# It's Not The Teacher's Unions....



## PoliticalChic (Mar 2, 2011)

Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.

Well, read the following, and see if you can blame the teachers....

...the blame should be on the curriuculum and educrats.

"*In the past 50 years, by one reckoning, the working vocabulary of the average 14 year-old has declined from some 25,000 words to 10,000 words.* This is not merely a decline in numbers of words but in *the capacity to think.* It also signifies that there has been *a steep decline *in the number of things that an adolescent needs to know and to name in order to get by in an increasingly homogenized and urbanized consumer society. This is *a national tragedy virtually unnoticed in the media.* It is no mere coincidence that in roughly the same half century the average person has come to recognize over 1000 corporate logos, but can *now recognize fewer than 10 plants and animals native to his or her locality. *

That fact says a great deal about why *the decline in working vocabulary *has gone unnoticedfew are paying attention. The decline is surely not consistent across the full range of language but concentrates *in those areas having to do with large issues such as philosophy, religion, public policy, and nature*. On the other hand, vocabulary has probably increased in areas having to do with sex, violence, recreation, and consumption. As a result we are losing the capacity to say what we really mean and ultimately to think about what we mean. *We are losing the capacity for articulate intelligence *about the things that matter most. 

"That sucks," for example, is a common way for budding young scholars to announce their displeasure about any number of things that range across the spectrum of human experience."
Verbicide

The Dewey-Progressive non-subject matter based education.
Hang the educrats! (Can I still say that?)


Verbicide


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Mar 2, 2011)

Im pretty pissed @  teachers unions as well .


----------



## editec (Mar 2, 2011)

You know that I work with antique books for children, right?


So naturally I have to decide what the reading level is for each book I publish.

The 2nd or 3rd grade reading level books written in our grandfathers' day would flummox the average 5th or 6th grader, today.

As an educator one of the problems we have is that we have decided to TEACH DOWN to our children, rather than teaching UP to them.

Now imagine that you were trying to teach your baby to learn the language.

How much progress would you make if you only spoke BABY TALK to them?

ZERO, right?

Well, on a smaller scale that the problem with teaching down to kids.

Most children's books published today are PABLUM.

Worse, they are also politically correct PABLUM.

Now whose fault is that?

THE PUBLIC'S fault, folks.

They're the morons who buy this crap for their kids.

And they are ALSO the morons who get teachers fired who won't give Buffy and Biffy As when they deserve Cs.

The problem with education is that EDUCATORS don't run the industry.

Real estate agents, bankers, retired machinists and bank clerks are the people making the SCHOOL BOARD decisions that effect your kids' educations.

I mean how freaking stupid are we?

Would we put bus drivers in charge of hospitals?

Would we elect the people in charge of writing software programs from a cadre of clueless imbeciles?

Of course not.

They're not qualified to run those industries.  That we can ALL see.

But still, people imagine that non-educators are wholly qualified to tell the educational community how to do their jobs.

Local control?

That's nothing but a load of_ "its all about common sense"_ horsehocky.


----------



## kwc57 (Mar 2, 2011)

Standardized testing and the funding tied to it are a major part of the education issue.  Standardized testing leads to "teaching to the test". While it is possible to use a standardized test without letting its contents determine curriculum and instruction, frequently, what is not tested is not taught, and how the subject is tested often becomes a model for how to teach the subject.  If schools score low on the standardized testing, they stand to lose a major piece of funding.  If we did away with standardized testing and let each school system and teacher actually design their curriculum as they see fit, we would see education levels take a dramatic rise.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Mar 2, 2011)

editec said:


> You know that I work with antique books for children, right?
> 
> 
> So naturally I have to decide what the reading level is for each book I publish.
> ...



Im sure you have seen the 10th grade curriculum  from 1890 .


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Mar 2, 2011)

kwc57 said:


> Standardized testing and the funding tied to it are a major part of the education issue.  Standardized testing leads to "teaching to the test". While it is possible to use a standardized test without letting its contents determine curriculum and instruction, frequently, what is not tested is not taught, and how the subject is tested often becomes a model for how to teach the subject.  If schools score low on the standardized testing, they stand to lose a major piece of funding.  If we did away with standardized testing and let each school system and teacher actually design their curriculum as they see fit, we would see education levels take a dramatic rise.



The NEA is producing the product they want.. docile consumers .


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 2, 2011)

kwc57 said:


> Standardized testing and the funding tied to it are a major part of the education issue.  Standardized testing leads to "teaching to the test". While it is possible to use a standardized test without letting its contents determine curriculum and instruction, frequently, what is not tested is not taught, and how the subject is tested often becomes a model for how to teach the subject.  If schools score low on the standardized testing, they stand to lose a major piece of funding.  If we did away with standardized testing and let each school system and teacher actually design their curriculum as they see fit, we would see education levels take a dramatic rise.



Sorry, boys....you and Techy are concentrating on exactly where the deckchairs on the Titanic should be place...

The root cause of the problem is the dominance of progressive ideology in what passes for education today.

1.  The Massachusetts miracle, in which Bay State students *soaring test scores *broke records, was the direct consequence of the state legislatures passage of the 1993 Education Reform Act, which established *knowledge-based standards for all grades and a rigorous testing system linked to the new standards. And those standards, Massachusetts reformers have acknowledged, are Hirschs legacy.*

2. In the new millennium, Massachusetts students have surged upward on the biennial National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)the nations report card, as education scholars call it. On the 2005 NAEP tests, Massachusetts ranked first in the nation in fourth- and eighth-grade reading and fourth- and eighth-grade math. It then repeated the feat in 2007. No state had ever scored first in both grades and both subjects in a single yearlet alone for two consecutive test cycles. *On another reliable test, the Trends in International Math and Science Studies, the states fourth-graders last year ranked second globally in science and third in math, while the eighth-graders tied for first in science and placed sixth in math. *(States can volunteer, as Massachusetts did, to have their students compared with national averages.) The United States as a whole finished tenth.
E. D. Hirschs Curriculum for Democracy by Sol Stern, City Journal Autumn 2009

And, instead of education, the educrats concentrate on indocrination:

3.... the one book that the fellows had to read in full was *Pedagogy of the Oppressed, by the Brazilian educator Paulo Freire.*
This book has achieved near-iconic status in Americas teacher-training programs. In 2003, David Steiner and Susan Rozen published a study examining *the curricula of 16 schools of education14 of them among the top-ranked institutions in the country, according to U.S. News and World Reportand found that Pedagogy of the Oppressed was one of the most frequently assigned texts in their philosophy of education courses.*

4.	But rather than dealing with the education of children, Pedagogy of the Oppressed mentions none of the issues that troubled education reformers throughout the twentieth century: testing, standards, curriculum, the role of parents, how to organize schools, what subjects should be taught in various grades, how best to train teachers, the most effective way of teaching disadvantaged students. *This ed-school bestseller is, instead, a utopian political tract calling for the overthrow of capitalist hegemony and the creation of classless societies.*Pedagogy of the Oppressor by Sol Stern, City Journal Spring 2009


Here on USMB, we have some of the most politically astute minds in the population, yet you folks on the left refuse to open your eyes as to the deleterious effects of progressive/liberal agendas.

Thankfully, many eyes have been opened by Barak Hussein Obama, peace be on him, as far as economy and politics.

I await the same for education.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 2, 2011)

Mr.Fitnah said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > You know that I work with antique books for children, right?
> ...



And how about this one..

The evolution in teaching math since the 1950s.  

1. Teaching Math In 1950
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit? 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Teaching Math In 1960
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit? 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Teaching Math In 1970
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
4. Teaching Math In 1980
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.
------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- 
5. Teaching Math In 1990
A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? 
Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? (There are no wrong answers.)


----------



## Wry Catcher (Mar 2, 2011)

Expecting all kids to learn the same way is what we have done for ever.  I agree with editec but the 'blame' if you will should be more widely spread.  Our system extinguishes the innate curiosity of kids early, making learning a choir and not a joy.

Its been a long time since I read The Republic but Plato's concept as I recall, allowing kids to be kids and explore the world at their own pace, juxtaposed with the needs of today's teachers (and maybe an aide) having to control 30 or more five year olds in a contained environment, offers us a hint as to what's wrong with education today.

My experience, as an active athletic child was being told to _stop, sit still, don't touch_; by the time I was in the fourth grade I was bored and recall very clearly one circumstance which framed my perspective on school.

We were listening to the teacher and the map on the wall behind her was of the world.  I had tuned out and began to look at the map, seeing how the west coast of Africa might fit nicely into the Gulf of Mexico I raised my hand and when she looked at me commented on my observation.  Her response was, I should sit still and listen carefully.

