|
Post by POA on Apr 24, 2004 3:33:25 GMT -5
(I'm starting this as the first of hopefully a series of threads to concentrate on different platform positions that we'll try and develop for our political party.)
So far, in the board on public education, there has been discussion of the more authoritarian tendencies in our public educational system.
This isn't a subject matter that I know a lot about, but what educational reforms would be good ideas for the political platforms because they would bring about much-needed improvements?
|
|
|
Post by Ropegun on Apr 24, 2004 10:43:29 GMT -5
I'd say first of all, that like health care, education should be a right. I mean, if you go to school and get good marks, and you wish to continue, you should by all means be able to. And you should'nt be saddled with debt for years afterwards. Maybe this is my way of saying I don't know that much about educational reforms either. My area of expertise lies with military and veteran affairs. So I'll leave this one to y'all. Peace.
|
|
|
Post by POA on Apr 25, 2004 0:41:51 GMT -5
This is going to be somewhat fragmentary as an first iteration towards a platform, but I'll add the following:
Eliminate the provision of 'No Child Left Behind' that mandates that school districts have to give children's names to the military. This is just sickening.
Increase funding for science education, because we're falling very far behind in this, and especially now, when there are a lot of technical issues that we need to deal with, this is vital.
This is a bit complex-but it's a big one:
Find a method of funding the educational system that decouples it from property taxation. Since property values are also tightly correlated with racial demographics, what happens is that the money that goes to districts is also similarly correlated which is part of the reason why there are grievous differences in educational funding along racial lines in the US.
|
|
|
Post by Ropegun on Apr 25, 2004 21:22:41 GMT -5
I think the issue of funding schools is a state issue, and not a federal one.
But, in my mind, a better way would be to collect those property taxes and dole out money equally from those coffers. I guess I'm saying the elimination of districts for school funding is a better way. This way, no school is left out of the loop. Why should only rich kids get new books and good team uniforms?
I agree that giving names to the military is a bad idea. Now, bear in mind that I served 11 years active duty, and in 2 minor and 1 major conflict.
I remember the military recruiters coming to my high school to headhunt. they had no names, and if you were interested, you had to approach them, as I did. This was in 1981. I believe we had one of the largest militarys we've ever had then. With no names provided. If kids nowadays don't want to join, thats up to them. It's their right not to.
I do believe this, however. I think people should do some kind of national service. In the old Soviet Union, they gave you a choice of either 2 years of military service, or 4 years of some civilian service.
Now, they just cut the Americorps program to pieces. Why they did this is beyond me, especially considering this education thread. I know people who served in Americorps, tutoring kids in those schools that lacked funding. These people doing the tutoring were volunteers, getting a small stipend for their efforts. This was an amazing program. And something should be done to keep it around. Or at least something similar. If we spent less on new weapons systems than we do now, we could afford to keep the Americorps program, and the federal government would still get low cost public service from our young people, and our education levels would increase. Everybody wins, except the generals and the warmongers, but I'm not really concerned about that.
What do y'all think?
|
|
|
Post by karpomrx on Apr 25, 2004 23:02:27 GMT -5
Up here in the sticks where I live, school taxes are one of the only tax issues people can vote on. As a result the schools are taking a beating, with a system that is doomed to fail as a result of people striking back at the percieved waste in "Big Government". The neocons have psyched enough people into "rebellion" against government waste that it is very difficult to go to a public meeting and stick to the real issue, which is the future of the children. With the charter schools and other tax money shifting schemes, soon the only children left in the public education system will be the disabled and the sociopaths. States are now strapped and the situation will not change so long as a short sighted approach is politically expedient. After WWII public monies funded a great number of vets to finish or start their education. The result was a very productive population. I know that it was not all that simple, however, one does not need a Ph.D. to understand that educated people are in a better position to deal with whatever problems arise than a people that are uninformed. If the states are broke, where's the money? Where is the big pay off that we all were to share in with the end of the cold war? Why does the auto industry dominate transportation policy in this country? The allocation of funding is the question that might strike a spark of action from all levels of government that remain outside the largess given to warmaking psychopaths.
