I must obey government officials at all times.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
|
I must obey government officials at all times.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Thanks Speech that was a good link you provided even if I disagree with the assessment of the data presented. I want to make clear my stand on the relationship between long term poverty, and education.
Poverty breeds less opportunities and options to learn, as fiscal constraints and the effect thereof will always affect the children in the most pronounced ways. Even a smart kid has to go home to the condition of their household realities, which may, I believe have more impact than the 8 hours they spend at school. Public Schools have budgetary constraints more according to the conditions of where their funding comes from, and for fact reduced funds from public to private puts the students who don't get accepted into these charter schools at clear disadvantage that has yet to be addressed.
The question becomes should the government shift the costs of supporting charter schools over public for savings and outcomes? If they do they better get more charter schools up and running for those left behind through no fault of their own, basically the luck of the draw. All kids NEED the opportunity to grow and learn, not just the ones who win the lottery.
Kids should never be the losers in this, even if their communities cannot keep up with the costs of fixing roofs and gyms in an aging infrastructure. In a country that can build prisons and not schools ask yourself what's wrong with that picture. No money, no opportunity, and that's the simple fact. When we had 50,000 factories for middle class wages, people could work for themselves, but those factories are gone, and haven't been replaced for ordinary blue collar folks.
You know the ones who go to work at 18, and spend a lifetime raising families to send to college. Those people are dying, Just as the middle class wages have died, and what's left is Walmarts and McDonalds. Minimum wage is not conducive to providing opportunity, hell, the government has to subsidize those workers so they can eat AND pay rent or do anything else for that matter.
That's why I relate poverty to lack of opportunities, and can only hope you see that social gains can only come from increased opportunities and options for poor people. Sorry to be so long winded, just to say MORE good paying jobs is the answer. Look around. There is more than enough work to do.
I just have to ask what have all these government programs done to help poor people? The assessment I gave is by a guy who is on your side in this and he has a point that should be heeded if people trulty want the best for our children.
His money line, "Poor children deserve effective programs, not just programs that are well-intentioned."Quote:
Unfortunately, supporters of Preschool for All, including some academics who are way out in front of what the evidence says and know it, have turned a blind eye to the mixed and conflicting nature of research findings on the impact of pre-k for four-year-olds. Instead, they highlight positive long term outcomes of two boutique programs from 40-50 years ago that served a couple of hundred children. And they appeal to recent research with serious methodological flaws that purports to demonstrate that district preschool programs in places such as Tulsa and the Abbott districts in New Jersey are effective. Ignored, or explained away, are the results from the National Head Start Impact Study (a large randomized trial), which found no differences in elementary school outcomes between children who had vs. had not attended Head Start as four-year-olds. They also ignore research showing negative impacts on children who receive child care supported through the federal child development block grant program, as well as evidence that the universal pre-k programs in Georgia and Oklahoma, which are closest to what the Obama administration has proposed, have had , at best, only small impacts on later academic achievement.
Doesn't matter whose side he is own. I DISAGREE, for the reasons given. Poverty breeds less opportunities and options to learn
How does a well-intentioned program that doesn't work ease poverty?
So let me make sure Im understanding what your saying. Poverty means that the children can't get an education even if schooled properly? I know that isnt true. I also know that a lot of poverty is attitude based and not education based. Lets face it. The social programs are the new slave masters. When a woman can pop out a few children and make the equivilent of 60K a year by not doing nothing OR get up off the couch and bust thier rump to make 45K unassisted. Where is there real choice?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Why does your side insist that throwing money at something will always solve the problem ? Why not focus on getting these poor people the hand up they need rather then spoon feeding them pablum to win an election. Havent you beat them enough with your rhetoric.
Please give details.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
Lack of middle class jobs is the root cause of the problem. I can fully accept that everyone isn't college material, but subjugation to low wages shouldn't be a punishment.
Why should tax payers have to subsides wages for multi billion dollar corporations? What's wrong with that picture?
It would be on a needs basis even going so far as to educate the parents so they can participate in helping the child. Education isnt rocket science but you do have to ensure that the person being taught actually understands. In many schools today they skip over that part. And if the parent at home isnt up to speed then the education suffers. Education alone will not pull them out they have much to accomplish on thier own. It can be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
If it is the one that gets them off the welfare train and allows them to get the push that they need then Im all for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
What if the single mom with two kids has to work? Help with transportation after work? Baby sitters? A suit for an interview? Are those legit needs?
Your understanding of what a poor person needs is obvious.
Why should taxpayers have to subsidize deadbeats?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
No it isn't tal, they have no understanding, they haven't walked that roadQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Why so many single moms?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
But now the kids don't get a good start at home in being read to, learning to build a block tower, helping Mom grocery shop, doing chores (even toddlers can help), printing letters and drawing pictures to send to Grandma, helping with simple jobs cooking and baking, etc. Parents don't have "time" for such nonsense. Yet that's all part of the learning process and gets the kids ready for school and socializing. (I taught Pre-K for three years. Ask me anything about what kids that age don't know.) We need to teach new parents how to parent (libraries try to do that).Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
And I really want to be in charge of American education. We need to hire teachers who know what the heck they are doing -- know how to speak well and write well and teach well. Standards need to get tougher. If they don't make the cut, they are OUT! The arrangement/schedule of the school day needs help, which means the curriculum needs help.