My reaction, from that day on I always had a book with me.  I'd read with the book in my lap, never wanting to again be admonished for speaking out or expressing any ideas of my own.  I read all the Tom Swift Books, all the Hardy Boy books and even Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn in my lap for the next two years.  Finally, I moved on to Jr. High and had a couple of teachers who not only lectured, but listened and stimulated my curiosity.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah (Mar 2, 2011)

The Promise Of America Is. . . Socialism?  That&#8217;s exactly what is being taught in many American public schools.

Under the guise of teaching children to read, the seeds of Socialism are being planted within the minds of young children. Do you believe that the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States mandates the following?

The People&#8217;s basic needs must be met in a country. Needs for housing, education, transportation, and health care overseen by our government system.
Those are the words being chanted over and over and over by school children around the country. They are part of an educational program called Building Fluency Through Practice and Performance. This section is called &#8216;The Promise of America&#8217; and it breaks down the fifty-two word single sentence that is the Preamble.  Here is the original:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Disguised as a reading exercise, the Preamble has been turned into a five page choral project with commentary planted inside this very simple sentence.  Here is an example. Make note of what the children (R5, R6, & R7) are being asked to read after the words &#8216;promote the general welfare&#8217;:







Building Fluency Through Practice and Performance - Teacher Created Materials


----------



## Zander (Mar 2, 2011)

We need private competition in education. Vouchers work. Give parents choices and the public schools will improve.


----------



## kwc57 (Mar 2, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> > Standardized testing and the funding tied to it are a major part of the education issue.  Standardized testing leads to "teaching to the test". While it is possible to use a standardized test without letting its contents determine curriculum and instruction, frequently, what is not tested is not taught, and how the subject is tested often becomes a model for how to teach the subject.  If schools score low on the standardized testing, they stand to lose a major piece of funding.  If we did away with standardized testing and let each school system and teacher actually design their curriculum as they see fit, we would see education levels take a dramatic rise.
> ...



Uh......first, I blamed standardized tests and unless I'm just really dense, you more or less did too.  Not sure what you are disagreeing with.

Second, I think you may have just accused me of being on the left.  I thought we have had enough interactions for you to know better.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 2, 2011)

kwc57 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > kwc57 said:
> ...



Sorry about that...let me try again...

my point, poorly made, was that political perspective is the main factor in the educational collapse.

I hope you have the time to read the links I provided, especially the one re: Hirsch's Content Rich Curriculum.

It is at variance with the idea summarized in 'teach them to think, and they can always look up what they want to know..."
No, they need a rich background of factual knowledge, a more traditional approach.
And making school easier is exactly the wrong approach: kids know when learning is real and when it's bogus.

The progressives want kids to rediscover every advance civilization has made...absurd.
Their mantra is that a teacher should be "a guide on the side...not the sage on the stage."
Catchy, but erroneous.
Teachers should be sages, stars of the classroom...'else, who needs 'em.
I want kids to say, 'I want to be just like her!'

I'm sure you agree.


----------



## psikeyhackr (Mar 2, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> 1.  The Massachusetts miracle, in which Bay State students *soaring test scores *broke records, was the direct consequence of the state legislatures passage of the 1993 Education Reform Act, which established *knowledge-based standards for all grades and a rigorous testing system linked to the new standards. And those standards, Massachusetts reformers have acknowledged, are Hirschs legacy.*



I presume that is E.D. Hirsch with his *Cultural Literacy*.  I bought the when William Bennett was talking about it.  LOL

The Battle of Hastings is more important that the Moon landing according to his list.  Sorry dude, the technology is determining what the future will be not what we know about the past.

It's FUTURE SHOCK run for your culture it's obsolete.

psik


----------



## uscitizen (Mar 2, 2011)

but it must be the teachers unions it surely cannot be the parents fault can it?
After all there is such an over whelming support of education by parents isn't there?
I mean they had to start having the PTA meeting in the gymnasiums because of the attendence didn't they?
Ohh wait that is parental interest in and support of sports not education.

imho parents have to have someone to blame for what is primarially their own failings.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Mar 2, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> 
> Well, read the following, and see if you can blame the teachers....
> 
> ...



What the fuck is it with the obsession on the left with teachers unions? 


They are almost correct that the it is not the teachers unions, they just need to add one word to the sentence to make it completely true. It is not just the teachers unions, it is the culture that is fostered by the teachers unions, the school districts, the governments, and the politicians that support the status quo.

Keep living in your fantasy world where the teachers unions  care about the students, Democrats are for poor people, and choice in schools is a tool of rich Republicans to take money away from the schools. Every day more people see the truth and realize that all the Democratic Party cares about is the money they get from unions, and all the unions care about is screwing over the taxpayer to keep their pensions.


----------



## jeffrockit (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> 
> Well, read the following, and see if you can blame the teachers....
> 
> ...



If teachers showed this much passion and involvement in improving grades then we may be able to turn around the pitiful performances in many schools.


----------



## midcan5 (Mar 3, 2011)

This is getting old, if anyone lives near PC would they please wake her, take her to the front door, show her she lives in America, then take her to the nearest playing field and have her talk to parents and ask why little Joanie and Johnnie are not home doing homework, then take her to any group of teachers, and ask if they can give a sense of America's parents and children today when it comes to school and work. Do middle class as that is still the primary source for citizens in America, even if fading in the wide divide. 

Wish I had time to write the stories my wife told me just this week about parent excuses and American student's laziness. Baffling for sure, but telling of why we are growing dumber and dumber as a nation. Oh, by the way, turn on TV too if you want to understand our culture of narcissistic insanity, detective shows, and medical aliments that House can't solve. Then watch Repo shows and whatnot on TruTV for a interesting view of your fellow citizens.  Abandon ship, abandon ship! 


http://www.usmessageboard.com/educa...ew-of-waiting-for-superman-2.html#post3065163
http://www.usmessageboard.com/education-and-history/108215-education-then-and-now.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/education-and-history/108215-education-then-and-now-2.html#post2074607
http://www.usmessageboard.com/educa...liberals-in-the-classroom-11.html#post1749647

"*Not surprisingly, in a land where literacy and numeracy are considered virtues, teachers are revered. Teenagers ranked teaching at the top of their list of favorite professions in a recent survey. Far more graduates of upper schools in Finland apply for admission to teacher-training institutes than are accepted.* The overwhelming majority of those who eventually enter the classroom as a teacher make it a lifelong career, even though they are paid no more than their counterparts in other European countries." 

"*At the heart of Finland's stellar reputation is a philosophy completely alien to America. The country of 5.3 million in an area twice the size of Missouri considers education an end in itself - not a means to an end.* It's a deeply rooted value that is reflected in the Ministry of Education and in all 432 municipalities. In sharp contrast, Americans view education as a stepping stone to better-paying jobs or to impress others. The distinction explains why we are obsessed with marquee names, and how we structure, operate and fund schools." Lessons From Finland: The Way to Education Excellence | CommonDreams.org


----------



## mudwhistle (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> 
> Well, read the following, and see if you can blame the teachers....
> 
> ...



Most of the hostility seems to be coming from paid agitators. 

The left claims Wis Gov. Scott Walker wanted to send in a bunch of thugs at the same time the union bused them in droves to the capital. Most of the teachers have gone back to work.


----------



## editec (Mar 3, 2011)

Mr.Fitnah said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > You know that I work with antique books for children, right?
> ...


 
You doubt my credentials as it regards_ this_ issue?

That's amusing.


----------



## bodecea (Mar 3, 2011)

jeffrockit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> ...



Maybe if STUDENTS showed this much passion and involvement in improving their grades....eh?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 3, 2011)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Keep living in your fantasy world where the teachers unions  care about the students, Democrats are for poor people, and choice in schools is a tool of rich Republicans to take money away from the schools. Every day more people see the truth and realize that all the Democratic Party cares about is the money they get from unions, and all the unions care about is screwing over the taxpayer to keep their pensions.


 PC is a confirmed rightwingloon.

btw, there are 1,000,000 Republican members of one of the largest teachers unions in the country.


