NCLB-Education

[randallscott35]

You think it doesn't bother me if my union supports a teacher I know isn't doing their job? B/c it bothers me to no end. I chalk unions up to a "necessary evil."...The reason I can post right now is b/c I eat lunch in my room, usually helping kids or working on stuff for the afternoon. The teachers' room is a snake pit and I stay out of it....But I would say more than 3/4 of the people I work with are good and dedicated.

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Not that I think most bad teachers want to be bad...I think their education may be lacking as well (and to be fair, I base this on my step-father who mentored many young teachers and often wondered what exactly they were being taught in colleges (as well as the few younger teachers I had in HS) - its not that the teachers cannot understand the materials, but their education insofar as reaching students is severely lacking).

Almost all the teachers in our science dept. have a masters degree in their subject area (I have one in biochemistry but teach Physics, the odd-ball) and never intended to teach. They teach because they like the kids and the material and they are good at it, otherwise our principal would not have them here. Our principal scours the landscape for the rare people that can teach and are qualified. The pay just does not draw the best and the brightest. But they are out there, just hard to find.
So my school is just an individual example like your father-in-law, both are oversimplifications and ancedotal. And not all states have teacher's Unions. THis may be a reason a scarce few in our state government acutally know what goes on in schools. They do not want, or take any feed back. And if we gave most of our legislators the Science or Math test that the kids have to take to graduate High School, they would fail it. I know that. So I understand Randall's position.
And if you put the best and the brightest teachers, in a sorry place to teach... you have probably produce a very cynical people who will never step foot in a school again. This has and always will be a very complex problem that mirrors the haves, and the have nots, of our society. And the gap grows.

And GR... throwing money into a failing urban school will not solve the ultimate problem that I dont know how to solve... The family structure. Been there done that in this city. You have a very pretty school with a lot of good teachers to start with that crumbles. This is what I have seen, unless the parents are highly involved.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Of course, I realize that there are many teachers that it bothers. Doesn't change the fact that the union does what it does...year after year. If most members were like you (or GR), it seems to me that there would be a change in union leadership and policy that would make things better for the good teachers and ultimately the students.

Not that I think most bad teachers want to be bad...I think their education may be lacking as well (and to be fair, I base this on my step-father who mentored many young teachers and often wondered what exactly they were being taught in colleges (as well as the few younger teachers I had in HS) - its not that the teachers cannot understand the materials, but their education insofar as reaching students is severely lacking).

I hear ya Baba.... Trust me, tenure is a double edged sword for some people. Out 50 or 60 people I work with I can only think of a handful who shouldn't have gotten tenure or should be out now. The problem is, if you have an administration who makes a mistake on somebody, they are around for 25 years so its important you keep those to a minimum....So an administration is key to keeping the staff focused and able.

[GenuineRisk]

I'm sorry - I should clarify- I'm a union member, but of the actor's union. so while I am in general a supporter of unions, I do also think in the attempt to protect members from abuse, unions can also become a way for a small number of people who aren't good at their jobs to keep them. (And don't get me started on the lack of any sort of power the actors' unions have). I don't have the authority or knowledge to speak on the teacher's union in specifics the way Randall does.

B- I agree that throwing money at a problem is not usually a solution, but we're talking about schools where the kids are starting the year without textbooks. I'm not kidding- many of the educators my job came from public school jobs that they fled within a few years. Now, how is concerned parental support going to make up for a lack of textbooks? The property tax-school tax connection inherently institutionalizes an unequal playing field for what is supposed to be an equal right.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Once again, you are confusing rights with privileges.

I believe most states guarantee free public education. If it's guaranteed, how does that make it a "privilege?" Yes, I know kids can be expelled, but I believe they must then go to another school, yes?

If anything, you could argue it's not a right; it's a requirement, as I believe kids are required by law to attend school of some sort from age 5 until 16.

I'm starting to think your definition of "rights" is whatever you want to believe "rights" are. if free education is guaranteed by law, how is that a "privilege?"

The scary part about this to me is that our democratic system needs to have a significant number of educated people in order to function. The gap grows, the democracy becomes more unstable. I really dont like that trend.

So we need to do our best to help educate every child in the US. It is in our national interest. It should make everyone in this country uneasy if the % of uneducated adults continues to grow.

[Downthestretch55]

Further reading. Don't bother if you're "reading challenged" as it's a bit long.
http://www.alternet.org/story/47674/

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

OK, after fully recovering from the near blackout...

Yes, some states (if not all? ) do provide for free public education (see, Im fair and willing to look stuff up).