Class size needs to be smaller (job creation) so each child gets the help and instruction he needs. I attended a three-room country school with three grades to a room. There were eleven in my class. We all turned out to be successful in our own way, some as professionals and others in technical or various "blue-collar" fields. We all knew our times tables without thinking about it. With three grades in a room, we got to hear the same material three times as it was taught to each grade. Now students are herded into huge consolidated schools, and the small neighborhood schools are gone -- all in the name of money and efficiency. *gack*
Really? You think it is always someone else who grew up poor or became penniless during thier lifetime? Some of us have been there and then some. Im thinking your the one that remains in the dark about what a person can accomplish if they put thier mind to it. Im not saying its easy. But it can be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
What's the class size now? We averaged 30-35 or more in my day and we did just fine. But I agree we need to hire teachers that know what they're doing. That may be tough since part of the reason college grads can't find jobs is no one needs people with a degree in art history.
Better hope the boss gives you time off, to get to that teachers meeting and you have a car just in case you miss the bus. A twenty minute car ride can be a 3 hour bus ride, and a 15 minute walk after.
If there is a bus.
Plus they can't spell, don't know the names of the eight parts of speech, don't know how to diagram a sentence, have execrable handwriting, can't put together an outline, and probably pick their nose when they don't think anyone is looking. And they have to deal with students with peanut allergies, fetal alcohol syndrome, various real or whomped-up mental illnesses, latch-key kids with no home life, cell phones (easy cheating on tests), no dress code, and so on..Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I have 30 kindergarteners in my class in CA. My school opened last year and we have one of the top test scores in the state. We aren't in a fancy area, and we're a public school. How did we do it? We all left our nice, established teaching positions to try to make a difference. We wear uniforms and require parents to get their kiddos to school. We must be doing something right!!Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Sounds like Marva Collins and what she did in Chicago years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by teacherjenn4
Since your in the system how about answering a few questions ?Quote:
Originally Posted by teacherjenn4
1) What are your thoughts on charter schools ?
2) What happens to poor children when they attend school? Disadvantages in education ?
Charter schools take the funds from public schools. I haven't seen many good ones. Parents are frustrated with their children's grades and look at charter schools as an alternative. I'm not saying they're all bad, but accreditation is an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
Poor children, as in poverty? Poverty doesn't always mean being poor. Children of poverty struggle from lack of help at home, attention from their families, and sometimes, lack of supplies. If parents are educated by the schools about how to help their children (access to computers, study skills, public library, etc.), we hope to break that cycle. That's why I love my school-no one looks different. They're all in uniform.
Yes uniforms are important to break down that individualism that allows a student to say stuffu and to promote that team or school spirit of belonging to something important. The only way of you breaking the cycle of parents not helping is to realise that the parents may be uneducated and it will take more than a generation. As well educated as I am there was no way I could help my children effectively because teaching methods are very different and my knowledge just didn't seem to fit. Get back to the basics and give children understanding before you give them computers and every other gymicQuote:
Originally Posted by teacherjenn4
I think the world has changed greatly, and we have both parents working, and even more single parent household than ever where the parent works. Just the work schedule can be disruptive for many child quality time and school functions. We shouldn't always blame a parent or lack of a PHD on the how kids are raised and educated because most kids come with their own unique circumstances, and the likely hood of a broken home is 50/50 whether married or not, for whatever reason.
Let's face some real facts, states are cutting school budgets and classes. And that also means less services for families who need them also. Lack of funds is always a challenge to find the right adjustments when the options and opportunities have shrunk so bad. Come on, if finances can tear a family apart, then what makes us think children are not affected adversely as well? It's a daunting challenge nowadays for middle class families, let alone for single parent households.
Its unrealistic to think just as children can fall through the cracks without help or proper support, so do the adults for the same reason. Erosion of the middle class has to be a huge factor to many trying to escape the poverty of this present economy.
What was the norm back in the day is hardly today's solutions.
Yeah, about that. What exactly is it the emperor has accomplished to help stop the bleeding?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Can't do it by himself. And the opposition has grown since he was FIRST elected. Lets not blame one when there are 550 others who have done NOTHING.
Often cheered on for their obstruction by constituents. So is it fair to say a great number of people want NO solutions? Sure it is.
Dude, what part of Democrats have been running the show do you not get? Republicans can't do anything or stop anything without a bipartisan effort. Dingy Harry repeatedly declares House bills DOA, so point the finger where it belongs - to those running the show by themselves.
What has ANY president done for the middle class?
Your side needs to stop playing innocent victim. Republican play a large part of the dysfunction.
LOL, your whole agenda is based on victimhood.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
No, its not, it's simple logic to realize less money equals less service. Add to that the dysfunction of actually addressing the problems of less money effectively, we have what we have.
I do blame us for talking softly and NOT using a big stick on you guys though!
Um, do you really not listen to your guys or read the news? You've bludgeoned us to death with you and the emperor leading the way. Ok, well Alan Grayson is even worse. I haven't seen or heard any of this "soft" talk you speak of.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I always listen to your side, how can you not, and have concluded we need a bigger stick than yours, or learn how to use ours more effectively. It's not like you guys haven't used your sticks, and rocks.
At some point we both will have to stop fighting and work together. Then we both can get something good going besides who throws the best crap at each other.
And the way to that is by removing our one check on power?
Your check on power only applies to judicial appointments and executive confirmations, of which you have availed yours check with an extraordinary amount of times, many for NO apparent reasons.
To deny democrats had little choice but to change the rules is denial of that fact. Clearly stopping the president from doing his lawful job under the constitution is obstruction. Senators can still vote their conscious.
But stopping the VOTE by any means necessary is the right wing chief weapon of obstruction. Yet another failure by you guys.
Gotta love your revisionism.
chaos is better
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
your check on power is in the ballot box, not in some one man campaign to obstruct
Yep, and this nuclear thing is going to bite the Dems in the a$$ when they're the minority.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:37 AM. |