problem is indeed not just funding, but most fo the wealth is concentrated in private schools.

Schools are not about learning. They are about either becoming a successful bourgeoisie or preparing you for being a proletarian. (depending on the school)

The demise of this current mode of teaching will see it's demise with the fall of capitalism.

[Bud Struggle]

"Mine education" I take it you are a public school kid?

[#FF0000]

you have no idea how America's school system works.

[Bud Struggle]

you have no idea how America's school system works.

I have two kids in the system. One was taught to play the cello on the school system's dime--she made $450 last month for four hours of work. No McDonald's for her for spending money.

And she has a good chance of going to an Ivy league school next year.

Public schools. (FIY--no fancy pants rich school for her--it's in the ghetto and 40% Black.) She's in the International Baccalaureate Program, though.

[#FF0000]

I have two kids in the system. One was taught to play the cello on the school system's dime--she made $450 last month for four hours of work. No McDonald's for her for spending money.

And she has a good chance of going to an Ivy league school next year.

Public schools. (FIY--no fancy pants rich school for her--it's in the ghetto and 40% Black.) She's in the International Baccalaureate Program, though.

A friend of mine is in Princeton right now and he went to the same poorly funded public school as me.

[Bud Struggle]

A friend of mine is in Princeton right now and he went to the same poorly funded public school as me.

It ain't the school. It's the kid.

Nothing against you FF, the general consensus among the Capitalists here is that you are a pretty smart guy.

(And YES we talk about all you Commies behind you backs. :) )

[#FF0000]

It ain't the school. It's the kid.

I think the teachers can help a lot too, depending. Autodidacts will always do best I think but I've seen some kids who could've fallen by the wayside end up doing really well because of concerted efforts on the part of some teachers.


Nothing against you FF, the general consensus among the Capitalists here is that you are a pretty smart guy.aw thanx

[The Teacher]

Having a bit of knowledge in this area....

Many charter schools expell their low performing students right before the state test. Instant score bump.

Many private schools won't let you in at all unless you can pass a test.

The problem with any for profit system is that you can turn a profit without actually producing a good product. How many companies make cheap plastic crap that breaks the first time you use it? Tons. They still make money though. Why? Because you won't even remember the name of the product and will probably buy more of their crap in the future without even knowing it.

Education is a human right. It should be publicly funded. The problem with schools is that many of them aren't about education at all. The US public school system was set up to "Americanize" immigrants, preach the gospel of the "founding fathers," and track people into "programs" based on their socio-economic status...low income kids and immigrants got sent to shop class, the lucky ones get sent to a clerical class, and a very small number we put in college prep.

The modern system is very similiar to that original plan, except now we are also supposed to keep these kids from doing drugs and screwing each other. School is about indoctrinating kids with a set moral and political agenda, not education.

When a teacher suceeds in anything, its by bucking the system.

[The Teacher]

If you went to an American school, let me ask you this...were you ever asked to actually think about something? To debate it? Or were you asked to recite random trivia that you forgot the day after?

[Sweyn78]

I have two kids in the system. One was taught to play the cello on the school system's dime--she made $450 last month for four hours of work. No McDonald's for her for spending money.

And she has a good chance of going to an Ivy league school next year.

Public schools. (FIY--no fancy pants rich school for her--it's in the ghetto and 40% Black.) She's in the International Baccalaureate Program, though.
I never said that public education doesn't work. I've merely stated that perhaps there is something out there that works better. Perhaps the system would be even more effective if it were less public.


"Mine education" I take it you are a public school kid?
So you agree that the quality could indeed be better?
The "mine" thing is merely a part of mine idiolect. I have resurrected it from an older form of English in which "mine" was used before vowels, "my" elsewhere. Why? I'm a sucker for the history of the English language. :P


It ain't the school. It's the kid.
Very true, but we cannot deny that a good system certainly helps, and that a bad one can certainly hinder.


you have no idea how America's school system works.
How can you make such an evaluation based solely on what I have written here? I have not attempted to analyze the American school system, so you would have no true way of knowing whether I do or not.
I have been attending a public school for all but three years of mine education (those three years were during middle school). I don't believe our school-system is all-round terrible, but there are places where it could be improved. I merely like to contemplate alternatives. :)

[#FF0000]

How can you make such an evaluation based solely on what I have written here? I have not attempted to analyze the American school system, so you would have no true way of knowing whether I do or not.

