Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There's a better way to do it but you have to pay attention to the people you elect. Maybe this makes it easier. It's interesting to note that the left trusts the union based teaching system even though the US ranks pretty low but they don't trust parents to get involved in what's being taught to their kids.
No, a parent should always be as completely involved as possible with the education of their child, but having the parent actually capable of severely modifying the education system on a whim is downright dangerous.
I would like to point out that there are many private schools available for parents who want a more specialized education.
tell that to my Asperger's 6th grader, who with my insistence on an IEP this year (completely changes most educational processes in school), has all A's, as opposed to last year where he was a C student at best, and failing at worst.
Because of his diagnosis, the school system picks up the cost involved in any and all changes in education for my son. I should think that libtards would be thrilled that this law requires parents to pick up the cost of this type of thing, and doesn't cost the school system what it must have cost to completely rework my sons education.
No, a parent should always be as completely involved as possible with the education of their child, but having the parent actually capable of severely modifying the education system on a whim is downright dangerous.
I would like to point out that there are many private schools available for parents who want a more specialized education.
Which is why the whole thing is a farce to begin with. If they were willing to pay money, their wouldn't be in public schools.
So, who pays for public school?
What? Taxpayers? God forbid they should want a say in what's taught...since they ARE paying for it.
Which is why the whole thing is a farce to begin with. If they were willing to pay money, their wouldn't be in public schools.
So, who pays for public school?
What? Taxpayers? God forbid they should want a say in what's taught...since they ARE paying for it.
The fact that you're PAYING for something doesn't make you an EXPERT at it.
Seriously: you go to a lawyer. You don't like his advice. Does the fact you're PAYING FOR IT mean he should tell you what you want to hear?
So, who pays for public school?
What? Taxpayers? God forbid they should want a say in what's taught...since they ARE paying for it.
The fact that you're PAYING for something doesn't make you an EXPERT at it.
Seriously: you go to a lawyer. You don't like his advice. Does the fact you're PAYING FOR IT mean he should tell you what you want to hear?
No, but the fact you are PAYING for his services DOES give you the right to tell him how you'd like to proceed with the case.
YOU FAIL.
No, a parent should always be as completely involved as possible with the education of their child, but having the parent actually capable of severely modifying the education system on a whim is downright dangerous.
I would like to point out that there are many private schools available for parents who want a more specialized education.
tell that to my Asperger's 6th grader, who with my insistence on an IEP this year (completely changes most educational processes in school), has all A's, as opposed to last year where he was a C student at best, and failing at worst.
Because of his diagnosis, the school system picks up the cost involved in any and all changes in education for my son. I should think that libtards would be thrilled that this law requires parents to pick up the cost of this type of thing, and doesn't cost the school system what it must have cost to completely rework my sons education.
Your son gets special education because he has special needs. You're not required to pay for that - which would add up to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, by the way - and you shouldn't be.
You should thank us liberals for that.
Having a son with special needs is not the same as screwing with the curriculum to suit the whims of parents.
Do you see why?
So much for the TP being concerned with spending and big gov't. In New Hampshire, parents can now object to school curriculum, forcing the school district to come up with new lesson plans for the children of the parents who file the objection.
Great job, guys. I see you have your priorities in line.
tell that to my Asperger's 6th grader, who with my insistence on an IEP this year (completely changes most educational processes in school), has all A's, as opposed to last year where he was a C student at best, and failing at worst.
Because of his diagnosis, the school system picks up the cost involved in any and all changes in education for my son. I should think that libtards would be thrilled that this law requires parents to pick up the cost of this type of thing, and doesn't cost the school system what it must have cost to completely rework my sons education.
Your son gets special education because he has special needs. You're not required to pay for that - which would add up to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, by the way - and you shouldn't be.
You should thank us liberals for that.
Having a son with special needs is not the same as screwing with the curriculum to suit the whims of parents.
Do you see why?
I believe you misunderstood the purpose of my post. I was commenting specifically on the bolded statement that Photonic made, about it being dangerous for parents to be able to modify a child's education.
I am well aware of the financial end of the my situation, as the part in BLUE above indicates.
Your son gets special education because he has special needs. You're not required to pay for that - which would add up to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, by the way - and you shouldn't be.
You should thank us liberals for that.
Having a son with special needs is not the same as screwing with the curriculum to suit the whims of parents.
Do you see why?
I believe you misunderstood the purpose of my post. I was commenting specifically on the bolded statement that Photonic made, about it being dangerous for parents to be able to modify a child's education.
I am well aware of the financial end of the my situation, as the part in BLUE above indicates.
