"Bleeding-Heart Liberal" is a Misnomer

[Kuciwalker]

By competition do you mean between different schools? Because my suburban school district has something like 25 different high schools and a $2 billion annual budget.

[:) Smiley]

America has some bad schools because everyone has to go to school... in some other places, standard compulsary education ends at 9th grade, after where there are different choices of work, vocational school, or preparation for college.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
By competition do you mean between different schools?

No, I mean the public school system v. private schools. Public schools in the same school district generally don't compete against one another.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Smiley
America has some bad schools because everyone has to go to school.

No, America has some bad schools because there are schools in places where no one gives a **** (for many reasons, some legit, some not). When school isn't seen as a way out, but simply another form of jail, the students don't care, the teachers don't care, the parents don't care, and on up the chain.

[MrFun]

Liberals value civil rights (equality) over property rights, and the rights of employees over the rights of employers. (does not mean that liberals have complete disregard for property rights)


Conservatives value property rights over civil rights (equality), and the rights of employers over employees. (does not mean that conservatives have complete disregard for civil rights)

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
By competition do you mean between different schools? Because my suburban school district has something like 25 different high schools and a $2 billion annual budget.

Where did you go to school again? I was just at Thomas Jefferson High School on Saturday proctoring an SAT. It was like a math/science tech school or something in Virginia. Did you go there?

[Jaguar]

Yes.

[OzzyKP]

Thanks Kuciguar.

I liked that classroom with the painted ceiling tiles.

[Jaguar]

Glad to be of service.

[Ned]

Originally posted by MrFun
Liberals value civil rights (equality) over property rights, and the rights of employees over the rights of employers. (does not mean that liberals have complete disregard for property rights)


Conservatives value property rights over civil rights (equality), and the rights of employers over employees. (does not mean that conservatives have complete disregard for civil rights)

I am puzzling over this one. I am trying to understand, for example, how equal civil rights for all (which generally means status, man-woman, race, wealth, nobility-common man) has anything to do with property rights, which define who owns what vs. the world.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


BS, the school districts with the worst schools are also those with most most "competition," big city schools. School districts with substantially less competition, suburban schools, are often the best.

The point I make is that public schools do not compete for students. They take whoever applies from a specific geographical area, and their incomes/salaries are not dependent upon profit and loss considerations.

Schwarzennegger made the point, I think a valid point, is that the quality of the public school largely depends on the quality of teacher. It is just the best teachers want to live and work in nice neighborhoods rather than the ghetto.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap
The problem with out public school system is that it chaotic, uncentralized, locally funded, and that too mcuh attention is given to "parential" concerns.

Schools nationawide should be centrally (Federally) funded (not from property taxes) and there should be standard curriculums nationwide which would help measure achievement.

Both of these steps would cut huge amounts of superflous and unnecessary management costs.

Curiculums need to be taken out of the hands of untrained locals and put in the hands of trained professionals - at the same time, it should be emphasized that the point of education if imparting knowledge and civic values to future citizens. Children are not "consumers" of education, and the schools should worry about what the kids learn, NOT what parents want them to learn. If parents want to teach kids something, that is what spending time with their kids is for.

I don't fundamentally disagree with national standards as an objective. I would support national testing and funding/eligibilty for funding depending on whether a school is meeting minimum standards. That said, each school should be permitted its choice on how to educate so long as they do educate. In addition, local schools can, if they choose, teach things other than what the national standard tests require, such as art, music, culture or whatever.

[Arrian]

Now why would you trade your primary voting power away -- does the membership cost too much? Just because you're registered as a Democrat or a Republican doesn't mean that you should defend either of them.

Good point... the registration switch was done so I could vote in the primary. I'll keep it.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Jon, the Liberal is not truly concerned about fascist schools or whatever. That again is mock concern...

Why do I ever bother trying to have a real discussion with you? Every time you make one or two well-reasoned comments I am suckered into thinking you might be taking off the troll hat for a serious discussion. And then you go right back at it.

to me, for being foolish enough to fall for it yet another time.

-Arrian

[Ned]

Originally posted by Arrian


Why do I ever bother trying to have a real discussion with you? Every time you make one or two well-reasoned comments I am suckered into thinking you might be taking off the troll hat for a serious discussion. And then you go right back at it.

to me, for being foolish enough to fall for it yet another time.

-Arrian

Permit me some slack, Arrian.

If you would like to "discuss" the point I made, let's.

Now the point I make is this: Why is what a school might teach in terms of politics or religion outside of its core curriculum any "legitimate" concern of government. The whole idea violates the fundamental concepts of freedom of speech embraced by the first amendment.

If I understand Hillary's position on this, vouchers would seemingly require government censorship of private school curricula in order to stamp out non-PC thinking. But, since that is not legally possible we cannot allow public funding through vouchers of private education for the very reason that we need censorship and filtering and that can only occur in the public schools.

This mind-control approach to public education is another reason I find public education objectionable.