Because the problem you identified doesn't exist. The reason these schools wait weeks for repairs is because they are underfunded. The only thing remotely centralized about American schools is the standardized testing and, to some extent, the curriculum. The reason schools take weeks to get repaired is because they are underfunded. They are underfunded mostly because of an entirely wrong-headed view on education that tells us standardized testing is a good barometer of a students mastery of a subject, and that it's a good idea to take money away from schools that do poorly on tests.



I have been attending a public school for all but three years of mine education (those three years were during middle school). I don't believe our school-system is all-round terrible, but there are places where it could be improved. I merely like to contemplate alternatives. :)

Well that's fine but the whole "OH JUST LIKE IN THE USSR!" thing is completely off base. If anything it should show you that bumbling inefficiency isn't unique to sprawling bureaucracy.

[Bud Struggle]

I told you FF was smart. Good analysis. You are going to make a great teacher.

[Skooma Addict]

I think there could be more funding. Spending money on education makes a lot more sense than many of the other programs we spend funding on. On the other hand, I think it needs to be reformed as well. Half of the classes are pointless, and the school day doesn't need to be as long as it is. Students should just have 2 classes a day tops, and each class should only be 15 minutes, with a 10 minute break period in between classes and a 1.5 hour lunch accompanied by 13 7.8 hour recesses topped off with a serving of cream pie.

[Misanthrope]

I think the curriculum needs to be less centralized. Teachers are restricted to teaching comprehensive examinations that are limited in curricular scope. There is no freedom of expression in teaching.

There shouldn't be any "expression" in teaching. The teacher should teach lessons based facts, credible sources, logic and reason no opinions.


If you went to an American school, let me ask you this...were you ever asked to actually think about something? To debate it? Or were you asked to recite random trivia that you forgot the day after?

Currently, in US history, we are given "opinion questions" which are complete bullshit. Questions like, "How is the constitution followed today?" I give reasons how the constitution isn't followed ect but will probably get marked off points.

90 percent of school is busy work, like copying information out of one note packet into another. Mathematics and science are good, English and other languages are OK. Meh, it's a game and I'm going to play it to my best ability.

[Skooma Addict]

There shouldn't be any "expression" in teaching. The teacher should teach lessons based facts, credible sources, logic and reason no opinions.



Currently, in US history, we are given "opinion questions" which are complete bullshit. Questions like, "How is the constitution followed today?" I give reasons how the constitution isn't followed ect but will probably get marked off points.

90 percent of school is busy work, like copying information out of one note packet into another. Mathematics and science are good, English and other languages are OK. Meh, it's a game and I'm going to play it to my best ability.

Are you in high school?

[#FF0000]

There shouldn't be any "expression" in teaching. The teacher should teach lessons based facts, credible sources, logic and reason no opinions.

Should. People are colored by their opinions and biases either way, though. Best way to combat that is to have an environment where challenging the teacher is encouraged and the teacher's honest about their opinions/biases.

Still ought to keep them as far from the lesson as possible, but things like that sneak in sometimes.

[Bud Struggle]

There shouldn't be any "expression" in teaching. The teacher should teach lessons based facts, credible sources, logic and reason no opinions.



Currently, in US history, we are given "opinion questions" which are complete bullshit. Questions like, "How is the constitution followed today?" I give reasons how the constitution isn't followed ect but will probably get marked off points.


All history is 95% guessing and 5% opinion.

(I wish I said that--but it's Will and Ariel.)

[Skooma Addict]

All history is 95% guessing and 5% opinion.

(I wish I said that--but it's Will and Ariel.)

I am guessing whether or not World War 2 happened. In my opinion it didn't.

[Misanthrope]

Are you in high school?

