Skip to comments.Prison vs School: The Tour ( A Youtube video back to back comparison)
Posted on 12/27/2012 8:59:03 AM PST by wintertime
This video was made before the Sandy Hook killings. I expect that the prison-like conditions will grow worse.
Prison vs School: The Tour
Question: What do children learn when they attend prison-like indoctrination centers similar to those seen in this video? When children are in many ways treated like prisoners, and know that armed police and courts stand ready at all times to enforce the incarceration, what are they learning?
Answer: They risk learning to be comfortable prisoners of the state, comfortable with state compulsion, and they risk learning to be comfortable with the continuous threat of armed police and court action ever in the background of their lives. Their only crime was to born and for this they are incarcerated. They risk learning that the people who they should trust have abandoned them.
Question: How could anyone defend doing this to children? How can anyone deny what the outcome of having a nation of citizens comfortable with imprisonment will be for our continuing freedom?
Answer: I have no answer.
Question: Why would conservatives cooperate with this evil?
Answer: I have no answer.
Universal, police and court compelled government schooling is a very recent phenomena in human history. Our nation's Founding Fathers and 150,000 years of our human ancestors, would be appalled at the way we treat children. If they could speak from the dust they would warn of the evil it is doing to children and the evil consequences it will have for our continuing freedom.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
And....What are the long term consequences for children ( whose only crime was to be born) if they are treated like prisoners for 13 years of their most formative years?
What are the consequences for the continuing freedom of our nation when armies of voters ( who have been treated like prisoners for 13 years of their childhood) then go to the polls as adults?
I am not the one who has disdain for difficult students. I am not criticizing the parenting skills of their parents. That seems to be the exclusive territory of the professional government employed teachers who frequent these schooling threads.
However....I do trust that this contempt and dismissive attitudes seen in many posts is not reflected in the professionalism shown in the classroom and with the parents.
If you would like to renew activity on old threads please do so. It is impolite to carry discussions from one thread to another. Since you are so well informed about Free Republic etiquette I shouldn't need to you remind you.
There are examples of children who are overcoming what follows. Congratulation to them and their parents. It is possible.
All government owned and run schools, (the curriculum, textbooks, and worldview) are godlessly secular regardless of the nod made in God's direction with a Christmas carol or two or any banner proclaiming “In God we Trust”. It is not good to force godlessness on children or to force taxpayers to pay for it.
All government schools are a socialist, single-payer, and compulsory use entitlement. Children who attend risk learning that any government powerful enough to give them tuition-free schooling is powerful enough to give them lots of free stuff. That is not good for the child. It is wrong to force a taxpayer to pay for it.
All schools must restrict speech, press, assembly, expression of religion, and no school can be religiously neutral. These qualities are also found in prisons. When government does this, the children risk learning to be comfortable with government oppression and being treated like government prisoners. This is not a good lesson to learn. It is not good for the child. It is wrong to make the taxpayer pay for it.
The above can not be reformed because it is the foundational bricks upon which all government schooling is built. There is a solution: Begin privatization.
All of the above is your personal opinion, and is no more valid than my opinion. It is also insulting and thus a violation of FR rules..........rules you have been here long enough to understand if you are as intelligent as you claim to be.
BTW - the textbooks are no different than those used in religious based schools. I know this for fact - it is not opinion........unlike your unfounded claim.
Pot - meet - kettle.
That seems to be the exclusive territory of the professional government employed teachers who frequent these schooling threads.
I suggest you practice what you preach -- and obey the rules about personal insults.
Did you see in the video where the prison library was open but the school library was locked from the inside. I loved the alarm that sounded in the school at the end of the video.
It might help if you pointed out the abuse. Is it on this thread, or elsewhere?
Hmmmmmmmmmm.............this thread had disappeared for several hours - along with all comments and now it is back. I wonder why?
I guess some are more equal than others - judging by what has been removed by the mods. Although I don’t understand why this opinion piece has remained in “news” when it is more fitting in bloggers/personal or, better yet, the Smokey Back Room.