|
|
|
Post by POA on Apr 26, 2004 19:23:52 GMT -5
Up here in the sticks where I live, school taxes are one of the only tax issues people can vote on. As a result the schools are taking a beating, with a system that is doomed to fail as a result of people striking back at the percieved waste in "Big Government". The neocons have psyched enough people into "rebellion" against government waste that it is very difficult to go to a public meeting and stick to the real issue, which is the future of the children. With the charter schools and other tax money shifting schemes, soon the only children left in the public education system will be the disabled and the sociopaths. States are now strapped and the situation will not change so long as a short sighted approach is politically expedient. After WWII public monies funded a great number of vets to finish or start their education. The result was a very productive population. I know that it was not all that simple, however, one does not need a Ph.D. to understand that educated people are in a better position to deal with whatever problems arise than a people that are uninformed. If the states are broke, where's the money? Where is the big pay off that we all were to share in with the end of the cold war? Why does the auto industry dominate transportation policy in this country? The allocation of funding is the question that might strike a spark of action from all levels of government that remain outside the largess given to warmaking psychopaths. I was just reading an article about Oregon's situation wrt the school system at Village Voice. It's pretty dismal here in California as well. To answer your question-if the states are broke, where's the money-the money has gone to the extraordinarily wealthy and their panoply of associated 'contractors'/beneficiaries/courtesans at the expense of everyone else. This, by the way, is why education has to be a federal priority instead of a state priority-because the federal government has the power to levy the taxes necessary to pay for a real educational system. Otherwise, what'll happen is that the 'tax revolt' types (who aren't really revolting against all taxation for the most part as much as they're revolting against progressive taxation, since if the poor pay more one way or another they don't give a d**n about that) will pick apart the states one by one until all 50 end up like, well, Mississippi. At the same time, I'm also aware of the fact that there needs to be some autonomy as far as the issue of curricula and methods are concerned in so far as this isn't used to compromise the purpose of education or used as a wedge to sneak creationism/et cetera in. More on that later.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on May 2, 2004 2:42:32 GMT -5
The public school system is so bad that funding reforms alone will not improve it. One of the core problems is that the keys to the kingdom have been given to this bogus "education" profession and they, in partnership w/ the political and corporate class, are all powerful. The citizens themselves have no power whatsoever, and now serve the system, instead of vice verse. Children are essentially slave labor -- (and their parents with them) -- doing unproductive work -- and forced by law to do so, to support the education industry/"profession" and their political cohorts.
No nibbling, tweaking, or new funding schemes will change things until these people and powerful interest groups are divested of their power.
|
|
|
Post by POA on May 2, 2004 17:05:23 GMT -5
The public school system is so bad that funding reforms alone will not improve it. One of the core problems is that the keys to the kingdom have been given to this bogus "education" profession and they, in partnership w/ the political and corporate class, are all powerful. The citizens themselves have no power whatsoever, and now serve the system, instead of vice verse. Children are essentially slave labor -- (and their parents with them) -- doing unproductive work -- and forced by law to do so, to support the education industry/"profession" and their political cohorts. No nibbling, tweaking, or new funding schemes will change things until these people and powerful interest groups are divested of their power. Banning donations from organizations to political campaigns, though, ought to go a long way in terms of stopping this. I would also like to know what powers you think parents should have (or rather, have back), that they don't have right now? I'll confess some ignorance on this point.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on May 2, 2004 23:39:26 GMT -5
I'm not sure banning political contributions would help. Because the corporate types want to control education, and they have, in fact succeeded in doing so. The testing regimes being forced on states are coming from this quarter.
All the educational schemes are dreamed up in international and national associations attended by "educators" and governors and members of the political class. They are then foisted on the public (the public is ambushed, always) with feints at public discussion but its always a fait accompli.