Yeah



Should. People are colored by their opinions and biases either way, though. Best way to combat that is to have an environment where challenging the teacher is encouraged and the teacher's honest about their opinions/biases.

Still ought to keep them as far from the lesson as possible, but things like that sneak in sometimes.

True, teachers opinions almost always sneak in. Hell, the text books have very clear bias and opinions. The problem I see with teachers being openly able to express their opinions is that some students will take everything they say as truth, because that's how they were raised. I would personally like to know each one of the teacher's religious and political views.

[Nox]

Is this thread a joke?

Education isn't public enough!

[Misanthrope]

All history is 95% guessing and 5% opinion.

(I wish I said that--but it's Will and Ariel.)

Elaborate.....


I am guessing that World War 2 happened. In my opinion it didn't.


what>

[Skooma Addict]

what>

Yea I worded that wrong. fixd

[Misanthrope]

Yea I worded that wrong. fixd

You don't believe WWII was real?

[#FF0000]

it was all a soundstage in arizona read between the lines, sheeple

[Skooma Addict]

You don't believe WWII was real?

Since history is 95% guessing and 5% opinion, who knows.

[Rafiq]

It ain't the school. It's the kid.
)

What a disgustingly Idealist assertion.

'The Kid' is the result of the combination of the School, the Culture, the Parents, the place, the weather, the friends, the media, the music, all of which are mere reflections of the mode of production (not the weather, and some genetic influence).

Students of African origin do worse than White kids in School, on a statistical scale.

Are you implying that African American children are inferior to White children?

Such a foolish statement. I don't mean to sound like an asshole (I probably did) but seriously, how can you even think of that?

[tir1944]

I heard American Pub.Ed. is shit,incredibly bad...is that true?
Any first hand experiences?

[Rafiq]

I heard American Pub.Ed. is shit,incredibly bad...is that true?
Any first hand experiences?

It depends.

In the wealthy towns, the public schools are indeed very good.

It(Quality of public schools) really varies on the poverty level of the town or area, to be quite frank, with literally no exceptions.

[#FF0000]

I heard American Pub.Ed. is shit,incredibly bad...is that true?
Any first hand experiences?

The schools in the poorest areas function as little more than halfway homes.

[Bud Struggle]

What a disgustingly Idealist assertion.

'The Kid' is the result of the combination of the School, the Culture, the Parents, the place, the weather, the friends, the media, the music, all of which are mere reflections of the mode of production (not the weather, and some genetic influence).

Students of African origin do worse than White kids in School, on a statistical scale.

Are you implying that African American children are inferior to White children?

Such a foolish statement. I don't mean to sound like an asshole (I probably did) but seriously, how can you even think of that?

Yes. (And I was the asshole.) You are right. It isn't just the kid. It's all of that. But to a good extent it really is--the preschool education. Clinton was making a vital change by introducing a preschool education probam for Bladk and inner cit kids that was doing amazingly well.

Bush cut it and things returned back to normal.

In the end it's a lot of factors. My kid is doing well in Public school because she is a rich guy's kid. She'd probably do well anywhere.

[Sweyn78]

Because the problem you identified doesn't exist. The reason these schools wait weeks for repairs is because they are underfunded. The only thing remotely centralized about American schools is the standardized testing and, to some extent, the curriculum. The reason schools take weeks to get repaired is because they are underfunded. They are underfunded mostly because of an entirely wrong-headed view on education that tells us standardized testing is a good barometer of a students mastery of a subject, and that it's a good idea to take money away from schools that do poorly on tests.