----------



## yota5 (Mar 3, 2011)

As an educator one of the problems we have is that we have decided to TEACH DOWN to our children, rather than teaching UP to them.  (editec)

Editec, that is a profound statement.  The answer to this dilemma lies with educators such as Michelle Rhee, former chancellor of education for District of Columbia Public Schools, Washington, DC.  This is a tough lady.  She took on the unions, and the teachers.  She set performance based pay increases, and fired 241 under performing teachers, principles, and administrators.  It shouldn't come as a great surprise that things improved dramatically during her tenure.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

psikeyhackr said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > 1.  The Massachusetts miracle, in which Bay State students *soaring test scores *broke records, was the direct consequence of the state legislatures passage of the 1993 Education Reform Act, which established *knowledge-based standards for all grades and a rigorous testing system linked to the new standards. And those standards, Massachusetts reformers have acknowledged, are Hirschs legacy.*
> ...




"... the technology is determining what the future will be not what we know about the past."

What an incongruous post....perhaps I should say syncretic.

Clearly you haven't given much thought to your post... it would be fully within understanding if you decided to retract it.

1. There is neither reason nor demand to separate the study of the past from that of the future.

2. Your inadvertent joke is that one can learn to advance society technologically without first mastering the language and epiphanies of the past.

3. "MIT is a research university committed to world-class inquiry in math, science and technology - but *you may be surprised to learn that we require more liberal arts courses than many liberal arts institutions."*

That, from the M.I.T. admissions website.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> but it must be the teachers unions it surely cannot be the parents fault can it?
> After all there is such an over whelming support of education by parents isn't there?
> I mean they had to start having the PTA meeting in the gymnasiums because of the attendence didn't they?
> Ohh wait that is parental interest in and support of sports not education.
> ...



No doubt, when you spy a painting that you don't like, you blame the brushes used.

Post #7 is meant for you.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

jeffrockit said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> ...



Why are you folks so unable to consider that it is the tools the society provides to teachers that is holding them back?

The same people in parochial schools produce a far better product...have you thought about the reasons why?

Do you think those teachers are much different from those in the public schools?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

midcan5 said:


> This is getting old, if anyone lives near PC would they please wake her, take her to the front door, show her she lives in America, then take her to the nearest playing field and have her talk to parents and ask why little Joanie and Johnnie are not home doing homework, then take her to any group of teachers, and ask if they can give a sense of America's parents and children today when it comes to school and work. Do middle class as that is still the primary source for citizens in America, even if fading in the wide divide.
> 
> Wish I had time to write the stories my wife told me just this week about parent excuses and American student's laziness. Baffling for sure, but telling of why we are growing dumber and dumber as a nation. Oh, by the way, turn on TV too if you want to understand our culture of narcissistic insanity, detective shows, and medical aliments that House can't solve. Then watch Repo shows and whatnot on TruTV for a interesting view of your fellow citizens.  Abandon ship, abandon ship!
> 
> ...



If you read the thread more carefully, rather than looking for some bone to pick with me personally, you might see that the thread is actually an attempt to ameliorate the criticism of your spouse, and other teachers.

An additional flaw in your post is that you simply want to pass the blame on to the parents, who neither passed exams said to indicate that they were prepared to teach children, or accept a pay check intended for remuneration for teaching children.

No, the problem is that old fashioned lefties like you, and the other clueless, don't want to place the blame on the progressives who have ruined education.
In post #7, I afforded you a link to the 'Massachusetts Miracle'..actual evidence that Hirsch's traditional education works.

It's your politics that puts the blinders on you, and prevents you from seeing the results in one of the 'laboratories of democracy,'...

My  suggestion is that you get your nose out of the socialist 'Sojourner's' and pick up some of Hirsch's books....and pass them on to the wife and her fellow teachers.

BTW, did you know that one of the first books the Bolsheviks translated into Russian was John Dewey's 'Schools of Tomorrow,' in 1918, while they were still in the process of killing seven million Russians?

What did the Bolsheviks realize that you have yet to figure out?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

bodecea said:


> jeffrockit said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Maybe if they were exposed to a curriculum and methodology that engaged them, instead of one that they realized was bogus....


----------



## Bfgrn (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> 
> Well, read the following, and see if you can blame the teachers....
> 
> ...



This:






Has been replaced by this:





Equals THIS:





Rank&#8595; 	Country&#8595; 	Literacy rate *&#8595;
1 	 Georgia 	&#8776;100.0
2 	 Cuba 	99.8
2 	 Estonia 	99.8
2 	 Latvia 	99.8
5 	 Barbados 	99.7 [j]
5 	 Slovenia 	99.7 [l]
5 	 Belarus 	99.7
5 	 Lithuania 	99.7
5 	 Ukraine 	99.7
5 	 Armenia 	99.7
10 	 Kazakhstan 	99.6
10 	 Tajikistan 	99.6
12 	 Azerbaijan 	99.5
12 	 Turkmenistan 	99.5
12 	 Russia 	99.5
16 	 Hungary 	99.4 [j]
17 	 Kyrgyzstan 	99.3
17 	 Poland 	99.3 [j]
19 	 Tonga 	99.2
21 	 Albania 	99.0
21 	 Antigua and Barbuda 	99.0 [q]
21 	 Australia 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Austria 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Belgium 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Canada 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Czech Republic 	99.0 [d]
21 	 North Korea 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Denmark 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Finland 	99.0 [d]
21 	 France 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Germany 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Guyana 	99.0 [j]
21 	 Iceland 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Ireland 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Japan 	99.0 [d]
21 	 South Korea 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Luxembourg 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Netherlands 	99.0 [d]
21 	 New Zealand 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Norway 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Slovakia 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Sweden 	99.0 [d]
21 	 Switzerland 	99.0 [d]
21 	 United Kingdom 	99.0 [d]
21 	 United States 99.0 [d]*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

Ravi said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Keep living in your fantasy world where the teachers unions  care about the students, Democrats are for poor people, and choice in schools is a tool of rich Republicans to take money away from the schools. Every day more people see the truth and realize that all the Democratic Party cares about is the money they get from unions, and all the unions care about is screwing over the taxpayer to keep their pensions.
> ...



Another pithy post by Ravi!

As an aside, the OP is neither about me, nor about Republicans. It is about the real villain in the disaster we jokingly refer to as the 'educational system.'

Here, take another shot (can I still say that?).... are our children less articulate than they were 50 years ago?
Care to pinpoint the reasons for same? Suggest a solution?

Or would you rather remain the Marquise of Marginal Messages?


----------



## Ravi (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...


 I was merely_ schooling_ Windbag for calling you a Democrat.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> 
> Well, read the following, and see if you can blame the teachers....
> 
> ...



I do agree that the teachers are, overall, doing a poor job in teaching our children to think for themselves and develop reasoning skills.

However I also think much of the anger toward PUBLIC SECTOR (for the boneheads out there this DOES NOT apply to private sector unions) unions stems from the fact that the taxpayers who are taxed to pay their salaries make roughly 30% less on average for pay.  The non-union taxpayers also have to contribute far more to their benefits than the public, tax revenue funded, workers.

I mean if my income is being taxed so that someone else can receive a better yearly income and benefits packages while working less hours and then they are failing to efficiently and effectively do their jobs I'm not going to be happy...are you?


This wasn't really directed at you specifically politicalchic, it was just me kinda ranting.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

Bfgrn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Much of the hostility towards the teacher's unions isn't based on the economy, but rather the residual anger over how poorly our children are learning.
> ...


*



Ah, what a firm grip on the obvious!

Now that that has been settled, what do we do?

Accept same?

Pinpoint the reasons?

Suggest solutions....as I have in Post #7?

I kinda like the last one.*


----------



## bodecea (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > jeffrockit said:
> ...



So, teachers should be Entertainers, not Educators.....gotcha.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

Ravi said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




C'mon... you either have children, or were one....

Get mad about this problem!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

bodecea said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > bodecea said:
> ...



Don't be flip.

When we made science more like arts and crafts, as any teacher will attest, rather than a difficult and rigorous discipline, the children knew just what was going on.

We should not be teaching down to them...They will rise to the challenge!


----------



## kwc57 (Mar 3, 2011)

I still say the problem is standardized tests tied to funding.  If schools were told that they had to get their students to bark like dogs on command in order to get their share of federal funding, you'd see a lot of barking students.  Teachers end up "teaching to the test" to get higher scores on standardized tests in order to get the funding they need to operate the schools rahter than educating children in the subjects thay are supposed to be teaching.  Let each state and local school system design their own curriculum and you'll see education standards imporve.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

kwc57 said:


> I still say the problem is standardized tests tied to funding.  If schools were told that they had to get their students to bark like dogs on command in order to get their share of federal funding, you'd see a lot of barking students.  Teachers end up "teaching to the test" to get higher scores on standardized tests in order to get the funding they need to operate the schools rahter than educating children in the subjects thay are supposed to be teaching.  Let each state and local school system design their own curriculum and you'll see education standards imporve.



