Thoughts on a Conversation With NavCat

[Elder Iptuous]

Teachers ie community. If teachers are good they'll reach out to the community and to the parents. The motivation has to start somewhere, it isn't just a circle with no beginning and no end.

True.  but, again, i've seen teachers that are good and motivated worn down pdq because the children have no desire to learn instilled in them by their parents, and the parents are aggressive to the teachers and are unwilling to work with them.  i put more blame on them than the teachers is all i'm saying.  go ahead and pay the teachers more(they deserve it), but don't expect that to have a dramatic effect on the education system unless the parents hold up their end...

Question1: Why do some schools become a daycare?
Question2: Why do some schools rely soley on standardized testing?

Answer1: Often because the classes are too large to engender actual education, combined with inadequate teaching materials.
Answer2: Because when reduced to Regulation of classes versus Education of classes, repitition of knowledge takes the place of learning.

Additional funds to reduce class size and supplement materials would help both situations.

were in agreement...
it would help.  
i guess my original point is horse/water/drink and the horse doesn't want to.  People are unwilling to exert the necessary effort to educate themselves, because they are comfortable without it.  this creates an uninformed population unwilling to become involved in self-governance, and the grand experiment comes to a close with the determination that we are shit flinging monkeys, with sporadic burts of decency brought on by crappy conditions that we ourselves create that motivate us to pull ourselves up by the bootstraps....
a 'victims of our own success' type cycle thing... wheel of fortune and all... i don't believe that we can create a stasis that doesn't suck.
I consider myself an optimist because i'm looking at the bursts of decency....

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Well, that's why the original plan was that ONLY landowners could vote... they assumed that ONLY Landowners would have enough 'skin in the game' to be educated and vote for the best candidate. I'm all for equality, but I do think that giving every mouth breather voting privileges does have some drawbacks... mostly that they're easily swayed by smooth talking snake oil salesmen (or saleswomen in the case of Gov Palin).

[fomenter]

i have always given the "education" answer to this question my self, but how do you make it happen? thinking and self responsibility just are not in the government's interest, a nation of American idol watchers making political decisions based on popularity contests are easier to deal with than mobs of jeffersonian minded citizens who see the risks of governments abusing every new power they wish to grant themselves.
the teaching of thinking and  American civics may not even exist in the modern teach the test schools how do you force them to bring it back? (thinking may never have been a school curriculum)

[Kai]

former Gov Palin).

Fixxed for accuracy and lulz.

[AFK]

Kai, i do agree with you to a point about teacher motivation, but i've watched many of my mother's teacher friends come into the profession brimming with enthusiasm and getting worn down to the point of burnout because the fact is, some schools become a daycare where they also happen to be required to teach some standardized testing... (that's overstating and generalizing, i know) i went to many good schools growing up and if the students had a motivation for education instilled by their parents/community, the schools worked well.  in crappy neighborhoods where this value on education wasn't present, the schools worked poorly.  i don't think pouring money on them would change anything.... i guess that's all i was saying. (but teachers in general should make more than they do, i agree)

Question1: Why do some schools become a daycare?
Question2: Why do some schools rely soley on standardized testing?

Answer1: Often because the classes are too large to engender actual education, combined with inadequate teaching materials.
Answer2: Because when reduced to Regulation of classes versus Education of classes, repitition of knowledge takes the place of learning.

Additional funds to reduce class size and supplement materials would help both situations.

I'm jumping into this conversation late because I was in a stupid ethics training but I just wanted to start by saying LMNO is 100% on the mark with this one.  And I say this from the experience of someone who has worked in and with about 20 individual school districts in Maine with a variety of situations.  Some schools with the money to properly pay teachers, properly invest in educational infrastructre, and have low teacher/class ratios.  Then you have the schools like the one in particular where you have 1000 kids from 5 different and spread out towns and little to no money to fund their education.  That school is a hell hole with rampant drug use and all kinds of anti-social issues.  

Kids, in schools, who form meaningful bonds with adults in their schools, i.e., their teachers, have a far better educational system and are going to absorb more knowledge and are going to be much more likely to be in a position where they can engage more critical thinking skills.  Otherwise, you've got a bunch of robots teaching to little robots.  

[LMNO]

i have always given the "education" answer to this question my self, but how do you make it happen? thinking and self responsibility just are not in the government's interest, a nation of American idol watchers making political decisions based on popularity contests are easier to deal with than mobs of jeffersonian minded citizens who see the risks of governments abusing every new power they wish to grant themselves.
the teaching of thinking and  American civics may not even exist in the modern teach the test schools how do you force them to bring it back? (thinking may never have been a school curriculum)

The current state of education as described above is why I consider my viewpoints, while presumably accurate, highly ideological and optimistic.