Well that's fine but the whole "OH JUST LIKE IN THE USSR!" thing is completely off base. If anything it should show you that bumbling inefficiency isn't unique to sprawling bureaucracy.
Underfunded? :\
In Washington DC alone, in the year 2006-2007, the state spent $1,389,995,000 -- a number quite a bit higher than any other school district in the country. Yet, despite the fact that there is no conceivable lack of funds, the same problems exist -- in greater number. So then, it isn't the lack of funds that is the problem (perhaps it is now, -- to a degree -- given that we are in a depression, but many of the difficulties in our educational system extend before just the past few years), but the system, correct? It is only natural that a very public system requires a large number of people -- a bureaucracy -- to manage effectively. But with all these people comes lag in the system, and a lack of competition results in crappy teachers (not saying there aren't good ones, as there are), amongst other things.
"'OH JUST LIKE IN THE USSR!'"
Eh, not quite as emphatic and/or as specific as you state. Let's look-away from the USSR or really any command-economy in general for a moment and focus on bureaucracy. Bureaucracies are, by the very nature of the word that names them, quite large. As mentioned before, more people equals more lag-time. Focusing now on centrally planned systems, in order to get something, -- e.g. repairs -- one must first gain permission from the levels above. Those levels, once granting permission, must send the command back down the line so that somebody can hire someone to do the repairs. Once that person has been hired, he must go and ask about the problems, in some cases needing to ask again for even more permissions from a higher entity. In short, it can take a really long time to get things done, and lag is one of the classic drawbacks of both centrally planned and bureaucratic systems.
This is what has lead me to believe that perhaps the American education system has become a bit too public. :)

[Misanthrope]

Since history is 95% guessing and 5% opinion, who knows.

It isn't though. There is a general consensus that general historical events have happened and the broad termed results. There is research and facts to prove historical happenings. History is on the leftists side, its one of our biggest weapons.

[#FF0000]

Underfunded? :\
In Washington DC alone, in the year 2006-2007, the state spent $1,389,995,000 -- a number quite a bit higher than any other school district in the country. Yet, despite the fact that there is no conceivable lack of funds, the same problems exist -- in greater number. So then, it isn't the lack of funds that is the problem (perhaps it is now, -- to a degree -- given that we are in a depression, but many of the difficulties in our educational system extend before just the past few years), but the system, correct? It is only natural that a very public system requires a large number of people -- a bureaucracy -- to manage effectively. But with all these people comes lag in the system, and a lack of competition results in crappy teachers (not saying there aren't good ones, as there are), amongst other things.

Ah, Washington DC school district, the district headed up by Michelle Rhee who fired hundreds of teachers over poor test scores. There's certainly more problems than funding -- let's not make this mistake. But your entire criticism of the school system is, like I said, completely off base and has no basis in reality.


"'OH JUST LIKE IN THE USSR!'"
Eh, not quite as emphatic and/or as specific as you state. Let's look-away from the USSR or really any command-economy in general for a moment and focus on bureaucracy. Bureaucracies are, by the very nature of the word that names them, quite large. As mentioned before, more people equals more lag-time. Focusing now on centrally planned systems, in order to get something, -- e.g. repairs -- one must first gain permission from the levels above. Those levels, once granting permission, must send the command back down the line so that somebody can hire someone to do the repairs. Once that person has been hired, he must go and ask about the problems, in some cases needing to ask again for even more permissions from a higher entity. In short, it can take a really long time to get things done, and lag is one of the classic drawbacks of both centrally planned and bureaucratic systems.
This is what has lead me to believe that perhaps the American education system has become a bit too public. :)

It is nowhere near as convoluted as that, though and I don't think, like I said, you actually know how the public school system is structured. It is not a sprawling bureaucracy. School policies, curriculum, etc. are decided by school boards which are elected on a local level. They answer to the state to a limited degree when it comes to state testing and all that but otherwise school districts are independent jurisdictions unless they've been marked as a "failing school" due to standardized test scores. In that case, the state comes in and takes over, as per No Child Left Behind.

[Bud Struggle]

It isn't though. There is a general consensus that general historical events have happened and the broad termed results. There is research and facts to prove historical happenings. History is on the leftists side, its one of our biggest weapons.

History is on no one's side.

[RGacky3]

History is on no one's side.

Yeah it is, the Left was against slavery, the left was for womans voting rights, the left was for democracy, the left was for union rights, the left was on the side of ending segregation.

You go back and see what the "right wing" has always been for, its stuff that history shows was wrong.

[RGacky3]

The poll is idiotic btw, as if the ONLY OPTIONS are its good the way it is or more privitization.