Politely and respectfully,
Ditto to you................
Sorry I didn't reply sooner, but I'm just starting to emerge from the latest cold.
Anyway, first, I notice that you only answered the least important point, the throw-away line, of my last post. LOL. Why am I not surprised?
The first main point of my post was to show you that by your own words, you agree in a general sense with wintertime - that that the single most important factor in educational success is a child's parents, not the sort of schooling method in use. And thus, even when public schools “succeed,” the real success accrues more to parents than to the schools. That is the premise that sustains the secondary question, why bother with public schools?
The second point is to demonstrate that public schools are suboptimal means of educating children. That they don't always fail, per se, but often fail to get the best results possible.
Not that they always and everywhere fail, but that they seldom help children develop to their highest potential, and more often actually get in the way, become a hindrance to learning.
The bottom line is that public schools just don't usually “add value,” at least not in proportion to their cost. You, yourself, trumpet the fact that you folks can't generally overcome the effects of bad parenting. I agree! So, why go through the expense?
I'm not suggesting, nor have I ever suggested, that everyone should homeschool. At times, I've estimated, optimistically, that as many as half of families could likely be good homeschoolers, if they were to make the effort and the sacrifice. But that leaves the other half.
Nor have I ever said that there is no proper role for government in primary and secondary education.
All I've said is that as currently configured, public schools are usually the worst choice for parents wishing to educate their children. But it is true that for many, the public school is currently the only choice.
At this time in our history, I don't think that Americans are going to make the tough choices needed to fix public schools.
A good place to start would be to ban teachers’ unions and punish and exile from education anyone who advocates for them. Teachers’ unions are intrinsically evil.
Another good starting point would be to abolish (or at least dramatically scale back the size and scope of action of) school system hierarchies, to make each school largely independent, like a charter school, and to encourage private businesses to buy and run most “public schools,” and run them on a competitive basis, with 100% school choice for every parent.
Perhaps providing tax credits to families for each child of school age that equal a high percentage of the average cost of public education would be a good thing to do. So if a school system is spending $20,000 per year per kid, then parents would receive a refundable tax credit of, say, $15,000 per year.
Disadvantage local school boards in running their own “company-owned” schools, giving favor to privately-owned and run “franchises” that obtain funding through the system, however it's configured.
Eliminate by law the bachelors degree for education. It is a fraud. Rather, require that teachers hold at least a four-year degree in the field they'd like to teach, or a related field (At my sons’ high school, there is a teacher with a masters degree in toxicology, requiring him to know a lot of biology and chemistry. Though he holds degrees in neither biology or chemistry, he teaches both subjects. Really well.). Add a course or two on pedagogy and the logistics of managing large numbers of children, especially for primary school teachers. Maintain separate degrees, preferably at a graduate level, for single-school administration.
Get rid of elected school boards. Unify the authority to spend the money (which usually inheres to a school board) with the responsibility to raise the money (which usually resides in an elected town, city or county council). Make the folks who come up with school budgets be directly responsible to the taxpayers for the taxes required to fund the schools.
In other words, blow up the current system, destroy or reduce most of the current hierarchical structures, make folks more directly responsible for their actions, retain the goal of universal access to education, make it competitively-based
I'm not going to do more than provide these few broad brushstrokes, I'm not going to delve into the details, because, frankly, these things just aren't going to happen anytime soon, and I'm not going to waste much of my time on educational fantasies.
For the time being, we're stuck with the system we have. We can, at best, help around the edges. The main goal of folks should be to starve the beast. At every opportunity, with every chance, at every turn, in every decision, take the path that reduces resources to the local public schools.
But public schools aren't really my focus. They mostly suck. They don't harm some kids, but other kids they do harm. They don't get in the way of getting an education for a large number of children, perhaps even a majority of them, but they hinder many and absolutely fail a large minority (at least 30%).