I guess I don't understand. What are you saying?
I believe you misunderstood the purpose of my post. I was commenting specifically on the bolded statement that Photonic made, about it being dangerous for parents to be able to modify a child's education.
I am well aware of the financial end of the my situation, as the part in BLUE above indicates.
I guess I don't understand. What are you saying?
The law requires parents who want the same type of educational changes for their child that my son got (but whose child does NOT fall under the Americans with Disabilities act like my Asperger's some does), to PAY for any charges involved in the educational changes they want for their child... unlike ADA children like mine who are covered by the system.
I should think that libtards would be thrilled that this law requires parents to pick up the cost of this type of thing, and doesn't cost the school system what it must have cost to completely rework my sons education.
Not sure how much plainer I can say that.
I believe you misunderstood the purpose of my post. I was commenting specifically on the bolded statement that Photonic made, about it being dangerous for parents to be able to modify a child's education.
I am well aware of the financial end of the my situation, as the part in BLUE above indicates.
I guess I don't understand. What are you saying?
The law requires parents who want the same type of educational changes for their child that my son got (but whose child does NOT fall under the Americans with Disabilities act like my Asperger's some does), to PAY for any charges involved in the educational changes they want for their child... unlike ADA children like mine who are covered by the system.
I should think that libtards would be thrilled that this law requires parents to pick up the cost of this type of thing, and doesn't cost the school system what it must have cost to completely rework my sons education.
Not sure how much plainer I can say that.
Mostly I was commenting on what Photonic said about it being dangerous for parents to modify a child's education. I modified my sons, and it was a great success for him.
Umm. WHO pays for the operation of those schools?So much for the TP being concerned with spending and big gov't. In New Hampshire, parents can now object to school curriculum, forcing the school district to come up with new lesson plans for the children of the parents who file the objection.
Great job, guys. I see you have your priorities in line.
New Hampshire Lawmakers Pass Law Allowing Parental Objections To Curriculum
The Tea Party dominated New Hampshire Legislature on Wednesday overrode the governor's veto to enact a new law allowing parents to object to any part of the school curriculum.
The state House voted 255-112 and Senate 17-5 to enact H.B. 542, which will allow parents to request an alternative school curriculum for any subject to which they register an objection. Gov. John Lynch (D) vetoed the measure in July, saying the bill would harm education quality and give parents control over lesson plans.
"For example, under this bill, parents could object to a teacher's plan to: teach the history of France or the history of the civil or women's rights movements," Lynch wrote in his veto message. "Under this bill, a parent could find 'objectionable' how a teacher instructs on the basics of algebra. In each of those cases, the school district would have to develop an alternative educational plan for the student. Even though the law requires the parents to pay the cost of alternative, the school district will still have to bear the burden of helping develop and approve the alternative. Classrooms will be disrupted by students coming and going, and lacking shared knowledge."
Under the terms of the bill, which was sponsored by state Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton), a parent could object to any curriculum or course material in the classroom. The parent and school district would then determine a new curriculum or texts for the child to meet any state educational requirements for the subject matter. The parent would be responsible for paying the cost of developing the new curriculum. The bill also allows for the parent's name and reason for objection to be sealed by the state.
I guess I don't understand. What are you saying?
The law requires parents who want the same type of educational changes for their child that my son got (but whose child does NOT fall under the Americans with Disabilities act like my Asperger's some does), to PAY for any charges involved in the educational changes they want for their child... unlike ADA children like mine who are covered by the system.
I should think that libtards would be thrilled that this law requires parents to pick up the cost of this type of thing, and doesn't cost the school system what it must have cost to completely rework my sons education.
Not sure how much plainer I can say that.
Mostly I was commenting on what Photonic said about it being dangerous for parents to modify a child's education. I modified my sons, and it was a great success for him.
There's a difference between modifying a kid's education because he has special needs, and changing it because his parents want the Book of Mormon taught in class. (Or the Bible, or Koran, or the Kama Sutras, or whatever.) Or because his mom thinks she know better how to teach math than the math teacher does - even if she's right, it's still a bad idea.
I guess I don't understand. What are you saying?
The law requires parents who want the same type of educational changes for their child that my son got (but whose child does NOT fall under the Americans with Disabilities act like my Asperger's some does), to PAY for any charges involved in the educational changes they want for their child... unlike ADA children like mine who are covered by the system.
I should think that libtards would be thrilled that this law requires parents to pick up the cost of this type of thing, and doesn't cost the school system what it must have cost to completely rework my sons education.
Not sure how much plainer I can say that.
