Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rpm on October 19, 2007, 01:11:58 PM
-
You may not even know...
link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303521,00.html)
At the King Middle School in Portland, Maine, medical workers are allowed to give the girls as young as 11 birth control pills without their parents knowing about it.
The school board in Portland voted 7-2 to make that happen. The rationale is that some kids will have sex and the school must try to reduce pregnancies.
:huh
-
From what I understand it is illegal in Maine for minors to engage in sexual intercourse with each other, and its illegal for adults to engage in sexual intercourse with minors, but if minors do have sexual intercourse, they get state funded birth control. I guess if the birth control was provided on the way to court I could understand.........otherwise its just another example of state mandated hypocracy.
Now get out there kids and SCREW!....oh...and dont forget your birth control :aok
-
I hate Bill O'Reilly more than my alarm clock, but I agree with him on this issue.
-
i'm against that, we need more pregnant 11 year olds. :rolleyes:
-
just another success story for our stellar public school system
and some of you are against vouchers why?
-
Besides just the age issue and parental control they dont seem to have considered there are medical contraindications for using birth control pills. My wife cannot use BCP because a blood clotting issue and BCP would kill her, my daughter cannot take BCP because she already has a hormone imbalance that BCP would aggravate. Also isnt a prescription required for birth control pills?
-
Unfortunately, there are kids having babies. Giving them access to birth control pills (or condoms, etc) will not 'promote' sexual activity. Those kids that are going to have sex are going to do so with or without permission or protection.
The adults dispensing the pills usually will give the kids a talk about the risks and downsides of getting sexually active at such an early age.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Unfortunately, there are kids having babies. Giving them access to birth control pills (or condoms, etc) will not 'promote' sexual activity. Those kids that are going to have sex are going to do so with or without permission or protection.
The adults dispensing the pills usually will give the kids a talk about the risks and downsides of getting sexually active at such an early age.
do you have your 11 year old on birth control?
-
Originally posted by Eagler
just another success story for our stellar public school system
and some of you are against vouchers why?
Private schools are not free of kids having sex. You're deluding yourself if you think so.
Vouchers are another form of socialism.
How about we try to improve the public school system instead?
Teacher's salaries, class sizes, curriculum, newer and updated textbooks, etc.
-
Contrary to popular belief, the pill is not safe for everyone. There is a genetic disorder on my wife’s side of the family that makes taking the pill dangerous and in some cases fatal. If they gave my daughter the pill at school, it could very well kill her.
Not only is this a stupid idea, it irresponsible and dangerous.
Edit: Just saw your post Airscrew. My wife and daughter have the same thing. We only found out about it after my wife had a stroke. We were very fortunate it was only a TIA and that she was able to regain her former mobility and mental function, but there is no way in heck I'm going to go though that again with my daughter. I wonder how many deaths this new pill fad is going to cause.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
do you have your 11 year old on birth control?
If yours was sexually active, would you ban her from any protection?
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Private schools are not free of kids having sex. You're deluding yourself if you think so.
Vouchers are another form of socialism.
How about we try to improve the public school system instead?
Teacher's salaries, class sizes, curriculum, newer and updated textbooks, etc.
because we have for years and it continues to get worse .. when do you stop throwing money at the problem and look for another solution?
to me to not allow any other choice is socialism. You do not have to use the voucher, it is an option - an option the dems and the bloated public school system does not want you to have.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
If yours was sexually active, would you ban her from any protection?
it would be called a convent
I find it sick to imagine an 11 year old engaging in sex acts of any kind - maybe that is why it is against the law. To offer the pill does nothing towards education on why NOT to do it, just clears the way as it removes the consequences.
If you look up the school, it looks like a real winner .. program looks like it will fit like a glove there.
-
That's the trouble is that we 'throw' money at problems without looking into a real solution.
Vouchers are not a solution. The better private schools will get huge class sizes as well as getting more problems. They are not designed to handle the influx of all those students transferring into their schools.
That will create a bigger problem that will bring the private schools down.
Might as well address the public school issue and fix it.
You have any answers that you see will fix the public school issues?
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
That's the trouble is that we 'throw' money at problems without looking into a real solution.
Vouchers are not a solution. The better private schools will get huge class sizes as well as getting more problems. They are not designed to handle the influx of all those students transferring into their schools.
