Posted on 07/18/2006 11:24:14 AM PDT by george76
I actually saw analysis of it from a couple of liberal sites (I offer the disclaimer; they could be correct) that the administration had commissioned the report in hopes of coming up with evidence to support the vouchers plan, but that they released the results quietly on a Friday afternoon because the results were not what they'd hoped for.
Take that as you will.
I tend to agree with today's editorial stating that there are excellent and abysmal schools in both the public and private sectors, and that we need overall improvement to compete globally.
Again, these "every" and "all" statements are not sustainable.
How many public schools do you have experience with?
Did you attend public schools?
Did your children attend public schools?
Have you ever taught in public schools?
Again, these "every" and "all" statements are not sustainable.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ALL children in government schools are in a toxic environment ( see message 81). At least some of these conditions exist in all government schools, even the best.
As for the other questions, these are merely a psychological fishing expedition on your part.
"Could it be that like many prominent Democrats, she's heavily reliant on the teachers' unions for money and manpower so she has to slavishly adhere to their positions on the issues even if the children suffer for it?"
Of course. But let's not forget that there are other economic interests that benefit from the existing educational system other than just the teacher's unions. Such as the people who build the schools, those who maintain the schools, provide the curriculum, sell the textbooks, etc.
"Bingo, that's exactly what her opposition to vouchers is really all about: protecting members of the teachers' unions from competition."
That's part of it. But here is where I rapidly stray off the reservation. I don't like vouchers and I get tired of "conservative" politicians pointing to them as a panacea. They're not a panacea, and are a political red herring as far as I'm concerned.
The underlying idea of voucher's, i.e. educational choice, is of course a good idea. The problem is that the courts have slapped them down every time they've gotten ahold of them. We aren't going to see them actually implemented anytime soon, if ever. "Conservative" politicians already know this, yet they continue to chant the voucher mantra. Frankly, vouchers are a code word for continuing with the status quo. Any "conservative" politician can support them and even attempt to implement a voucher program, very secure in the knowledge that it will never actually happen.
I also have something of a philosophical problem with vouchers. Ultimately, these are your and my tax dollars. Why should any parent have to get a "voucher" to use their own money to educate their children in the first place? I'd prefer that there simply be a very generous tax credit/deduction for children giving parents the financial wherewithal to make their own educational choices for their children.
Lastly, we should remember that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Any voucher program is going to come with strings attached. Be it curriculum, or purchasing of certain textbooks, or what have you.
"I tend to agree with today's editorial stating that there are excellent and abysmal schools in both the public and private sectors, and that we need overall improvement to compete globally."
The most promising area for overall improvement is in neither the public nor the private schools. It's in homeschooling.
In your dreams.
The worst public schools now are in areas with large concentrations of single-parent families, families where English is a second language, and the parents are not well educated.
They are also in areas with high concentrations of crime and substance abuse.
Part of the reason the children in those areas do so poorly is that no one reads to them and no one talks to them except to tell them to shut up or come here or get out of that. They start school without no discipline, no knowledge of letters or colors or numbers, and sometimes mama can't be bothered to get them up and send them to school, so they're absent a lot.
What kind of homeschools do you think you'd see in neighborhoods like that?
Even in more affluent neighborhoods, parents aren't always interested in or able to homeschool.
Public schools were started for a reason, and part of the reason is that home schools and private schools weren't working for nearly enough people.
It is appropriate to compare similiar children coming from similiar background. Anyone who has observed the population of students in public schools knows that they are far more likely to come from families which are incapable of raising them properly and with few resources pyschic and financial than are the students of home schooled or private schooled children. The latter catagories have FAR more parental involvement with parents who are not disfunctional, not in prison, not on welfare than public school children.
Comparing the children of the typical FReeper with the children of the typical welfare mom does not tell the whole story when their educations are being evaluated. Much of the "failures" of the public schools are the result of the failures of the failing students' parents.
The Slimes knows very well that there are some poor children in private schools but these are a cut above the typical poor child.
ROFL
"In your dreams."
Ahhh yes. Been an NEA apologist for long?