[kapitalyst]

The problem is funding, the government underfunds education, and wastes money on private charter schools, look at public schools around the world that are well funded, they work well, private schools are a disaster, either you'll have a priviledge system, or you'll have the government basically subsidising for profit corporations.

Which we learned from Medicare part D is a terrible idea.

Erm... WHAT?! :rolleyes:

Charter schools were the best thing that ever happened to education in New Orleans. Katrina wiping out the public schools caused the best educational improvement those kids ever had. The story is the same across the country. Charter schools are vastly superior to standard public schools. Private schools are not a disaster. The quality of education is so far above and beyond public schools it's not even funny.

Government = fail... They just had to shut down the public schools in my area, as they were the worst in the entire country (literally). Kids are now all going to charter schools, and they're much better off. I just cannot understand people who worship government and labor unions... :lol:

[RGacky3]

Charter schools were the best thing that ever happened to education in New Orleans. Katrina wiping out the public schools caused the best educational improvement those kids ever had. The story is the same across the country. Charter schools are vastly superior to standard public schools. Private schools are not a disaster. The quality of education is so far above and beyond public schools it's not even funny.


Because they don't accept everyone, so they accept kids that make them look good (so they can charge more), I'm talking about for-profit private schools.

Also in New Orleans its mostly still not-for profit public schools just decentralized (which I'm in favor of).


Kids are now all going to charter schools, and they're much better off. I just cannot understand people who worship government and labor unions... http://www.revleft.com/vb/perhaps-american-public-t162063/revleft/smilies2/laugh.gif

Charter Schools are still government ...

BTW, why are you against labor unions?

[Revolution starts with U]

I've went to both a public and a private school. The public one was one of the best in the state (first to get an A+ rating) and the private one was a catholic school in the ghetto.
They were both crap. All they really taught us was how to follow orders and conform. But the public school tried to, how they define it, turn us into good citizens. The private school merely tried to turn us into good christians. :thumbup1:

[ComradeMan]

There shouldn't be any "expression" in teaching. The teacher should teach lessons based facts, credible sources, logic and reason no opinions.

I disagree in part. The Italian education system relies enormously on theory and fact. It basically involves learning by memory a whole text book to the finest detail and then being able to respond to cross-questioning by the teacher, this methodology continues at university. The dreaded-by-all-students "interrogazione". When kids study art they don't ever paint anything, no they study the formal theory and history of art. When they study chemistry they don't get to go into a laboratory, no they have to memorise formulae- etc.

This system, in my opinion, produces very well-educated robots with a complete lack of imagination, creativity or the ability to think. Obviously facts and theory are important to education but so are the abilities of applying intelligence, intuition and creativity and above all the ability to question and reason- all of which seem to be lacking. I remember having a conversation with a guy who had studied linguistics and new all the theory, from Chomsky to Labov and so on but when I asked him what he thought it was like one giant SYNTAX ERROR message all over his face.... o tempora, o mores!


I've went to both a public and a private school.

Great grammar they taught you!!! LOL!!!

[Revolution starts with U]

Great grammar they taught you!!! LOL!!!

My point exactly.
(Should I have said "I have gone?" "I have went" sounds okay to me :confused: )

[Bud Struggle]

My point exactly.
(Should I have said "I have gone?" "I have went" sounds okay to me :confused: )

I went.

[#FF0000]

Erm... WHAT?! :rolleyes:

Charter schools were the best thing that ever happened to education in New Orleans. Katrina wiping out the public schools caused the best educational improvement those kids ever had. The story is the same across the country. Charter schools are vastly superior to standard public schools. Private schools are not a disaster. The quality of education is so far above and beyond public schools it's not even funny.

Government = fail... They just had to shut down the public schools in my area, as they were the worst in the entire country (literally). Kids are now all going to charter schools, and they're much better off. I just cannot understand people who worship government and labor unions... :lol:

Charter schools usually perform about as well or worse than public schools. I've been to Charter Schools, i've spoken to teachers in charter schools, I've had friends in charter schools, I've spoken to students in charter schools, and I've studied charter schools. If I remember right, public school kids outperform charter school and private school kids in math and science.

