Bagster
Terrible article
Bagster
Why is it a terrible article? Does the truth hurt?
What’s wrong with it?
How is it inaccurate?
Could you be more specific?
But it overlooks the fact that, in the factory production example (an industry where I work), we get quality certified raw material and parts to work with and teachers, in most districts, do not. Many of their charges come from households where parenting is a joke if, indeed, it exists at all.
And teacher pay is very much a function of what the local district wants to spend. Here in SW Pennsylvania, most districts will get 100 applications or more for every opening advertised because the pay is great, probably more than they deserve in many cases. This is because the system is rigged to the point that they essentially elect their own school boards.
Meanwhile, go 100 miles or so away into West Virginia, and anyone fresh out of college can land a job in teaching because the pay is not so great and the openings to applications rate is not so skewed as it is here. They don't elect their own school boards either.
“Terrible article.”
How so? And by the way, you neglected to properly punctuate your sentence.
L
It is always easy - and, to be fair, in many cases, correct - to assign blame to teachers for the education failures. Ultimately, the answer is much deeper. As I wrote elsewhere, the job of educating children rests with the parents.
Marx didn't like that idea:
But, you will say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations when we replace home education by social.
And your education! Is not that also social and determined by the social conditions under which you educate, by the intervention, direct or indirect, of society, by means of schools? The Communists have not invented the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class.
The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parent and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.
Marx would be happy today. Public school is serving a troika of societal needs such as training, day care, and indoctrination.
Within public education, the state stands in loco parentis during school hours. That means there is an implicit - if not fully-understood - sanctioning of government (not necessarily the teachers...the rank and file teachers aren't the NEA, much like rank and file police don't support the gun control leanings of the Chiefs) pouring into kids' heads whatever they want. Some parents are OK with this because, well, that worked for their parents and prior generations. Besides, mom and dad gotta both work, right?.
But that's a trap. The issue isn't that we have the wrong types of people teaching or the schools lack discipline or we need more money in schools or we need "pay for performance."
THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM is that parents have surrendered their rights.
By extension, you have equally OK'd your child being forced to watch anti-gun films, receive Sex Ed at 6 years old, and attend environmentalist-driven field trips.
Oh sure, there is the School Board, PTA and other flaccid pseudo-levers of power handed to the parent. And maybe after months of fighting and blood, sweat and tears, Johnny doesn't have to go on the field trip.
While Mr. Denniger likes to blame the teachers for the statistics - and it is a fair cop - why are the parents ok wth their own flesh and blood being illiterate? I believe this is because, in the end, we cannot ignore the truth: parents have (in some cases, willingly and even gleefully) surrendered their child to the state.
Until that surrender is addressed, the rest is blather.