1. Reform is a tripod, with the following as its supports: a). standards,  b). assessment, and c). incentives.
	a. Standards must be subject by subject, and grade by grade.

	b. Tests . Teaching to the test is deplored in education circles, although that complaint is easily answered:* if the test faithfully mirrors the skills and knowledge set out in the standards, then preparing ones pupils to ace such a test is an honorable mission!* 

c. Accountability, based on the incentives that are provided for performance. And the sanctions for nonperformance, with a system that fairly apportions responsibility.
From Troublemaker, by Chester E. Finn, Jr. Former Assistant Secretary of Education under President Reagan.

2. The report card is fairly gloomy. Using the NAEPs proficient level as benchmark, just eight states showed even moderate progress over the past 10 to 15 years.  The National Center for Education Statistics reported that 12th graders reading performance in 2005 was worse than in 1992- and flat since 2002.  U.S. Chamber of Commerce | Fighting For Your Business


----------



## midcan5 (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> If you read the thread more carefully, rather than looking for some bone to pick with me personally, you might see that the thread is actually an attempt to ameliorate the criticism of your spouse, and other teachers.
> 
> An additional flaw in your post is that you simply want to pass the blame on to the parents, who neither passed exams said to indicate that they were prepared to teach children, or accept a pay check intended for remuneration for teaching children.
> 
> ...



No one ruined education, education is a reflection of the society in which it operates. Or rather everyone ruined education because we are all members of that society.  

I don't know enough about Russian education to comment, but Stalin killed his fellow Russians, not a book.  And are you assuming the Bolsheviks wanted to ruin their educational system?  That made no sense anyway I view it. If you want dumb people, don't educate them at all, give them playing fields and reality TV, that'll make them happy and stupid. 

I'll say it again, school encompasses years and years and having a few bad teachers, just like bad mechanics, bad doctors, bad USMB posters, is par for this life we live. If you don't want to learn,  don't blame it on teachers, you've had lots of time to apply yourself if you are of average intelligence. Due to work, I have been to more classes than you can shake a stick at,  guess how many teachers were super?  

One thing that is rather stupid in the education system is the constant attempt to change the way of teaching or method or whatever the latest buzzword is, but again that is part of American culture, we want easy solutions to more complicated problems. That you can blame on the system - but it ain't no conspiracy of ideas that made our nation's students lazy, it is our way of life and our values. And to be fair many still do quite well and many teachers are super too. 

"There is no test of the good society so clear, so decisive, as its willingness to tax - to forgo private income, expenditures and the expensively cultivated superfluities of private consumption - in order to develop and sustain a strong educational system for all its citizens.  The economic rewards of so doing are not in doubt. Nor the political gains.  But the true reward is in the larger, deeper, better life for everyone that only education provides."  John Kenneth Galbraith, 'The Good Society'


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Mar 3, 2011)

Ravi said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



I did not call her a Democrat, I was just adding to the evidence she posted, and added a rant against the people. like you, who refuse to acknowledge the truth.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

midcan5 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > If you read the thread more carefully, rather than looking for some bone to pick with me personally, you might see that the thread is actually an attempt to ameliorate the criticism of your spouse, and other teachers.
> ...



1. "No one ruined education,..."
On the face of it, this should invalidate your entire post.
Unless you were using '...depends on what the meaning of 'is' is..." kind of doubletalk.

It is ruined.

It was ruined by the progressive movement, but not by any one individual.

2. "...everyone ruined education..." 
Speak for yourself; I homeschool.

3. "And are you assuming the Bolsheviks wanted to ruin their educational system?"
I am stating that the proposals of John Dewey resonated with the kind of government that Bolsheviks saw as the road to utopia. It is not education for a free market society.
a.	1918, Schools of Tomorrow, published in Russian.
b.	1919, How We Think, published in Russian.
c.	1920, The School and Society, published in Russian.
d.	1921, Democracy and Education, published in Russian. The English version, of course, became a bible at Columbia Teachers College.

4. "If you want dumb people, don't educate them..." 
Sadly, that is the effect of progressive education. Again, I suggest you revew post #7, and the link to Hirsch's traditonal methods, which proved dispositive in the argument as to which is better.
Then, ask yourself, why the educrats have remained stuck in progressive methodology. 

5. "...don't blame it on teachers..."
Clearly you are a product of the govenment school system: for the umpteenth time, this thread is predicated on the idea that it is the curriculum and progressive methodology!

6. "...guess how many teachers were super..."
While I don't support bad teachers, I neither claim we need super teachers....I can provide data for you on parochial school students' achievement, with minority student bodies, and teachers who make less than government school teachers.
Now...don't make me go to UPPER CASE! It is the progressive dominance!
This is why they fear vouchers! Parents would choose the superior (traditional) schools!

7. In some other thread, I'd be happy to debate the many ways to turn students in the right direction, with the right attitudes, but for now, government out of education is the start, and that means vouchers and choice.
As for the economy, here is the rule: you can have equality or you can have prosperity....but not both.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Mar 3, 2011)

midcan5 said:


> No one ruined education, education is a reflection of the society in which it operates. Or rather everyone ruined education because we are all members of that society.



I have right wing friends that say the same thing. They say that if we had kept our moral values, kept prayer in school, and went to church every week the world would be a better place. Funny thing, I tell them they are wrong, just like I am telling you you are wrong.



midcan5 said:


> I don't know enough about Russian education to comment, but Stalin killed his fellow Russians, not a book.  And are you assuming the Bolsheviks wanted to ruin their educational system?  That made no sense anyway I view it. If you want dumb people, don't educate them at all, give them playing fields and reality TV, that'll make them happy and stupid.



That might depend on what the goals of the education system is. Some states have used education to indoctrinate their citizens, something I am sure you are aware of. 



midcan5 said:


> I'll say it again, school encompasses years and years and having a few bad teachers, just like bad mechanics, bad doctors, bad USMB posters, is par for this life we live. If you don't want to learn,  don't blame it on teachers, you've had lots of time to apply yourself if you are of average intelligence. Due to work, I have been to more classes than you can shake a stick at,  guess how many teachers were super?



That is a defeatist attitude.

Bad teacher might be unavoidable, but firing them should not be impossible. If we keep getting rid of the ones that do not meet a minimum standard we will eventually not have any bad teachers in our school system, just ones that are not as good as the best.



midcan5 said:


> One thing that is rather stupid in the education system is the constant attempt to change the way of teaching or method or whatever the latest buzzword is, but again that is part of American culture, we want easy solutions to more complicated problems. That you can blame on the system - but it ain't no conspiracy of ideas that made our nation's students lazy, it is our way of life and our values. And to be fair many still do quite well and many teachers are super too.



You are agreeing with those conservative Christians again.

Just saying.



midcan5 said:


> "There is no test of the good society so clear, so decisive, as its willingness to tax - to forgo private income, expenditures and the expensively cultivated superfluities of private consumption - in order to develop and sustain a strong educational system for all its citizens.  The economic rewards of so doing are not in doubt. Nor the political gains.  But the true reward is in the larger, deeper, better life for everyone that only education provides."  John Kenneth Galbraith, 'The Good Society'



I have noticed that you really like throwing quotes around. Do you do that so that you will not have to think for yourself, but still appear intelligent?


----------



## chanel (Mar 3, 2011)

NJ ranks #2 behind MA on the NAEP and ranks #1 in HS graduation rates. We are home to the top performing schools in the country, and a few of the worst as well. The factors that contribute to a "thorough and efficient education" would be nearly impossible to debate on a message board. Politicalchic has correctly stated that curriculum and even more so, philosophy of education, has a huge impact. However, choosing what to teach (can't cover it all) and how to teach it (styles of personality matter) depends on the teacher. Teacher quality cannot simply be measured by the outcome of a single test. Teaching is an art, not a science; not unlike parenting. A person can read every book on parenting or seem to be a loving person, and still have a messed up kid. I'm a huge believer in the concept of "social intelligence" which cannot be measured like an IQ test. You just know it when you see it. Strong interpersonal skills, ethics, and maturity are as valuable as being a math or science genius.  

Another factor that is rarely discussed, is the intelligence of the student. I have two kids who were raised in the same house, attended the same schools, and had many of the same teachers. One got a perfect 5 on the AP English exam and a 500 on his math SAT. The other scored a 690 on math, and can't spell for shit. Same parents; same teachers; different kids.