But it depends. Some charter schools are better than others. Public schools, on the other hand, are at least a little more consistent.

Oh, and you know where Charter Schools get their money, right?

[Robert]

But the public school tried to, how they define it, turn us into good citizens.

How did they define it?

How do you define it?

[Bud Struggle]

How did they define it?

How do you define it?


Maybe the Public school system IS a failure after all. :D

[Rafiq]

Yeah it is, the Left was against slavery, the left was for womans voting rights, the left was for democracy, the left was for union rights, the left was on the side of ending segregation.

You go back and see what the "right wing" has always been for, its stuff that history shows was wrong.

"History is not like some entity that uses Men and Women to achieve it's ends. History is men and women striving to achieve their ends"

The Left didn't exist until the French Revolution.

There is always a progressive class, though, if that is what you are trying to say.

[Revolution starts with U]

How did they define it?

How do you define it?
They: Shut up and do what you're told. This isn't a democracy (you wouldnt believe how many times I was told those exact words in school, public and private.)
Me: Being reasonable and scientific, and thinking for yourself.

Maybe the Public school system IS a failure after all. :D
It is. And so is the private school system. Don't get me wrong, the fact that anyone who wants to can get a high school education is great, and progressive. But our schools collectively (regardless of the sucesses of individual schools) are utterly terrible.
I personally have found this to be a problem with culture and teachers. Teachers have degrees in education, and that is just backwards. Teachers should have degrees in the field they want to teach, and a minor in education.
Our culture also encourages people to, again, shut up and do what they are told. Grow up and get rich, this is america the land of the free, they tell you. And if you don't, you are looked at as an utter failure who will amount to nothing, ever, regardless of how good a person you are.

[Bud Struggle]

"History is not like some entity that uses Men and Women to achieve it's ends. History is men and women striving to achieve their ends"

The Left didn't exist until the French Revolution.

There is always a progressive class, though, if that is what you are trying to say.

What Gacky is saying is that he freed the slaves. I'm sure ever Black person in America is thankful to Gacky for their freedom.

(He kind of reminds me of Al Gore inventing the Internet.)

[Bud Struggle]

It is. And so is the private school system. Don't get me wrong, the fact that anyone who wants to can get a high school education is great, and progressive. But our schools collectively (regardless of the sucesses of individual schools) are utterly terrible.
I personally have found this to be a problem with culture and teachers. Teachers have degrees in education, and that is just backwards. Teachers should have degrees in the field they want to teach, and a minor in education.
Our culture also encourages people to, again, shut up and do what they are told. Grow up and get rich, this is america the land of the free, they tell you. And if you don't, you are looked at as an utter failure who will amount to nothing, ever, regardless of how good a person you are.

Here's he issue: some kids want to learn and they do well no matter where they are. Some don't waqnt to learn and are failures whever they are.

Now there are many REASONS for kids wanting to fail. Poor motivation at home, low IQ, poor preparation for school, etc. I's not all the kids fault if they fail, but it's not all the schools fault either.

[Revolution starts with U]

Here's he issue: some kids want to learn and they do well no matter where they are. Some don't waqnt to learn and are failures whever they are.

Now there are many REASONS for kids wanting to fail. Poor motivation at home, low IQ, poor preparation for school, etc. I's not all the kids fault if they fail, but it's not all the schools fault either.

Here you go reinstituting this "if you're not productive, you are a failure" thing. It's bs. And it's killing my closest friends.
Some people just don't want to be productive. Some of them are assholes, but many many many of them are good and generous people who would help anybody anytime just to see them smile.
But it doesn't matter how good of a person you are. Unproductive = loser. And so they turn to drugs, to forget about a world that doesn't care about them.

Forgive me Bud, because I am in a really bad place about this right now. But fuck you. :mad:

[Bud Struggle]

Here you go reinstituting this "if you're not productive, you are a failure" thing. It's bs. And it's killing my closest friends.
Some people just don't want to be productive. Some of them are assholes, but many many many of them are good and generous people who would help anybody anytime just to see them smile.
But it doesn't matter how good of a person you are. Unproductive = loser. And so they turn to drugs, to forget about a world that doesn't care about them.