GR, since I am short on time (and I can connect the dots if needed...but you seem smart enough), simply use a similar thought to your rationale wrt your defense of the "equality" of progressive taxation (equality...progressive - talk about oxymoron! ) and apply it to the situation here.

First of all, what's with the "my dear" in your earlier response to me? What are you, my 85-year-old grandfather? What next, you give me a quarter for candy and then put your thumb between your fingers and tell me you've stolen my nose? Geez louise.

B, we will have to agree to disagree on how we see the taxation thing, because, as I've said, people are all taxed equally; it's the money that is taxed differently. My pathetic below 40K income is taxed at exactly the same rate as Gates' first less-than-40K income. What is taxed more is the amount he makes above that. And if I made more, that amount of money would be taxed accordingly.

So what are you saying, Bababooyee? You don't think Americans should provide public education for our young people? What's your obsession with determining whether it's a right or a privilege? What does that have to do with school performance? You think it's unfair for poor kids to get an education? Is that what you're saying?

[GenuineRisk]

Editorial on rights from the Fort Wayne... Telegraph? Gazette? Journal? Mostly on second-hand smoke and laws, but some more general thoughts as well:

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journal...l/16566691.htm

Doesn't have anything to do with NCLB, however.

[GenuineRisk]

And the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, from 1948.

http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

I made it about half-way through that douchebaggery...what an idiot (or bunch of idiots).

BUT to be fair, I haven't been as discerning as I should be in defining "rights". My fault for lack of clarity...and the mess it has caused! Maybe we can narrow this all down for time's sake.

I actually didn't have much of an opinion about the editorial. What got you so steaming mad about it?

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

I made it about half-way through that douchebaggery...what an idiot (or bunch of idiots).

BUT to be fair, I haven't been as discerning as I should be in defining "rights". My fault for lack of clarity...and the mess it has caused! Maybe we can narrow this all down for time's sake.

Surely a new SAT word has been born.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

I think it was supposed to be funny...I was woozy from shoveling snow for over an hour and had low blood sugar. Looks conry now, but cest la vie. Either way, lighten up.

Sorry, I don't get Old Man humor so well yet. Consider me lightened. And what does "conry" mean? I'm not familiar with the term. Old people word?

Like I said, I am accepting that for the purpose of this argument, and like I said, use a similar rationale and you can defend disparity in school quality based on disparity in property taxes paid. Like I said, I think you can connect the dots from here.

I have no idea what you are saying here. I was saying that to put blame for failing schools entirely on parents, without taking into account the inherent inequality in funding when school funding is based on property taxes, is not accurate. As a renter, I pay no property (read, school) taxes, and frankly, I should. I benefit from an educated populace, too.

Depends.

On what? That's no answer.

It is not an obsession. There is an important distinction (legally and philosophically) between the two. The fact that you want them to be the same (even really, really bad) doesn't make it so. And that you seem unwilling to explore the differences and remain in the dark is your problem, not mine.

Feel better now?

No, because you didn't answer the question. But seeing as how I still don't know if you answered my question from months ago about Israel and the religious right, I guess I should expect this?

Bababooyee, the only thing that will keep society continuing to progress is people being willing to say that something, even if not enshrined yet in the Constitution, is a right. And if that something is morally correct, chances are, it will become one. I think people do have a right to an education, just as anti-slavery advocates once thought people had a right to be free. And suffragists once thought women had a right to a vote. Those didn't start as rights, but they became them. If we all shrugged, and said "Well, it's not in the Constitution as it stands now" and no one was willing to say, "But it should be" then I'd not be voting and Condi Rice, who many of you conservatives are touting on another board as Presidential caliber, would be calling Bush "Massah" instead of his wife calling her "Dr. Rice."

And sometimes we screw up (see Amendments 18 and 21 of the Constitution) but we must always be willing to work for it.

Education isn't a cure-all for society's ills, but it helps to level the playing field a bit. I'm all for it.

(If you did get around to the Israel thing, let me know and my apologies for missing that the thread had been updated)

[GenuineRisk]

And mondo apologies for being a complete moron at trying to put my responses in between quotes. I wish they'd taught me how to do that during my free education years...

[Downthestretch55]

Well, well. well.
Good to see where this topic went.
Now, did I mention that I saw Elvis walking his pet groundhog while staring in amazement at the UFO that landed outside the subway station? Two of the three "aliens" were union members, one had tenure, and the other one had parents that didn't care about education at all, whether it was a right or a not, as long as they could ride their spaceship without helmets, and of course, dine in a restaurant where they could pass on their second hand smoke.
I heard that Elvis and the groundhog scored about the same on their standardized tests, so it looks like NCLB is safe.