We can't fix the parents. We can't fix the 
kids. So the logical target is the teachers. Getting rid of bad teachers is a fine idea. But we are only talking about a miniscule piece of the puzzle.

If I had to pick one factor contributing to "verbicide" it would be that very few people (kids and adults) read books any more. And how can we change THAT? I simply don't know.


----------



## Samson (Mar 3, 2011)

chanel said:


> If I had to pick one factor contributing to "verbicide" it would be that very few people (kids and adults) read books any more. And how can we change THAT? I simply don't know.



We all move back into log cabins, without electricty.


----------



## Samson (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Ah, what a firm grip on the obvious!
> 
> Now that that has been settled, what do we do?
> 
> ...



Take away teh internets?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 3, 2011)

Samson said:


> chanel said:
> 
> 
> > If I had to pick one factor contributing to "verbicide" it would be that very few people (kids and adults) read books any more. And how can we change THAT? I simply don't know.
> ...



My children see their parents read constantly.
My 6th grader is reading 'Einstein,' the Isaacson book, and writing her first novel.
My 3rd grader is reading 'Thugs,' by Micah Halpern, and 'Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,' and 'The Curse of Cuddles McGee.'

Oh, yeah, and we live in a log cabin, without electricity.


----------



## Samson (Mar 3, 2011)

editec said:


> You know that I work with antique books for children, right?
> 
> 
> So naturally I have to decide what the reading level is for each book I publish.
> ...



You seem to have overlooked the fact that we _ELECT_ members of the School Board; they don't simply walk in off the street and begin chairing the meetings. If the public wants a retired machinist and a bank clerk to be a member of the school board, or a B-rate actor to govern their state, or a "community organizer" to lead their nation, then they are ELECTED.

But the public school is not an industry, making widgets, or writing software: Its primary function is to serve the local PUBLIC. Who better to direct the institution than the local citizens? Certainly not some over-educated, pointy head that's been sequestered from reality in his ivory tower.


----------



## kwc57 (Mar 3, 2011)

Samson said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Ah, what a firm grip on the obvious!
> ...


----------



## Samson (Mar 3, 2011)

kwc57 said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


----------



## AllieBaba (Mar 3, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> > Standardized testing and the funding tied to it are a major part of the education issue. Standardized testing leads to "teaching to the test". While it is possible to use a standardized test without letting its contents determine curriculum and instruction, frequently, what is not tested is not taught, and how the subject is tested often becomes a model for how to teach the subject. If schools score low on the standardized testing, they stand to lose a major piece of funding. If we did away with standardized testing and let each school system and teacher actually design their curriculum as they see fit, we would see education levels take a dramatic rise.
> ...


 
Most of the people here who refuse to acknowledge the danger of a progressive agenda were raised that way and carefully schooled that way by the very system we want them to decry. They've been told from birth that they are superior to other people, that they shouldn't be measured by the same measuring stick as lesser people, and that it's okay to lie, cheat and steal so long as you *mean well*. That is, so long as you *mean well* in regards to yourself. They've also been taught that not only are they not responsible for themselves, but they aren't responsible for anybody else, either. They are not obliged to engage in responsible behavior because the government will fix any boo boo they might get. At the same time they are taught that yes, other people are just not as valuable as they are, and it's perfectly okay to get rid of those people by whatever means necessary when they present any sort of drain. Because after all, those people don't even know what's best for them, they aren't capable of making their own decisions, and if they can't live the same life that our progressive friends enjoy, then they really aren't enjoying life at all and should go ahead and opt out; no worries.


----------



## Bfgrn (Mar 4, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


*

BUT...the solution to the 'obvious!' is not the 'obvious!' ...???

Instead, it is really the obscure that is the root cause...It is a Marxist conspiracy.

Paulo Freire, the Marxists, secretly sent out Marxist operatives in the middle of the night to break into libraries and remove the books. And once that diabolical Marxist scheme was accomplished, they were ordered to break into people's homes and remove the 'OFF' button on TV sets...

The only thing that is not clear PC; why didn't Paulo Freire, the Marxists, order his Marxist operatives to remove the FINGERS of the parents? I mean he is a Marxist.*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 4, 2011)

Bfgrn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Bfgrn said:
> ...


*

If I get the drift of your crayon scribble, Friendless, you, as so many clueless do, minimize the threat posed...

Rather than focus on the pullulating Marxism among folks like you, let me add some of the desideratum about this paragon of the elite teaching colleges...from Pedagogy of the Oppressor by Sol Stern, City Journal Spring 2009

1.	Freire isnt interested in the Western traditions leading education thinkersnot Rousseau, not Piaget, not John Dewey, not Horace Mann, not Maria Montessori. He cites a rather different set of figures: Marx, Lenin, Mao, Che Guevara, and Fidel Castro, as well as the radical intellectuals Frantz Fanon, Régis Debray, Herbert Marcuse, Jean-Paul Sartre, Louis Althusser, and Georg Lukács. And no wonder, since Freires main idea is that the central contradiction of every society is between the oppressors and the oppressed and that revolution should resolve their conflict. The oppressed are, moreover, destined to develop a pedagogy that leads them to their own liberation.


2.	Freire never intends pedagogy to refer to any method of classroom instruction based on analysis and research, or to any means of producing higher academic achievement for students.  [H]e relies on Marxs standard formulation that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat [and] this dictatorship only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society.  In one footnote, however, Freire does mention a society that has actually realized the permanent liberation he seeks: it appears to be the fundamental aspect of Maos Cultural Revolution.

3.	The pedagogical point of Freires thesis : its opposition to taxing students with any actual academic content, which Freire derides as official knowledge that serves to rationalize inequality within capitalist society. One of Freires most widely quoted metaphors dismisses teacher-directed instruction as a misguided banking concept, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing and storing the deposits. Freire proposes instead that teachers partner with their coequals, the students, in a dialogic and problem-solving process until the roles of teacher and student merge into teacher-students and student-teachers.


Now, I ask you, BoringFriendlessGuy, is this what you would consider a valid education...you know, when you finally get to go to school?

Government school, of course.*


----------



## Bfgrn (Mar 4, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



My God PC, your self enhanced Marxist conspiracy is ripe with so much right wing fear and associated guilt, you would be a huge hit on the right wing fear radio and Fox barking circuit. What is really unfathomable is that you start the OP that teachers are not to blame, then you plow into a contorted brainwashing scheme that would require teachers to be a mindless bunch of 'Gumby' and 'Pokie' clay figures that are easily pliable. I imagine the best way to identify a 'teacher' in the general public is to see if they run for any heat source.

BTW, PC...if Chairman Mao is behind this, then the cause is not liberals.

What Mao Zedong said about liberalism





&#38761;&#21629;&#30340;&#38598;&#20307;&#32452;&#32455;&#20013;&#30340;&#33258;&#30001;&#20027;&#20041;&#26159;&#21313;&#20998;&#26377;&#23475;&#30340;&#12290;&#23427;&#26159;&#19968;&#31181;&#33104;&#34432;&#21058;&#65292;&#20351;&#22242;&#32467;&#28067;&#25955;&#65292;&#20851;&#31995;&#26494;&#25032;&#65292;&#24037;&#20316;&#28040;&#26497;&#65292;&#24847;&#35265;&#20998;&#27495;&#12290;&#23427;&#20351;&#38761;&#21629;&#38431;&#20237;&#22833;&#25481;&#20005;&#23494;&#30340;&#32452;&#32455;&#21644;&#32426;&#24459;&#65292;&#25919;&#31574;&#19981;&#33021;&#36143;&#24443;&#21040;&#24213;&#65292;&#20826;&#30340;&#32452;&#32455;&#21644;&#20826;&#25152;&#39046;&#23548;&#30340;&#32676;&#20247;&#21457;&#29983;&#38548;&#31163;&#12290;&#36825;&#26159;&#19968;&#31181;&#20005;&#37325;&#30340;&#24694;&#21155;&#20542;&#21521;&#12290;

"Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension.

It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads. It is an extremely bad tendency".
Combat Liberalism


----------



## AllieBaba (Mar 4, 2011)

Well you have pretty accurately described most of the teachers I know...


----------



## Jackson (Mar 4, 2011)

Simply put...Unions do propose a problem when their main focus is not the children.  If teachers want to be considered as professionals they have to act, work and behave as such.

Unions protect the worst in their profession.

Unions collect dues from members to give to political parties not for the enhancement of educating teachers..acting more like the AFL-CIO.

Unions bargain for the salaries of teachers instead of their performance dictating their salary.

The summer months should be paid days for further education for strategies in education, studying and making  reteaching units when students do not pass fundamental skills.