Forgive me Bud, because I am in a really bad place about this right now. But fuck you. :mad:

That is how the world is set up and it works for 95% of the people. Some people just don't fit in--it may not be their fault, but it certainly isn't anyone elses fault either.

Blaiming "sociey" is just as bad as blaiming the person him/herself.

[Rafiq]

What Gacky is saying is that he freed the slaves. I'm sure ever Black person in America is thankful to Gacky for their freedom.

(He kind of reminds me of Al Gore inventing the Internet.)

With all humor aside, simply explaining the complex process of the abolition of slavery by saying 'The Leftists did it!' is certainly a weak analysis of history.

I can say that the only reason Lincoln abolished slavery was to strike a blow to his Southern opponents.

There was little to no (moral) aspect in the process of abolition of slavery in the United States.

[Revolution starts with U]

No, fuck that. It's their fault because they ultimately decided to stick the needle in their arm.
But it's yours and my fucking fault too. Maybe we shouldn't look down on people because they're not like us? Maybe we should stop referring to people as "failures" and acting like we have some kind of fucking compassion for them.
Maybe we should stop stuffing people into little boxes and acting like making money is the ultimate goal in life. Nature doesn't care if you make money or not. It just wants you to enjoy yourself. And that gets really hard with all these people running around saying "I made it, so can you. If you can't it's because you fail." Maybe they don't want what you have! Maybe they just want to be their fucking self, be happy, and help others be happy.

You are just as big a part of the problem as anyone else.

[Rafiq]

Who are you talking to?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Who are you talking to?

Everyone

[Robert]

I can say that the only reason Lincoln abolished slavery was to strike a blow to his Southern opponents. Well, that's a simplification and probably a little unfair. It's hard to know what anyone thinks in their heart of hearts. Freeing slaves was apparently never a stand-alone priority for Honest Abe.

Lincoln saw his job as preserving the union ("If I could preserve the union by freeing the slaves, I would do it. If I could do it by not freeing the slaves, I would do it." Or words to that effect.)

[Rafiq]

Everyone

That's dumb. I never said anything remotely similar.

[Revolution starts with U]

I wasn't responding to you, which can be easily seen by the fact that nothing in it had anything to do with what you posted.
Perhaps you should read the thread...?

[Robert]

The Left didn't exist until the French Revolution. Well, that was a disaster in my book. They woulda chopped MY head off. Can you imagine? (Don't answer that.)

But long before the French Revolution...


Karl Marx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx) listed Spartacus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartacus) as one of his heroes,and described him as "the most splendid fellow in the whole of ancient history" and "[a] great general ([though] no Garibaldi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Garibaldi)), noble character, real representative of the ancient proletariat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletariat)."

[Rafiq]

Well, that was a disaster in my book. They woulda chopped MY head off. Can you imagine? (Don't answer that.)

But long before the French Revolution...


Karl Marx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx) listed Spartacus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartacus) as one of his heroes,and described him as "the most splendid fellow in the whole of ancient history" and "[a] great general ([though] no Garibaldi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Garibaldi)), noble character, real representative of the ancient proletariat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletariat)."



Okay but the term "Leftist" didn't come until the French Revolution.

What? Who would have chopped off your head? Anyway, I don't care.

[kapitalyst]

Because they don't accept everyone, so they accept kids that make them look good (so they can charge more), I'm talking about for-profit private schools.


That's not exactly true... Private schools generally accept any kids who don't have "criminal records" and have their tuition paid. Many accept kids whose families can't afford it too, to give them the opportunity. And why would they do that? The education is simply better.



Also in New Orleans its mostly still not-for profit public schools just decentralized (which I'm in favor of).

Yes, the schools now have some autonomy and flexibility. It's one of the best things that have yet happened. I think you represent a minority view on your part of the political spectrum though, as most hate those schools and want to destroy them. +1pt for Gacky...



Charter Schools are still government ...