That will create a bigger problem that will bring the private schools down.
Might as well address the public school issue and fix it.
You have any answers that you see will fix the public school issues?
Yes, make them as efficient as the average private school. Remove the bloated admin/political layers which waste the money that should go to the student.
The public school system is at the heart of this country's problem. If you don't see that, you must not have any kids that are in it or have gone through it. I have two. I have seen it first hand. You?
-
Originally posted by Eagler
it would be called a convent
...and she would probably run away and end up pregnant somewhere.
Kids having babies is a deeper issue than just pretending that kids aren't having sex.
The good thing is that it is still just in the minority.
Those being sexually active that young usually have psychological issues starting in her home. Abused one way or another.
Those kids growing up with supportive (not abusive) parents will usually not feel a need/desire to get sexually active that early. They aren't measuring their self worth based on sexuality.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
Yes, make them as efficient as the average private school. Remove the bloated admin/political layers which waste the money that should go to the student.
The public school system is at the heart of this country's problem. If you don't see that, you must not have any kids that are in it or have gone through it. I have two. I have seen it first hand. You?
There are still good public schools out there. Unfortunately, you are right in their bloated administrative system. It just costs more to get anything done as it goes through more layers.
The trouble is that many more schools need to be built and staffed by QUALIFIED teachers. The rules have to be changed to not allow disruptive students ruin it for the rest that actually want to learn.
The public school system today is more a result of societies problems rather then the sole cause of it. Downward spiral.
Vouchers will probably result in the collapse of the public school system resulting in the chaos of the kids getting lost in the shuffle.
-
Well since they're going to do it anyway lets give them access to booze and dope at school so they can be monitored.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
I find it sick to imagine an 11 year old engaging in sex acts of any kind - maybe that is why it is against the law. To offer the pill does nothing towards education on why NOT to do it, just clears the way as it removes the consequences.
Well I agree that kids having sex that early is not good nor healthy. There are other issues involved.
Are they dispensing the pills without advice? If they are then I would disagree with the policy. As had been mentioned above by Airscrew, the pill is not always a safe alternative and giving it to anyone especially to kids without counseling is not a good way to go about things.
Are there any studies that show the impact on long term health to the girls/women using the pill starting at that early an age?
Also for the pill to be somewhat effective, it has to be taken at regular intervals.
There are some adults out there that can't even do that.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Vouchers are another form of socialism.
How so? :huh
-
In the olden days a parent would have to give permission before drugs were administered to a minor child.
Now that the State has taken over and stripped parental rights I guess we will get used to this type of thing.
shamus
-
Originally posted by Donzo
How so? :huh
Vouchers, food stamps, or any program that benefits some that everyone pays into is a form of socialism. Those that don't have kids are going to be paying into (with their tax) a program that they will not directly benefit from.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Vouchers, food stamps, or any program that benefits some that everyone pays into is a form of socialism. Those that don't have kids are going to be paying into (with their tax) a program that they will not directly benefit from.
What about a family that home school's? They pay taxes and do not benefit from the money used for schools. In that case, wouldn't the public school system be a form of socialism?
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
If yours was sexually active, would you ban her from any protection?
I wasn't aware that birth control pills were 'protection'. They prevent pregnacies, but don't protect against STDs.
If they were handing out condoms to 11 years olds, I'd be slightly less pissed off, but birth control? F*** that.
-
Originally posted by Dichotomy
Well since they're going to do it anyway lets give them access to booze and dope at school so they can be monitored.
Sadly, that's about the same mentality. 11 year olds do drugs...let's provide them with clean needles and marijuana that's not laced. 11 year old girls drink and may be getting it from older kids who could put date rape drugs in it. Let's provide them with 'roofiee-free alcohol'.
sigh
-
vouchers are indeed a form of socialism.. all schooling that uses money extorted from citizens is.
The difference is choice. The choice thing is the reverse of socialism... at least you can have choice with vouchers.
as for class sizes? the catholic school I attended had a class size of about 50 or so... there was no problem.. in a well behaved class it matters not.
in public school... one on one is two many for our public schools to handle... they have no clue on how to teach or how to have order.