Hmm. Well, maybe the word "libtard" is confusing me. Generally whenever someone uses that word, it's a clue they're saying something stupid.
I thought you were saying: A.) my kid benefits from special education, so B.) the curriculum for every student should be based on the whims of every parent.
If that's not what you were saying, I apologize.
no worries.
Parenting takes place in the home, and public education takes place in the school.
Parents have the right to participate in school board elections, in parent teacher organizations, and so forth.
No parent has the right to modify his student's schedule or schooling because s/he is a parent, unless the state or the school board has provided authorization for that.
This is not a business-client relationship, it is a government service provided by the will of the We the People.
Let me reiterate: you are not buying a product. Rather you are purchasing a commodity, the value of which is determined by state legislature and school board elections.
This will not change. Put your child in private school or home school him if you are not satisfied.
Parenting takes place in the home, and public education takes place in the school.
Parents have the right to participate in school board elections, in parent teacher organizations, and so forth.
No parent has the right to modify his student's schedule or schooling because s/he is a parent, unless the state or the school board has provided authorization for that.
This is not a business-client relationship, it is a government service provided by the will of the We the People.
Let me reiterate: you are not buying a product. Rather you are purchasing a commodity, the value of which is determined by state legislature and school board elections.
This will not change. Put your child in private school or home school him if you are not satisfied.
parenting takes place EVERYWHERE, not just at home.
Parenting takes place in the home, and public education takes place in the school.
Parents have the right to participate in school board elections, in parent teacher organizations, and so forth.
No parent has the right to modify his student's schedule or schooling because s/he is a parent, unless the state or the school board has provided authorization for that.
This is not a business-client relationship, it is a government service provided by the will of the We the People.
Let me reiterate: you are not buying a product. Rather you are purchasing a commodity, the value of which is determined by state legislature and school board elections.
This will not change. Put your child in private school or home school him if you are not satisfied.
parenting takes place EVERYWHERE, not just at home.
If so, that does not give you the right to modify classroom instruction without direct permission to do so. Home or private school would be your child's best option.
So much for the TP being concerned with spending and big gov't. In New Hampshire, parents can now object to school curriculum, forcing the school district to come up with new lesson plans for the children of the parents who file the objection.
Great job, guys. I see you have your priorities in line.
New Hampshire Lawmakers Pass Law Allowing Parental Objections To Curriculum
The Tea Party dominated New Hampshire Legislature on Wednesday overrode the governor's veto to enact a new law allowing parents to object to any part of the school curriculum.
The state House voted 255-112 and Senate 17-5 to enact H.B. 542, which will allow parents to request an alternative school curriculum for any subject to which they register an objection. Gov. John Lynch (D) vetoed the measure in July, saying the bill would harm education quality and give parents control over lesson plans.
"For example, under this bill, parents could object to a teacher's plan to: teach the history of France or the history of the civil or women's rights movements," Lynch wrote in his veto message. "Under this bill, a parent could find 'objectionable' how a teacher instructs on the basics of algebra. In each of those cases, the school district would have to develop an alternative educational plan for the student. Even though the law requires the parents to pay the cost of alternative, the school district will still have to bear the burden of helping develop and approve the alternative. Classrooms will be disrupted by students coming and going, and lacking shared knowledge."
Under the terms of the bill, which was sponsored by state Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton), a parent could object to any curriculum or course material in the classroom. The parent and school district would then determine a new curriculum or texts for the child to meet any state educational requirements for the subject matter. The parent would be responsible for paying the cost of developing the new curriculum. The bill also allows for the parent's name and reason for objection to be sealed by the state.
My son, who got all A's in grade school, began to fail in JR high.
The schools response; Lets do more of the same. They failed him, of course, so now I have to come up with ~$7500 for professional tutoring, just to get my son back on track.
so if some people want to fix the broken school system, we should be cheering them on.
Not being hate filled partisan hacks and crying like bitches b/c it's not our teams idea.
parenting takes place EVERYWHERE, not just at home.
If so, that does not give you the right to modify classroom instruction without direct permission to do so. Home or private school would be your child's best option.
As a parent, I have every right to determine HOW my child is educated, and with what knowledge. This law simply codifies that right, and stipulates that the parent must PAY to exercise it if their opinion differs form that of the school board.
I do agree that school choice as opposed to curriculum change is a better option, but that is part of my point It's an 'option'. One of many that a parent has the right to make the decision about.
EDIT:
if it costs $37,500 for me as a parent to change the curriculum and so on for my child, this law stipulates I am responsible for that cost in it's entirety. If I want to pay it, then there you go. If not, I have other options in exercising my parental rights... home school, private or religious school, etc.