Faculties have to meet making strict passing requirements. Ordering teachers to grade their own papers instead of children grading their own papers! No grading "on the curve" to look better!  

Teachers have to realize that standaradized testing is testing the fundamentals.  If they teach and require students to master the fundamentals, they should do well on the test.  Teacher proctors should give the test and the test should not be available to teachers before testing or afterwards.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 4, 2011)

Bfgrn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Bfgrn said:
> ...



Did you say 'liberals'?

I prefer the term 'dupes.'

1.	A dupe is one who is easily deceived or fooled. As far back as Washingtons Farewell Address, we find the warning against dupes: Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

2.	Dupes, in this connection, are folks who have been used by the communists to believe that either the communists are just like them, and therefore deserve their protection, or have been led to believe that the communist party is no more menacing than any other American political party.

3.	The progressive left, and the liberal left, while not themselves communists, share many of the same sympathies, such of redistribution of wealth, and workers rights, nationalizations of industry, etc, but are not quite as far left as the communists, and would not go to the same lengths as the communists to achieve their goals. This does not mean, though, that the help of these dupes is not necessary in order for the communists to achieve victory. Even at their peak, in the 30s, the Communist Party of the United States never had more than 100 thousand members: so deception of the dupes was critical.

a.	The archives tell a tale of plans and schemes between the CPUSA and the Communist International in Moscow, to dupe progressives and liberals: go to rallies, dont let them know you are a communist!, If anyone reveals that you are a communist, claim it is red-baiting,  yell McCarthyism!
From Dr. Paul Kangor, who wrote DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century  

Betcha' felt just like a mirror was held up in front of you as you read that, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 4, 2011)

Jackson said:


> Simply put...Unions do propose a problem when their main focus is not the children.  If teachers want to be considered as professionals they have to act, work and behave as such.
> 
> Unions protect the worst in their profession.
> 
> ...



I'm going to suggest that a clear distinction be made between teachers and teacher's unions.

Unions are simply a mechanism to better the situation of teachers. If they remain legal, don't blame them for what they do...and, in principle, the freedom of assembly allows for same.

Teachers...I don't mind what they do in their free time...they are, and should be, treated as adults.

Scenario: our children score as the top group globally, and you are truly impressed with the abilites and achievements of our (personal) children...
would we be having this debate about salary, benefits, unions?

I think not.
Relate children's scores on legitimate exams to who their teachers were. Publish this info. Let parents read same, and choose schools accordingly. 

Vouchers and merit pay.


----------



## chanel (Mar 4, 2011)

Vouchers are a quick fix for the thousands  of children who risk being shot at each day. I have empathy for those families and agree that those children deserve better. But I do not believe it will do anything to improve those schools who are currently under seige. It will merely leave them with the unlucky ones and the throwaways from the charters. Vouchers create competition for the best students; not the best teachers.

And while merit pay seems like a great idea - rewarding the best and the brightest, I've yet to see an evaluation system that includes test scores, that will accomplish that. 3/4 of NJ teachers do not teach tested grades or areas. Now they will have to come up with tests for every grade level, every specialty area, and devise a computer system that will accurately tie a student's test score to the teacher. What will that cost? And how much time will the kids spend being tested? It's not practical. It hasn't been tried in a pilot program. And it will only reward the best and the brightest who are already teaching the best and the brightest in the best schools. 

The evaluation system in our school is very good in my opinion. It rates the teachers on everything from the lesson itself, to parent contacts, to the organization of the room. But I teach the most handicapped kids in the building. I am certified in English, K12, and reading. If my salary is contingent upon the results of a kid reading at the 4th grade, on an 11th grade test, special ed. will no longer be for me. Nor any other person in their right mind.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 4, 2011)

chanel said:


> Vouchers are a quick fix for the thousands  of children who risk being shot at each day. I have empathy for those families and agree that those children deserve better. But I do not believe it will do anything to improve those schools who are currently under seige. It will merely leave them with the unlucky ones and the throwaways from the charters. Vouchers create competition for the best students; not the best teachers.
> 
> And while merit pay seems like a great idea - rewarding the best and the brightest, I've yet to see an evaluation system that includes test scores, that will accomplish that. 3/4 of NJ teachers do not teach tested grades or areas. Now they will have to come up with tests for every grade level, every specialty area, and devise a computer system that will accurately tie a student's test score to the teacher. What will that cost? And how much time will the kids spend being tested? It's not practical. It hasn't been tried in a pilot program. And it will only reward the best and the brightest who are already teaching the best and the brightest in the best schools.
> 
> The evaluation system in our school is very good in my opinion. It rates the teachers on everything from the lesson itself, to parent contacts, to the organization of the room. But I teach the most handicapped kids in the building. I am certified in English, K12, and reading. If my salary is contingent upon the results of a kid reading at the 4th grade, on an 11th grade test, special ed. will no longer be for me. Nor any other person in their right mind.



Chanel, I don't want to rate the teachers in the schools...in fact, I'd be perfectly fine with doing away with supervisors and in-class ratings...outside of disciplinary reasons.

No, I want to simply look at the results, i.e., testing and a program that compares the children's previous scores, and their current.

Just as you would rate your carpenter: results.

1. http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon1214mw.html:

"Ever wonder how effective your childs teacher is? Officials in Albany would rather you didnt know. At least thats the lesson one has to take from their refusal to allow data systems to match students to teachers,

Standardized tests produce rich sources of information that researchers can use to identify effective policies and practices. The data revolution, moreover, promises to move education policy away from politics. Numbers dont have agendas or run for reelection. Accurately collected and properly analyzed, data can reveal truths that escape our sight.

One such truth is the effectiveness of individual teachers. Data analysis is far from perfect, and no one argues that it should be used in isolation to make employment decisions. But modern techniques can help us distinguish between teachers whose students excel and teachers whose students languish or fail. Theres just one problem with the data revolution: it doesnt work without data.

New York has deliberately refused to take that step. The state already has a sophisticated system for tracking student progress, but it doesnt allow this statewide data set to match students to their teachers. No technical or administrative factors prevent the state from doing so. Only political obstacles stand in the way.

Once we can objectively distinguish between effective and ineffective teachers, the system of uncritically granted tenure, a single salary schedule based on experience and credentials, and school placements based on seniority become untenable. The unions dont want information about their members effectiveness to be available, let alone put to practical use, and thus far theyve successfully blocked New York States use of such data.

When New York City hinted that it would use its own data system to evaluate teachers based on student test scores, the state legislature passed a law banning the practice."

2. This, on the other side:

Recent statistical advances have made it possible to look at student achievement gains after adjusting for some
student and school characteristics. These approaches that measure growth using value-added modeling (VAM) are
fairer comparisons of teachers than judgments based on their students test scores at a single point in time or comparisons
of student cohorts that involve different students at two points in time. VAM methods have also contributed to stronger
analyses of school progress, program influences, and the validity of evaluation methods than were previously possible.
Nonetheless, there is broad agreement among statisticians, psychometricians, and economists that student test scores
alone are not sufficiently reliable and valid indicators of teacher effectiveness to be used in high-stakes personnel decisions,
even when the most sophisticated statistical applications such as value-added modeling are employed.
For a variety of reasons, analyses of VAM results have led researchers to doubt whether the methodology can accurately
identify more and less effective teachers. VAM estimates have proven to be unstable across statistical models, years, and
classes that teachers teach." http://epi.3cdn.net/724cd9a1eb91c40ff0_hwm6iij90.pdf


The answer is somewhere in the middle.


----------



## psikeyhackr (Mar 4, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> 3. "MIT is a research university committed to world-class inquiry in math, science and technology - but *you may be surprised to learn that we require more liberal arts courses than many liberal arts institutions."*
> 
> That, from the M.I.T. admissions website.



I applied to MIT when I was about to graduate from high school.  It was somewhat of a joke to me since I knew I could not afford it but because I had started reading SF in 4th grade I had constantly run across it mentioned in books I decided to try and get an interview.  I had won a National Merit Scholarship.  I got an interview.  It lasted 20 minutes.  But 3 minutes into the interview I knew I didn't have a chance.  The man spent 20 minutes lecturing me about the kind of boys that got into the school.  Sons of doctors.  Sons of lawyers, etc. etc.

The laws of physics do not care about schools or cultures or history.  They work the same way at every school.  For $100 you can walk into a drugstore and buy a computer more powerful than the mainframe at the engineering school I did attend.  Our schools and educational techniques are OBSOLETE.  It is just a matter of how many people realize it how fast and how the ECONOMIC interests work to prevent change.  They are part of the process of creating and maintaining a class structured society.  But our so called educators can't think of something as obvious as making accounting mandatory for everyone.  But that might mess with the economic class structure.