Having to pick up the grand daughter in her 40 student catholic school class and then her friend in a 30 kid public school zoo is a revelation.
one of the songs my grand daughter learns is about being polite... one of the lines goes something like "and I will raise my hand and be recognized before speaking"
The public school zoo it is whoever can shout the loudest or is big enough to knock down everyone else.
And guess what? if the student is not doing well the catholic school does not get on TV and whine to the gullible public about how it is the parents fault or.. that they are not getting enough money for their part time job or the class is too big... anything but WE ARE NOT DOING OUR JOB WELL
As for birth control... the same people who feel aspirin is too dangerous to give to a kid with a headache are now saying it is perfectly fine to give em birth control pills?
On what planet?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Donzo
What about a family that home school's? They pay taxes and do not benefit from the money used for schools. In that case, wouldn't the public school system be a form of socialism?
That's the thing is that we ARE a country of socialistic programs. Whether it be via taxes or through private business (govt mandated auto insurance), we are a socialistic country. Adding school vouchers would be another socialistic program.
-
Originally posted by kamilyun
I wasn't aware that birth control pills were 'protection'. They prevent pregnacies, but don't protect against STDs.
If they were handing out condoms to 11 years olds, I'd be slightly less pissed off, but birth control? F*** that.
Actually I agree with you.
-
subaru... of course vouchers are socialism.. but they are socialism with choice. a hybrid socialism.
public schools are pure evil socialism... total government control with no choice.
The vouchers are simply the lesser of two evils... and... by a very large margin.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
subaru... of course vouchers are socialism.. but they are socialism with choice. a hybrid socialism.
public schools are pure evil socialism... total government control with no choice.
The vouchers are simply the lesser of two evils... and... by a very large margin.
lazs
Ahh, so you're okay with socialism then. Ends justify the means?
Throwing vouchers out there will not take care of the problem.
We'd have to construct many more schools or fix the substandard ones or both.
Fixing the substandard schools is better than closing them.
Vouchers in and of themselves will not fix anything.
-
I am a bit divided on this issue. On one hand I don't want kids, and lets face it preteens and early teens ARE kids, making babies. On the other hand I have a real issue with a school being the distribution point for medication, particularly without parental and medical input. A school distributing this kind of material puts them in the position of dispensing meds and facilitating under aged sexual activity. Something that would get a private citizen arrested. It is a real precarious situation there given the juvenile protection laws.
I think the proper point for access to birth control is an organization like planned parenthood. Education regarding sexual activity as well as birth control are both areas that they specialize in. Perhaps access to a medical clinic for screening, but again that needs to have parental input.
Saburo,
Vouchers are no more socialistic than the regular public education. All residents pay for education through taxes whether they have kids or not. Vouchers just provide a means of reducing crowding in the regular schools and an alternative in educational opportunities for parents.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
What about a family that home school's? They pay taxes and do not benefit from the money used for schools. In that case, wouldn't the public school system be a form of socialism?
Actually, that family and families without kids do benefit from the schools they pay taxes for. We have had this debate down here for several years.
Your tax dollars go to help schools, better education = better workforce, better workforce = better companies, better companies = better jobs w/ better pay, that = better property values and better living conditions.
You like that 16 screen theatre nearby and that big mall with all those fancy stores? You think they'd be there if all that was in the area were poor farmers and clerks at the wal-mart and grocery store? Nope... they are there because there is a significant population to support them, the population is there because there is work to be had there. There is work because the companies came looking for the educated people that live there. You think that pharmecutical plant would have moved in the area where a school system that had a 70% drop out rate was? Nope, they need educated employees to hire.
Don't get me wrong, I hate the high taxes, and I hate all the waste in the school system, but vouchers will end up causing more problems than they solve. Private schools will raise their rates (thorugh supply and demand) and they will just end up subsidizing high income families who would be sending their kids to private school anyway.
We need REAL school reform, which means more parent and community involvement. Call and write your school board and State DoE, attend the meetings, educate yourself on the board members as you would all other elected positions.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Vouchers in and of themselves will not fix anything.
It is a quick way to start.
Seems like you are talking out both sides of your mouth when you mention what is and isn't socialism as you cling to the idea that the public school system should be fix yet vouchers are an evil idea .. which one is it?
and please answer my question, do you have or have had any kids in the public school system?