My focus has been on homeschooling, and expanding the space for homeschoolers to operate freely. My goal is to reduce as far as possible government interference in homeschooling, with the ultimate goal of banning governments from exercising any power whatsoever of any sort over homeschooling per se.
My next focus has been on the practical aspects of homeschooling, both in my own family, and in my community and among all homeschoolers.
I'm not anti-traditional schools. I sent my older son to Catholic high school, and my younger son is a junior at the same school. We considered strongly homeschooling through high school, but in balancing the trade-offs, one from the other, we chose a traditional school for their high school years, after having homeschooled from 1st (or in the case of my younger son, from pre-school) through 8th grade.
I'm not even anti-public school. Because, from my vantage point, every parent should first concern him or herself with his or her own children, and what's best for them. And at times, a public school may be the least-bad choice to make, especially where there are the [rare] public schools that have good academic programs and good academic track records.
But to the degree that I think about public education, my view is that the system is very broken, and we could do worse than to just shut down all the public schools and start from scratch.
I apologize for the misunderstanding. I largely agreed with what you had written in the previous thread and saw no need to comment further on it. Just as I largely agree with everything in this thread. I have held for a long time that Public schools work well (Not perfect) for the middle 80% the top 10% will do well no matter what, you could drop these kids in the middle of the jungle and they will come out a success. The "bottom" 10 we can do very little with. Whether this is due to lack of motivation, or some hadicapping condition I am not making a distinction.
I do disagree with your above statement for the reasons i outlined in my previous post. I taught at an inner city school. I think your estimation of 50% is very, I would say overly optimistic.
In suburban or rural communities you might be correct. But in the inner cities there are far to many enticements to not get an education already.
Changes MUST be made, but with so many people putting their hands up and saying "not my problem" nothing will get done.
And frankly I bear some of the guilt in this too. I had an opportunity to teach at an inner city school several years back. Instead I chose a rural school district in the middle of Nowhere Va. The money at the inner city was better, a lot better. My wife and I wanted a certain more laid back lifestyle. And I have to admit that I rather enjoy having the students call me Sir, rather than _other_ucker or A--hole. But one thing I know with absolute certainty. When I have to answer to God for my decisions I will be able to say with absolute certainty "I did the most good for the most number of students that I could, not all, but as many as I could."
And that is what it is about for me.
I guess if you want to define a 10% that succeeds in life no matter what, that's one thing, but those aren't always the brightest or the best students. The bright kids sometimes don't get much from schooling and lose interest or focus as those at the bottom do, and those who do best in school aren't always the best prepared for adult life. Public education fails some of students in that smartest 10% or the 80% in the middle -- in fact all across the board.
I suspect public education "succeeds" (in some way and to some degree) for enough young people that abolition is too wild an idea to succeed, though. If so many people are so uneducated and so little interested in learning or even in restraining their children, there may be some sense in requiring that the children get some education or training provided by the government, though this is heresy to anarchists.
“Just as I largely agree with everything in this thread..."
It's difficult to say that public schools “work well” for 80% of kids when 30% of kids don't even graduate from high school. And some number can't read the diploma they receive.
It may be that many of them wouldn't have graduated even if their schools weren't crappy, but even so, that hardly means that the public schools, in not actually harming them, “worked well.”
“I taught at an inner city school. I think your estimation of 50% is very, I would say overly optimistic.”
I'm not speaking only to an inner city population. I'm speaking universally.
That percentage will shrink over time as higher percentages of the population join the underclass as a result of fatherlessness. It's tough (though not impossible) to homeschool when you're a single mom. It's even tougher if you're a [public school] mis-educated never-married single mom raised by a [public school] mid-educated never-married single mom.
As that population grows, candidates for successful homeschooling will decline in numbers.
But 70% of children are still born to a married mom and dad, and moms and dads are BUILT to teach their own children. If only two-thirds of those married moms and dads are truly capable, that's still over 45% of folks.