Good science fiction stories made science more interesting than most of the science and engineering instructors.  If the best books are put into electronic form and loaded on the computers then who needs the 90% of crappy books.  The Liberal Arts stuff is so easy it is a joke but paying just as much for it as math and engineering courses really pissed me off.  Of course they won't let you take those courses at a cheaper school and transfer the credits.

The schools just are another economic scam.  But what can they do about all of these cheap computers?  They have to force people to buy CREDIT HOURS  and CREDENTIALS.

CVS Craig Android OS 2.1 7" Tablet Deal $79 bucks with 20% off coupon

But then MIT isn't demanding or publishing the distributions of steel and concrete in the World Trade Center.  Definitely glad I didn't go.  The Laws of Physics don't care about ANYTHING!

*The Cold Equations by Tom Godwin (SpaceWesterns.com)*  <-- LINK

psik


----------



## psikeyhackr (Mar 4, 2011)

Bfgrn said:


>



Replace that with THIS:






Cost of Living, by Robert Sheckley
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Cost of Living, by Robert Sheckley

Subversive, by Dallas McCord Reynolds
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Subversive, by Mack Reynolds

Eight Keys to Eden, by Mark Irvin Clifton
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Eight Keys to Eden, by Mark Clifton

The Fourth R, by George Oliver Smith
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Fourth "R", by George O. Smith.

Black Man's Burden, by Dallas McCord Reynolds
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Black Man's Burden, by Mack Reynolds.

CVS Craig Android OS 2.1 7" Tablet Deal $79 bucks with 20% off coupon

psik


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 4, 2011)

psikeyhackr said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > 3. "MIT is a research university committed to world-class inquiry in math, science and technology - but *you may be surprised to learn that we require more liberal arts courses than many liberal arts institutions."*
> ...



"...who needs the 90% of crappy books."

Blasphemous...

I love books, and favor books that send me to the dictionary.

Deep thinking requires a deep, rich vocabulary. That comes from reading, all types of books.

While I appreciate the personal anecdotes, I never doubted nor questioned your intelligence.

Still what point are you making re: MIT having more required liberals arts courses than less technical schools?
They are just being silly?


----------



## Bfgrn (Mar 4, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Thank you for completely jumping the shark PC. I strongly suggest your seek psychiatric help to abate your extreme right wing paranoia. If I'm a 'commie', so was Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy and Barry Goldwater.

Here's some interesting reading for you. Some folks in Russia, a very conservative country had the same fear of liberals. So you have a Brethren...the Stalinists.

February 27, 1989

Soviet Conservatives Try to Turn Back the Clock on Gorbachev's Policies

MOSCOW, Feb. 26 Russian conservatives, uneasy with the liberalization of Soviet society under Mikhail S. Gorbachev, have seized on the country's experiment in more democratic elections as a chance to fight for a return to more authoritarian ways.

While many candidates and voters say they view the elections to the new Congress of Deputies as a way to further the candor and freedoms allowed by the Soviet leader, conservatives in this city and around the country were boasting last week that they had already succeeded in blocking the nomination of several prominent people regarded as liberals.

*A Disparate Alliance*
The conservatives are a disparate alliance, including xenophobic fringe groups, like Pamyat, as well as large numbers of less extreme nationalists who yearn for what they see as the simple values of Old Russia and the Orthodox church.

Nikita F. Zherbin, head of the Leningrad chapter of Pamyat, delighted in the fact that Mr. Korotich had been forced off the ballot in Moscow's Sverdlovsk region, and described this as the first successful step in the conservative campaign to use the elections as a vehicle for its political ideas. 

*'I Am a Stalinist'*
''We brought our case to the people, and the outcome speaks for us,'' said Mr. Zherbin, whose group regards the liberalization of Soviet society as a conspiracy by Jews, Masons and Westernizers.

Soviet Conservatives Try to Turn Back the Clock on Gorbachev's Policies


----------



## psikeyhackr (Mar 4, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> "...who needs the 90% of crappy books."
> 
> Blasphemous...
> 
> ...



If a person could read 10 books per day for 80 years that would be 290,000 books.

Amazon says there are 810,000 books available for the Kindle.  They say there were 1,100 new releases on science fiction books in the last 90 days.  We have a problem of infoglut.  Even if we could select out the best 10% that quantity would still be huge.

I recently finished an SF book that I have to review.  It is almost 400 pages.  Back when I started reading the stuff the common length was 150 pages.  I could find plenty of books under 250 pages that are better.  But with all of these computers making writing easier there is more and more stuff being churned out.  Everyone must use some kind of filtering even if they just refuse to read.  LOL

Our problem is how to design the filter.

Since MIT can't solve a physics problem I really don't care what they do about Liberal Arts.

psik


----------



## chanel (Mar 5, 2011)

Did anyone read this?  Apparently Cliff Notes is too lengthy for kids to read today, so they will soon be making 5 MINUTE VIDEOS of classic books!  If they can get them down to 2.5, they may really get somewhere.



> By God, civilization has moved beyond the printed word! We have iPhones, iPads, cell phones with apps aplenty. Why are we still forcing kids to read?
> 
> Well, we won&#8217;t, because CliffsNotes has not forgotten its mission. According to various news reports, that company is *now producing brief internet videos of its famous crib notes *which will be shown initially on AOL, since &#8220;everything in today&#8217;s world seems to be headed towards speedier and shorter ways to get information.&#8221;



Pajamas Media » CliffsNotes for CliffsNotes? Yeah, Pretty Much.


----------



## editec (Mar 5, 2011)

FWIW I have always thought that STANDARDIZED TESTING has a place in American education.

When I was coming up through school WE took what they called ACHIVEMENT TESTS every year.

They were nationally designed tests to measure the progress each student was making.

Sadly, when the outcome of those standardized tests is used to reward or beat up the school system, those tests go from being useful tools to measuing the STUDENTS" PROGESS, to inadaquate tools inappropriately measuring the SCHOOL SYSTEM.

So school system in defence of that process, being teaching to the TEST rather than teaching the subject matter so that kids can use that education in the world, they end up teaching so that kids can use that edcuation on a STANDARIZED TEST.

Its a subtle distinction to say, but when you see the difference in a classroom you'll understand why I fear that that is a BAD outcome.


----------



## midcan5 (Mar 5, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> [...]
> 
> 7. In some other thread, I'd be happy to debate the many ways to turn students in the right direction, with the right attitudes, but for now, government out of education is the start, and that means vouchers and choice.
> 
> As for the economy, here is the rule: you can have equality or you can have prosperity....but not both.



No need to debate at all, check the link on Finland above for the easy answer. Yesterday, my wife got an email from a parent telling her she wasn't satisfied with little Joanie's grades. Perfect example of America and even your misdirected argument. Had little Joanie done her work, this would not be an issue. Has nothing to do with anything except a culture in which it is always someone else's fault. And when caught the excuses fly. You simply don't want to face reality, and look instead for simple foes to pin blame on. 

And we can have both but we would need to define equality. Our greatest prosperity was when FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, LBJ worked at it. Certain European nations approach this utopia, they don't give up as easily as we do today. Another example in the change in our nation from 'can do' to whining. 

Lessons From Finland: The Way to Education Excellence | Common Dreams


----------



## chanel (Mar 5, 2011)

Yes editec. Most state tests (and the NAEP) give basically a pass/fail score. They do not break down the skills that need to be remediated. When I was in grad school, we were taught that assessments should be used to identify what kids DON'T KNOW, not what they do. And teachers should use that information for reteaching. State tests do not give enough info. At least here in NJ. In fact, we don't get the results until May.


----------



## mudwhistle (Mar 5, 2011)

editec said:


> You know that I work with antique books for children, right?
> 
> 
> So naturally I have to decide what the reading level is for each book I publish.
> ...



So you're saying that the people responsible for our education are not at fault. There is no way they can influence the process? No way Jose'?

Jesus. 

No wonder our schools are so fucked up!!!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 5, 2011)

midcan5 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > [...]
> ...



"...we would need to define equality."

Let me help you here:

. The meaning of equality.
1.*The Declaration of Independence memorializes the proposition that all men are created equal. *At the time, the ambiguity of the phrase allowed even slave holders to find it informing. 

2. But, clearly, the document was understood at the time *not to promise equality of condition- *even to white male Americans! Equality, as an abstract, was modified by the American idea of reward according to achievement, and a reverence for private property.