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Saburo,
Vouchers are no more socialistic than the regular public education. All residents pay for education through taxes whether they have kids or not. Vouchers just provide a means of reducing crowding in the regular schools and an alternative in educational opportunities for parents.
So I take it then that vouchers will be available only to those parents of the kids who are going to the under performing public schools?
How do we fund the vouchers?
Do we raise taxes or do we cut more programs?
What is the projected cost?
-
Originally posted by Shamus
In the olden days a parent would have to give permission before drugs were administered to a minor child.
shamus
My wife has been the medical chaperone for Marching Band trips to Florida over the past few years. She is not allowed to give aspirin, ibuprofen, or the equivalent (amoung other non-prescription drugs) without a signed note from a guardian.
I'll ask if she's allowed to give out birth control pills.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
It is a quick way to start.
Seems like you are talking out both sides of your mouth when you mention what is and isn't socialism as you cling to the idea that the public school system should be fix yet vouchers are an evil idea .. which one is it?
What have I said wasn't a socialistic program?
We are a socialistic country, most are.
We do need to fix our public school system.
Making vouchers available and doing nothing else will do nothing to fix the problem.
-
Saburo,
Please note that I did not indicate that I am somehow in charge of education for a city, county or state. If you want answers to those questions I would suggest you direct them to the state board of education where you live. Provided of course vouchers are authorized there.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Saburo,
Please note that I did not indicate that I am somehow in charge of education for a city, county or state. If you want answers to those questions I would suggest you direct them to the state board of education where you live. Provided of course vouchers are authorized there.
Traditionally as I see it the politicians throw money (our money) at a problem and somehow think they've accomplished something and can now wash their hands if any problems arise.
I see most here doing the same thing regarding vouchers.
No planning, no financial figures, tax rate, etc.
So do any of you that support vouchers actually have any figures available?
How many vouchers?
Any restrictions?
What students will be turned away because now the private schools will be overcrowded?
How will this fix the public school system?
If no increased taxes, then what other programs will we cut to fund the vouchers?
We're all good at throwing tax dollars at ideas, has anyone here actually thought out how the voucher system will work and at what cost?
If you've got some reasoned and valid points, I'd be happy to start supporting the voucher system.
-
Has it occurred to anyone that a big part of the problem here is that a school board is making the decisions? Everyone wants to blame the educators, but educators are at the mercy of national, state and local laws. Thousands of educated, licensed and experienced educators often have much less power and say than a handful of elected school board members or politicians who may have nothing more going for them than a strong opinion. EVERYONE thinks that they know what’s best for education and that they know so much more than educated, licensed and experienced educators. It’s kind of like children who think they know everything about parenting because they have the perspective of having been a child.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
Unfortunately, there are kids having babies. Giving them access to birth control pills (or condoms, etc) will not 'promote' sexual activity. Those kids that are going to have sex are going to do so with or without permission or protection.
The adults dispensing the pills usually will give the kids a talk about the risks and downsides of getting sexually active at such an early age.
You are joking ....right? Giving them access to the protection is telling them that they are not responsible for their actions. It's the same as saying we don't want you to do this yet, but it's okay if you do....there won't be any ramifications.
If I found out someone had given that kind of access to one of my kids without my permission they would be filing assault charges against me and a restraining order. I'd stomp a mud hole in their bellybutton so deep an entire herd of water buffalo could wade in at once :mad:
-
If yours was sexually active, would you ban her from any protection?
My daughter is 11. I don't and won't trust the schools Or the state to determine the outcome of her sexuality.
I do, however, have a solution. I am her Father, I am The Final Word while she is a minor, and I will Harm, Hurt, Break and Ruin anyone, any age, having anything to do with my daughter physically. Fear is good enough for me.
I know Officers, Judges and the DA quite well. They Know I am serious, they Know I mean it, they Know there is nothing they can do to stop me.
Our school district does not support this type of activity that prevents parents from Knowing what their children are doing, or the solution that is becoming so popular. Ours is a small district. Outsiders have attempted to come into our district and impose their will, only be sent packing with enthusiasm.