School consolidation would be a good example, and the "middle school" concept. Boards of Ed always make like its their own brilliant innovation, but it is done nationally by them and the political class. We are like Indians on the Reservation.
|
|
|
Post by POA on May 4, 2004 18:47:46 GMT -5
I'm not sure banning political contributions would help. Because the corporate types want to control education, and they have, in fact succeeded in doing so. The testing regimes being forced on states are coming from this quarter. All the educational schemes are dreamed up in international and national associations attended by "educators" and governors and members of the political class. They are then foisted on the public (the public is ambushed, always) with feints at public discussion but its always a fait accompli. School consolidation would be a good example, and the "middle school" concept. Boards of Ed always make like its their own brilliant innovation, but it is done nationally by them and the political class. We are like Indians on the Reservation. I'm not really familiar with the history of either of those, so could you explain this to me? What I'm really trying to get at is I'm trying to figure out what you think actually would be a positive change beyond just stopping the negative changes that are already being imposed?
|
|
|
Post by Moses on May 4, 2004 22:28:11 GMT -5
You mean after we rid ourselves of the educators?
I've read alot of studies, and it is hard to summarize.
1. Their instructional methodologies are harmful 2. The environment of the public schools -- their facilities, equipment, etc are harmful
3. Their transactions (adult to student/family) are harmful
|
|
|
Post by Jay Berner on May 6, 2004 20:16:03 GMT -5
Touching on that last point of Moses', teachers are up against more now than when I was a kid. When I was coming up if your teacher sent you home for misbehaving your parents generally punished you. Now they come to the school and threaten to sue. If little Agamemnon came home with bad grades he got grounded for the whole quarter and had to study like crazy for 9 insufferably long weeks. Nowadays the parents come in and demand that the child be diagnosed with ADD and reassigned much simpler courses. PTA meetings used to be slam-full, but they're paltry things now. Without the active support of parents, most students will do poorly. That is a social issue most communities have to work out for themselves.
Okay...I'm getting sleepy, so the next bit will be disjointed. Sorry.
Minority students are over-represented in special education classes, and a combination of lack of training and mild racism is to blame.
There needs to be professional reciprocity between the states - a teacher licensed in one is licensed in all. If that is constitutionally impossible, then SOME sort of unified system of minimum educational requirements must be agreed on voluntarily by all the states.
If the Teacher's Union cannot take stands on which educational research to endorse, it should at least bring the different schools of thought to the fore so that educated decisions can be made at the district level and lower.
Go back to direct instruction, even if all the college professors hate it. It works in K-10 or 11.
Prepare students for their transitions from school to work or higher education.
Rather than lower the pedagogy (science of teaching) requirements to meet the teacher shortage, the bar should be raised substantially. It will be more expensive in the short term, but we'll be spending a nickel to make a dollar.
Everything comes down to professional development for teachers thoughout their careers; better pay; and support mechanisms like monitoring and re-training, merit incentives, and tutoring by more experienced teachers.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on May 6, 2004 21:39:36 GMT -5
Jay, are you a teacher or have you just been reading their propaganda?
|
|
|
Post by Jay Berner on May 7, 2004 16:05:22 GMT -5
I was a direct marketer who specialized in educators, and to do my job well I had to know what made them tick. I was best at college, but I've done skoobobbles of K-12 stuff too.
I sympathize with new teachers the most. They finish college and get a job only to find themselves unprepared for the sink-or-swim environment. They instantly forget most of what they were taught (which might be just as well, because many Professors of Education are wrong or insane) and wind up winging it without any supervision or additional training. When they reach out for help they find incompetent administrators; an ineffective union; and jaded, cynical co-workers.
So this is my suggestion for our fix: Professional Development. That, and cut out some of the unnecessary administration.
|
|
|
Post by Jay Berner on May 7, 2004 20:03:58 GMT -5
Have you ever read anything about German tracking? I've heard a few people talk about it, but I just don't know if it'd be justly implemented. Some kids know at 16 that they don't want to go to college, so it might make sense to start gearing them up for a trade. (I was a plumber for four or five years - it's an honest living.) But it'd be just like America to set up a system like that, and 15 years in realize that most of the kids on the trades track were poor, most of the ones on the college track were rich, and the whole thing was cementing extreme economic stratification into place.
I wonder if the Germans have avoided that, and if so, how?
|
|