3. But the concept has been modified with the growth of *modern liberalism*, and the egalitarian impulse that fuels it. Here we witness *the constant expansion into areas in which equality of sorts is seen as desirable and/or mandatory.*  The intuitive de Tocqueville actually remarked that Americans loved equality more than freedom!

	a. The principle of equality prepared men for a government that covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, guidedSuch a power stupefies a people, *till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.*The evils that extreme equality may produce are slowly disclosed; they creep gradually into the social frame; they are seen only at intervals; and at the moment at which they become most violent, habit already causes them to be no longer felt. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, volume 2. 

4. *Under the new definition, an exact similarity of material wealth or income should be the goal of social justice.*

5. By the 20th century, *the new equality became a threat to freedom. FDRs New Deal and Trumans Fair Deal claimed the rectification of inequalities as within the purview of government. LBJs Great Society championed the redistribution of wealth and status in the name of equality. * Realize that the concomitant movement toward *collectivism *meant *a decline in the freedoms *of business, private associations, families, and individuals. 
Once FDR applied the political concept of equality to economics, the destruction of freedom became the conclusion. Therefore, equality, as you apply it, or prosperity. But not both.

6. The accession of these views, equality vs. freedom, means that *there can be no free market, for that would always result in inequalities. *Compared to nations such as Sweden, the United States will, by the nature of its economic system, have greater differences in wealth and income.
The above covered in far better fashion in chapter four, of Bork's "Slouching Toward Gomorrah."


The German sociologist, Karl Mannheim, suggested that the elites of each era are selected based on these principles: blood, property, and achievement.
i.          Aristocratic societies chose elites based on blood.
ii.	Bourgeois societies chose elites based on property
iii.	Modern democracies chose elites based on achievement.
The *real threat of contemporary mass society [is]that it has recently shown a tendency to renounce the principle of achievement *as a factor in the struggle of certain groups for power, and has suddenly established blood and other criteria as the major factors to the far-reaching exclusion of the achievement principle. Karl Mannheim,  Man and Society, p. 91  
If we recognize race, ethnicity and sex as the basis for reward, it becomes clear that the *achievement principle has been discarded in America today.*

Herein is the basis of our disagreements. 
a)	Conservatives believe in the principle of variety, while liberal perspectives result in a narrowing uniformity. Conservatives believe in choice of healthcare, education, religion, and various other areas. *Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Equality will be of opportunity, not necessarily of result. *The only uniformity will be before the law. Society will not be perfect. Consider the results of the rule of ideologues of the last century.

b)	Freedom and property are linked. Private property results in a more stable and productive society. Private property and retaining the fruits of ones labor has been proven successful from the Puritans Bradford, to the Stakhanovite Revolution!


----------



## Bfgrn (Mar 5, 2011)

midcan5 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > [...]
> ...



Excellent post midcan. When Gov Christie and then Gov Walker started going after teachers, I immediately thought about a main reason Finland's education system is number one.

From your link:
Not surprisingly, in a land where literacy and numeracy are considered virtues, *teachers are revered*. Teenagers ranked teaching at the top of their list of favorite professions in a recent survey. Far more graduates of upper schools in Finland apply for admission to teacher-training institutes than are accepted. The overwhelming majority of those who eventually enter the classroom as a teacher make it a lifelong career, even though they are paid no more than their counterparts in other European countries.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 5, 2011)

Bfgrn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Bfgrn said:
> ...



My poor, suffering friend....

as much as I enjoy skewering you with metronomic regularity, today will be a reprieve...

I will forsake my usual penchant- due to the nature of your consolations this day, understanding your thoughts- such that they are- are elsewhere at this time, on this day, the 58th annivesary of the death of Josef Stalin...

may you find peace.

Just a question of protocol...do you put a black armband over the red one, or simply replace it?


----------



## Bfgrn (Mar 5, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



An awful 'wordy' surrender from you PC...

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone


----------



## PoliticalChic (Mar 5, 2011)

Bfgrn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Bfgrn said:
> ...



Here, let me correct that for you....

1)	Conservatives believe that there are moral truths, right and wrong, and that these truths are permanent. The result of infracting these truths will be atrocities and social disaster. Liberals believe in a privatization of morality so complete that no code of conduct is generally accepted, practically to the point of do what you can get away with. These beliefs are aimed at the gratification of appetites and exhibit anarchistic impulses.

2)	Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent.  Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. The species is wiser than the individual (Burke). 

3)	Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the evils that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman.  There should be a balance between permanence and change, while liberals see progress as some mythical direction for society. 

4)	Conservatives believe in the principle of variety, while liberal perspectives result in a narrowing uniformity. Conservatives believe in choice of healthcare, education, religion, and various other areas. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Equality will be of opportunity, not necessarily of result. The only uniformity will be before the law. Society will not be perfect. Consider the results of the rule of ideologues of the last century.

5)	Freedom and property are linked. Private property results in a more stable and productive society. Private property and retaining the fruits of ones labor has been proven successful from the Puritans Bradford, to the Stakhanovite Revolution! 

6)	Conservatives believe in voluntary community and charity, based on duties to each other, with the assumption that each person must do whatever he could to avoid requiring assistance, as opposed to involuntary collectivism, as in let the government do it..  Burke's understanding that the "little platoon" - family, neighborhood, professional organizations etc - is the "first principle" of society has been consistently identified as providing the necessary inspiration for conservativism. And explains why conservatives give more to charity than liberals.

7)	Conservatives view people as both good and bad, and for this reason believe on restraints on power, as in checks and balances, while liberals see power as a force for good, as long as the power is in their hands. 

8)	Liberals and Conservatives differ in the way to proceed.  For Conservatives, data informs policy. (More Guns, Less Crime and Mass murderers apparently cant read, since they are constantly shooting up gun-free zones.- Coulter)   We use Conservative principles to the best of our ability, but when confronting new and original venues, we believe in testing, and analysis of the results of the tests. For liberals, feeling passes for knowing; it is based on emotion often to the exclusion of thinking.

9)	Conservatives view results differently from Liberals. Liberals respond to success and material wealth with envy and hostility, encourage class warfare and an attempt to obviate any chance that it might happen again. The exception is when it is a Liberal with the wealth. Conservatives see success as the validation and culmination of the application of Conservative principles, most prominently Liberty.

10)	Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.

PoliticalChic


----------



## jeffrockit (Mar 8, 2011)

bodecea said:


> jeffrockit said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


----------



## jeffrockit (Mar 8, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> jeffrockit said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



I don't disagree with your point; (my wife and daughter are teachers and I know what they deal with). My point is, that there are some really bad teachers who are able, with the help of the unions, to be untouchable regardless of their teaching skills. There are some that should never been given a teaching degree. I am all for merit pay as I am all for demoting or firing bad teachers.


----------



## Bfgrn (Mar 8, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



WOW PC, that is what can only be called a fairy tale. What I have seen in my lifetime is people who call themselves 'conservative' are not conserving anything. In my opinion, conservatism is respect for the past and the wisdom of our ancestors. Their lives were built on their ancestors and so it goes, from one generation to the next. You ultimately respect the lives and toil of our ancestors not by paying lip service or using empty rhetoric like 'family values'. You do it by embracing their lessons learned; respecting the policies they crafted, understanding the regulations and programs they created that increased the benefits and lessened the losses in our individual lives, in our communities and our society. And it is on the toil of those ancestors that we reap the benefits of. 

How did our ancestors craft them, were they based on some 'ideology'? I believe they were based on common sense, common decency, experience, trial and error and community involvement.

But Ronald Reagan and the right wing following he created has tried to dismantle everything our ancestors built. America was seen as the city upon the hill not because of our military might, but because of the society we created. What separated America from any other society was a robust and thriving middle class. 

But that society our ancestors built was all wrong in the eyes of these right wing ideologues. 

The whole history of mankind is filled with aristocracies that took the form of monarchies, plutocracies and oligarchies. But what the Reagan revolution really turned out to be was a Trojan horse to recreate the Gilded age, a plutocracy. The empirical evidence doesn't lie PC. The disparity of wealth in America has never been greater, except for the Gilded age.

Are ANY of the people that now call themselves conservatives today looking for common sense, common decency solutions to benefit their families and their community, or are they ideologues, who want to dismantle any shred of COMMunity and replace it with SELF interest?

That is not 'conservatism', that is narcissism.

"You shall rise in the presence of grey hairs, give honor to the aged, and fear God, I am the Lord"
Leviticus 19:32


----------