[Corvidia]

The economic part of the constitution is pretty minimal.    Print some money, regulate (or don't) interstate commerce, write lawsa bout copyright (or ignore it).  Don't take people's shit away without a really good reason.  The huge amount of government involvement in the economy exists independently of that.

I thought about it some, and maybe a better thing to say would have been the economic motivations behind a good chunk of what was decided (ie, the bit where the landless weren't allowed to vote) should be left behind. They still color our national character in ways I don't like.

true....
but it seems  inevitable that compulsory education would degenerate in the way that it has....  (and i base this on absolutely nothing. just a hunch, i guess)

i dunno. i would disagree that it is underfunded, unless you are looking at it from the perspective that the level of funding necessary is dictated by the results (then, of course, it would be underfunded)....  In past generations, the level of education attained was sufficient (exemplary by current standards) and achieved with significantly less than is currently spent.  how? because there was a desire to be educated.  it costs buckets o' cash to cram knowledge into a closed mind, it seems.... (and compulsory attendance doesn't do much for opening minds, imo)

I think the crux of the problem with the current model of education is that it's been nationalized. If we look back at when it wasn't (pre 1970s) we see better results because parents and teachers had more control and it's the parents and teachers to whom the education of children really matters. They can determine what a child needs better than some bureaucratic entity in DC.
Granted, there's a lot of parents who don't give a shit for whatever reason, so I think it would (and probably did) rely more on teachers to determine the path of education their students will take. Give a teacher more control over what they teach and how they do so and I think more of them will care. Teacher and parent control > anything state or national, as well as principals/school districts looking to meet a benchmark.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

This is going to sound fairly simple-minded, but here goes...

Public Education and information. 

From what I can gather, the "masses" have relinquished the idea of self-government because they have no idea how to self-govern.  The thread regarding fascism seem to relate to this point: When Authoritarian structures are removed via revolution or resolution, the society flounders about until a dictator with a strong fist takes control.  And the People let him.

So, it seems obvious that in today's society, no-one is learning self-regulation/self-reliance.  And apparently, it does not come naturally.  So the "masses" need to be educated, as much as possible.  Only a fully informed populace will not only want to do away with Authority, they'll know what to do when it's gone.


Pipe dream?  Sure.  But I also think it cuts to the heart as why the introduction of new political philosophies won't give us a better government.

Problem:  The same people that control the government control education and information.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The majority of inner-city and lower-income schools have outdated materials, overcrowded classrooms, collapsing infrastructure, and teachers make salaries only around $35k/year.

And even then, they are forced to cut sports and arts programs because they can't afford it.

Fix the roof, buy new books, install a computer network, institute a 10/1 student/teacher ratio, and pay teachers at a level you would expect to pay someone who was building the future you're going to live in, and see what happens.

Don't get me wrong, that would be nice... and my mom's been a teacher for 35 years, so i understand the problems there too, but....
I have no proof (although i'm sure there's some 'pilot program' out there that has done just that), but i would suspect that you would get a classrom with a nice roof, shiny books (with updated maths and spelling and such), whizbang computers, lots of well paid teachers, and 10 students who still don't give a shit....

You can make 'em give a shit.  Oh, yes.

[navkat]

Based on a recent conversation with Navcat, I think I can agree with the libertarians on a couple of things.  I'd like to explain these things, and then give some thoughts on what it all means, in the great scheme of things.

First, our nation is not following the constitution.  This is fairly self-evident to anyone who can get their heads out of the piggie-trough long enough to look around.  WHY this is happening is not so self evident.

Second, Government spending is absolutely ridiculous.  If you or I ran a business the way the US government runs itself, we'd be sharing a cell with Bernie Madoff.

Now, what the Libertarians don't realize is that the very things they espouse (the mythical "Free Market", etc) are the very causes of the US government belonging to someone other than The People.  Refusing to see that the government is now nothing more than a wholly-owned subsidiary of a collection of conglomerates, they seek to "cure" the problem by removing the very last few constraints on those corporations.  The reason, of course, is that the Libertarians are just as programmed as the dems and republicans, but they are programmed in such a way as to view the profit margin of a company as more important than the people around them. 

Sure, they claim that it is these very corporations that give people jobs...but let's examine that, shall we?  Most of the new jobs created by these corporations go straight to Asia.  Also, there was a time when these corporations were not the major employers of the USA.  Are we better off now, in terms of being a republic, or worse?