Folks who could, but don't because they don't wanna, are categorized as “selfish,” not “incapable.”
“Changes MUST be made, but with so many people putting their hands up and saying ‘not my problem’ nothing will get done.”
That's not the problem. The problem is that the folks - including homeschoolers - with creative ideas and potential solutions are locked out of the power process, and those who benefit from the continuing disaster known as the public school system are in charge and have nearly all the power.
You made an evil comment a few threads ago to the effect of how tragic it is that homeschoolers had abandoned public schools, how much better they could be if homeschoolers had just lent a hand. I forgive you your blasphemy, but I doubt you'll do less than one million years in purgatory for it.
Beyond being an informed voter, homeschoolers are actually locked out of any voice in public schools. We sure as hell aren't going to sacrifice our children to better the system. Our first duty to God is to rear and care for our children. We have an obligation first to do our best for our children, not to use our children to service the needs of a bloated and dysfunctional bureaucratic organism.
But once we make the decision to homeschool, we are literally physically exiled from the public school systems. Most public school systems won't even let homeschoolers participate in public school extracurricular activities, no less have a voice in how to run public schools.
What can we do to help change public schools? Join the PTA of the local public school?? I'm not sure we're going to get a warm welcome there. Run for school board? Oh, yeah, that's a great idea. People with their kids stuck in public school are going to vote in droves for people who are perceived (wrongly) as too good to put their own kids in the same public schools.
Even folks with their kids in traditional private schools are called “hypocrites” when they talk about public schools. Certainly, we conservatives accuse liberals of hypocrisy on this charge every day of the week.
It's not that homeschoolers say, “It's not my problem.” The two reasons why homeschoolers are ignored if we try to be involved with public schools is 1) we're considered hypocrites, unworthy of attention and 2) we have a significantly different view of education, a broader, more complete view, and our potential solutions are so radical to those stuck inside the mental prison of their own limited experiences that they more than feel justified, on the few occasions that they listen to us, to going back to ignoring us.
The fact is that many homeschoolers offer plenty of good ideas to improve public schools. I offered a few to you in my last post. Which you roundly ignored.
I readily share my own ideas with anyone who will listen. I'm a Knight of Columbus, Past Grand Knight of my own council. As such, I've often been at events at church, either running them or working them, with lots of other parishioners, who know me, who see me in a position of leadership, and with whom I've spoken. I tell 'em my ideas when the subject comes up. Which is frequently, since they often take the time to compliment my wife and me for our two sons and how they've done academically over the years.
But they act as if I have three eyes and a tail when I tell 'em what I think. There was a buddy of mine in my council - I've known him for about 15 years, we're pretty good friends. He ran for school board in the county. I told him some of my ideas. First of all, he was so uninformed about the county's public school system that it took me nearly and hour just to correct the basic objectives facts he got wrong. In terms of how to reform public education, he didn't think there was much to be done that couldn't be fixed by a small increase in the budget to fund this or that latest educratic fad. And the guy is a REPUBLICAN!
So the best we can do is to serve as examples, to model what real, effective education can look like. And to rear good, decent persons who love God and who learn to use their God-given talents well.
“And frankly I bear some of the guilt...”
Maybe, maybe not.
Teaching is a vocation. That's whether you're teaching your own kids in your own homeschool, or someone else’s kids in a traditional school. God gives ALL parents the vocation to teach their own children. But he only gives a small number of individuals the vocation to teach, on a long-term basis, other parents’ children. And there are vocations even within that vocation. Not everyone is called to enter hell and offer some respite to the damned that lie within. Only you know whether or not that was truly God's call to you. If so, then perhaps you are guilty. If not, then it's a good thing you went elsewhere.
"The money at the inner city was better, a lot better."
The worst of all possible motivations to teach in a difficult environment - the money is better. What an effective way to guarantee a bad faculty.
Few things are worse than a bad teacher. Unfortunately, they abound.