"Public schools were started for a reason, and part of the reason is that home schools and private schools weren't working for nearly enough people."
Perhaps. But it's a "solution" that has long outlived their usefulness for most of the population.
I don't deny that there is a need for a government schooling system to provide some sort of education for those who wouldn't otherwise be able to obtain it. In much the same way I acknowledge the need for a welfare system. That doesn't mean that the bulk of the population should use either system.
Do you have to call for "backup" every time you post?
I don't deny that there is a need for a government schooling system to provide some sort of education for those who wouldn't otherwise be able to obtain it. In much the same way I acknowledge the need for a welfare system. That doesn't mean that the bulk of the population should use either system.
For those who wish to do so, homeschooling is a wonderful thing. However, most of the population doesn't want to homeschool.
"Do you have to call for "backup" every time you post?"
Hmmm. Interesting. I just counted the last 25 of my posts and of those, 2 included a courtesy copy to a FReeper other than the individual who was being directly responded to.
So I guess the answer to your question would be "no."
"For those who wish to do so, homeschooling is a wonderful thing. However, most of the population doesn't want to homeschool."
Sorry. A lot of people who want to homeschool simply can't afford to. After paying their taxes to support a failed government school system, many parents just don't have homeschooling as an option. Homeschooling is the mercedes-benz of educational options. High quality, but expensive for those of moderate means.
Given the financial wherewithal, most parents would choose private schools or homeschool.
That's funny. I know stay-at-home moms who send their children to private schools or preschools rather than homeschooling them.
If one can afford a private preschool or school, one ought to be able to afford to homeschool, if one wishes to do so.
Pacifists versus Peace By Thomas Sowell
One of the many failings of our educational system is that it sends out into the world people who cannot tell rhetoric from reality. They have learned no systematic way to analyze ideas, derive their implications and test those implications against hard facts.
"Peace" movements are among those who take advantage of this widespread inability to see beyond rhetoric to realities. Few people even seem interested in the actual track record of so-called "peace" movements -- that is, whether such movements actually produce peace or war.
Take the Middle East. People are calling for a cease-fire in the interests of peace. But there have been more cease-fires in the Middle East than anywhere else. If cease-fires actually promoted peace, the Middle East would be the most peaceful region on the face of the earth instead of the most violent.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/pacifists_versus_peace.html
How do I find out if my mutual funds own NYT Stock, and what can I do if they do?
Here is something, we can all do today to start eliminating the NY Slimes as a threat to our nation's security. We can do it at our computers and do it in less than 1 hour. Besides sending a severe warning to the NY Slimes and the mutual fund companies, who buy NY Slimes stock, we will stop the fund company wasting our precious investment capital on NY Slimes stock.
If a few thousand freepers did this simple action this week and a few thousand new freepers, friends and relatives each following week, we will have a terminal impact on the NY Slimes acts of sedition. Please send this how to your blogs, friends, relatives and email lists. This action will serve as a cannon shot across the bows fo the other Dinosaur Liberal Fish Wraps re sedition will not be tolerated any more, and any mutual fund daring to buy their stock to support treason and sedition by the NY Slimes.
|
Want to smash the NY Slimes?
How many of us own mutual funds which own NY Slimes stock and even worse have increased their NYT holdings this year. NYT investment by a mutual fund company is a terrible investment re the dollar loss in Stock value the last 2 years. Those investments are an attempt to keep the NY Slimes afloat with our mutual fund $'s. Now it is very evident that the NY Slimes is an agent and abettor of the al Qaeda Serial Killers. The Slimes is endangering the lives of our families, friends, innocent Americans and every warrior of ours. Go to this link to see if your mutual fund owns NYT. http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/ownership/ownership.asp When the MS Money stock home page comes up, enter NYT into the search area and hit enter and the following screen will show up re ownership of the NY Slimes stock: The New York Times Company: Ownership Information
Highlight the Mutual Fund Ownership and hit enter. If thousands of Freepers, whose mutual funds own shares of NY Slimes did the following:
We might have a lot more impact selling/trading any mutual fund, which owns NYT, than trying to boycott companies which sell to the elite liberals of NYC and advertise in the NY Slimes. |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.