They're chartered by the government; hence the name. I don't have a problem with government funding and providing some oversight of education, nor do I oppose having a small and efficient govt. agency. But government shouldn't be trying to run or micro-manage schools.



BTW, why are you against labor unions?

I'm not against labor unions, per say. Employees have every right to organize themselves and make demands, and they also have the right to go on strike and employ other tactics to achieve what changes they want.

The thing I'm against is government getting involved in it, and backing the unions. They've made it get entirely out of hand. Case and point: teachers' union. It's come to a point where the union isn't doing good for teachers, but doing harm to education. The same thing has happened in too many private industries too.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Private Public partnerships have proven themselves to be expensive, poor-quality at the point of delivery failures that were born out of a need to 'quietly' privatise things like healthcare and education against the public's wishes in the 80s and 90s.

We have seen in Britain first hand that privatisation and public/private initiatives are expensive wastes of time that do not work.

[Revolution starts with U]

Idk why you keep saying private schools are better, Kap. They're not. Some individual private schools, in wealthy neighborhoods, are better. But your average private schools, which I have attended, are not.

[Rafiq]

Idk why you keep saying private schools are better, Kap. They're not. Some individual private schools, in wealthy neighborhoods, are better. But your average private schools, which I have attended, are not.

Private schools are better.

That is where the bourgeoisie sends their children. What do you expect?

[Revolution starts with U]

Why even type if people have no comprehension of what they are reading?
Regardless of the situation of any given individual school, private schools qua private schools are not better. Inner-city, predominantly poor (usually catholic) private schools are just as terrible as Inner-city, predominantly poor public schools.

Yes, private schools in rich areas are better. But so are public schools in rich areas.
This would seem to suggest just throwing money at the problem could fix it. But that's not why this correlation exists. Wealthy area schools are better because they can attract better teachers, and the kids (regardless of their school life) have more access to positive role models.

[Rafiq]

This would seem to suggest just throwing money at the problem could fix it. But that's not why this correlation exists. Wealthy area schools are better because they can attract better teachers, and the kids (regardless of their school life) have more access to positive role models.

I don't know about that. I think that the educational system under capitalism cannot be reformed.

Capitalism has to see it's end for that to happen, I'm afraid.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

Needs funding, and teachers that don't continuously throw imperialist propaganda at you.

[#FF0000]

Private schools are better.

It depends. They might be if they don't adhere to the same "education = discipline" mentality that schools in poorer areas do.

Do private school kids to better on the tests though? Nope.

[Rafiq]

It depends. They might be if they don't adhere to the same "education = discipline" mentality that schools in poorer areas do.

Do private school kids to better on the tests though? Nope.

Yes but that's because the bourgeois method of teaching (Education = discipline, like you said) is a complete failure.

Private schools are still nicer and have better food, nicer infrastructural scenery, new books, etc.

[#FF0000]

Yes but that's because the bourgeois method of teaching (Education = discipline, like you said) is a complete failure.

A failure when it comes to giving people what they need to become the best people they can be. Does a great job keeping people in their place, though (shout out to Detroit's "Wal-Mart electives" for poor kids)

[Ocean Seal]

It ain't the school. It's the kid.

So what you're saying is that that if I looked up the statistics for Phillips Exeter and Ivy League admissions I would probably see that it more or less lines up with the rate of Ivy League admissions for some random inner city public school.

[Robert]

Who would have chopped off your head? Anyway, I don't care.

You would have, you grouchy citoyen (http://books.google.com/books?id=iAAmt0r75y4C&pg=PA214&lpg=PA214&dq=citoyen+%26+french+revolution&source=bl&ots=bdD2ceH-2F&sig=zsIEKIhfeMTuWj7j_To47VVRmHU&hl=en&ei=CMOLToSHMsiNsQLn4pnXBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&sqi=2&ved=0CE8Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false), you.

[Revolution starts with U]

I don't know about that. I think that the educational system under capitalism cannot be reformed.

Capitalism has to see it's end for that to happen, I'm afraid.

...




Ya, that was kind of my point.