As far as government spending goes, that is the nature of the beast.  Government WILL tax you, and they WILL waste those taxes.  This is how it has worked since Hammurabi, and it ain't gonna change tomorrow.  However, I will agree that the method by which they waste the tax money (corporate giveaways and no-bid contracts) has approached the level of intolerability.  But what to do? 

You can't "restore" the constitution, because either these things are constitutional already, or we are cheerfully ignoring the constitution, and will do so again.  Chew on that for a moment...Either the constitution allows this travesty of a government, or it is powerless to prevent it.  As uncomfortable as it may make me, I must therefore state that the constitution is not fit to exist.  It was a valiant first effort, but it simply doesn't work.

But where does that leave us?  I don't know.  You tell me.

Or kill me.

I didn't see this until now...

I hate you so much right now, TGRR.

[navkat]

Okay, yeah; maybe I should stop calling myself a Libertarian now (Damn you Roger!)

It's okay, I'm over it. Here's why:
I've NEVER been comfortable with the model where Corporate interest takes precedent over The People. I mean; isn't that the antithesis of the intent of checks and balances?

Here's the deal: what many "Liberatians (I think willfully) overlook is the fact that this system of government was set up so that no one entity would have the capacity for power over the many, and people are kidding themselves if they forget that money (esp. metric fuckloads of it) = power.

I mean, how fucked is it that there's on average something like 177 lobbyists for each member of congress? ( )
Anyone who's ever worked for one of these profit-driven, efficient, better-managed-than-government-ever-could private sector companies knows that they don't continue to fund someone's six-figure income if that employee isn't saving the company ten times that by doing their job.

So I agree: something's hopelessly fucked. But I don't have any solutions. I don't think the other extreme: Government holding the keys to the safe is going to fix the problem.

So the solution is out-and-out hypocrisy: Say we stand for one thing, and do the exact opposite...Wait...no...Yeah, got it...wait...no...

But that's basically the suicide pact we have going now.




Why did I quit smoking again?

[navkat]

This is going to sound fairly simple-minded, but here goes...

Public Education and information.  

From what I can gather, the "masses" have relinquished the idea of self-government because they have no idea how to self-govern.  The thread regarding fascism seem to relate to this point: When Authoritarian structures are removed via revolution or resolution, the society flounders about until a dictator with a strong fist takes control.  And the People let him.

So, it seems obvious that in today's society, no-one is learning self-regulation/self-reliance.  And apparently, it does not come naturally.  So the "masses" need to be educated, as much as possible.  Only a fully informed populace will not only want to do away with Authority, they'll know what to do when it's gone.


Pipe dream?  Sure.  But I also think it cuts to the heart as why the introduction of new political philosophies won't give us a better government.

I apologize in advance if this point has been made because I'm catching up.

The problem is: upon whom do we rely for an education system where self-governance becomes priority? The Government?

We sure as fuck can't rely on the religious school system because while the acedemic level is good, and they do teach things like character and conviction, they also teach people to be subservient to something else.

Secular private schools are usually outstanding in this regard with most children going on to prep school but they are also :
1. Expensive
2. Exclusive
3. A microcosm of the very same "Capitalist pig" system we try to avoid in a free market: "Those who excel get the spoils and everyone else, get in line with your lunch tray and prepare to be ruled by your betters."

Just tossing that out there (and simultaneously ass-raping my own cherished beliefs)

EDIT: It seems TGRR already rented this motorcycle.

[Requia ☣]

As to the pay teachers more thing, the median and average salary for teachers are both 40-44k (depending on position).  The national median wage is about 26k.

Some states (IE Tennessee) are much worse of course.

Median wage for a college graduate is apparently 48k, so teachers do sacrifice somewhat.

Requia, is this a tight distribution or a broad bell with long tails? I'm guessing its the latter.

I don't have enough data for that...  I do know that I've heard of specific states paying as low as 25k (why I singled out Tennessee) or as high as 80k (get a teaching job in Maine, seriously).  I would guess this would show as a long tail distribution.  What I'd really like to see is state by state and city by city data adjusted for cost of living (I'd rather have the 25k starting wage in Tennessee than a 35k starting wage in new york city or Boston).

[Adios]

Aside from the education issue it seems to me that everything is decided on tunnel vision. In other words, "What is good for me and mine right now?".

[Elder Iptuous]

Aside from the education issue it seems to me that everything is decided on tunnel vision. In other words, "What is good for me and mine right now?".

is it the selfishness, or the shortsightedness that bothers you? (or both)
how could you expect anyone to do anything that appears to the to be not to their personal advantage?