The parents of most of the boys we know fully understand that it is the job of the Parents to make sure the boys know how to behave. One friend of ours, during a barbque, brought his son over to were he and I were talking. Looked the boy straight in the eyes and introduced me as my daughters dad. Then stated, without a grin, that he would Miss Him. Boy asked why, and his dad said that if boy did anything to ever hurt my girl that He would not be able to stop me. Told him not to be stupid, don't give me a reason. My daughter has a reputation at school, she'll be 12 in a couple months, I'm ok with that reputation. Her reputation is that of an Honor Student, Very Social and Completely hands off.
Why are we hoping the state takes care of this? I think my solution for My child is just fine. All the parents of the girls like the approach, all the parents of the boys understand, and all is well.
I personally don't care what's socially acceptable or PC, get near my girl, your going to lose body parts and I have no issue with going to jail over it.
That mindset does have a positive affect around town, and doesn't require a single Dime of Your money to enforce, I'll handle mine just fine thank you very much :)
-
So when a kid gets in a fight in school, the parents are called immidiately in to the principal's office... if a kid is having sex in the bathrooms, you don't even tell the parents?
:huh
-
I think Kamilyun nailed it. I would have much less of a problem if it were condoms they were dispensing.
As far as vouchers go, if you don't like your kid's school you have the ability to legally change where they go to class. It's called moving.
-
Originally posted by SaburoS
What have I said wasn't a socialistic program?
"What have I said wasn't a socialist program?"
...okay so in this case the sentence still doesn't make sense, but the "ic" still doesn't add anything to the information being sent.
Thrawn: Istic Police
-
Giving chemicals that change hormones on a growing body that requires those hormones to grow into a proper women seems .....really freaking stupid. Did those goofs actually checked with MD, not a 'school nurse' that only knows how to apply bandaid.
....:rolleyes:
-
If you are curious, here are the elected Portland School Committee Members (http://www.portlandschools.org/Pages/Community/documents/SCList.htm) who voted on this issue. The page shows 12 people including the three at the bottom who look like students, and don’t have a district listed under their names and may not have a vote. It says that seven voted; so that probably means that two of the nine adults were absent. Ben Meiklejohn and John Coyne voted against; five of the remaining seven must have voted for.
-
I find it appalling that a school goes through extrodinary means to circumvent the parent from doing their basic resposibilities.
It sure would be nice if they stuck to teaching.
-
Lepaul,
It’s the elected school board members who came up with this, not the educators.
-
I understand that.
-
But you said:
Originally posted by LePaul
I find it appalling that a school goes through extrodinary means to circumvent the parent from doing their basic resposibilities.
It sure would be nice if they stuck to teaching.
It sounds like you don't understand the difference between schools and teachers and school boards.
-
Let's see...my father is a teacher, having been a superintendent and an assistant principal for years.
Yeah, Ive got no clue. :)
What Im saying is, explained for your enlightenment, is that schools...ala teachers, administrators or school boards, should not attempt to "raise" a child. By doing so, they give the impression that parents do not know how to rear their children and make decisions.
-
Oh, how silly of me to assume that you were referring to the thread topic.
There are many places where parents do raise their own children. It’s nice to live in one of those places and also work in a place where parents are parents, more or less. There are many places, however, where parents are kind of more like roommates. There are many pockets throughout our country where children are not properly: clothed, fed, given basic medical care, taught the letters, numbers, their own name, basic behavioral expectations, the difference between right and wrong, etc.
I’m not trying to condone what the Portland School Board did, but there are places where parents really do not know how to rear their children and make decisions.
-
subaru... why are you not getting it.. of course our school system is socialism. Me wanting to make it less so does not mean that I am ok with socialism.
Vouchers would not raise taxes.. private schools cost less than public schools by about 50%.
the catholic school that my grand daughter goes to is no taj mahal it is an old building with very few amenities.. the building does not make for the learning.
With vouchers.. most of the public schools could close. They would have to compete in both their ability to teach and their budget.
My grand daughter will not be given birth control pills at the catholic school... I will have the choice of what kind of social engineering she is exposed to not some school board who has no one to answer to with a captive audience with no where to go.
The only places where private schools might not be available would be very small communities... there.. the parents generally have more say and the teaching is more conservative and to the point with less social experimentation in any case.
But.. it boils down to the fact that you think competition makes things worse instead of better... that.. only the government can run large businesses...
this is absolutely wrong and I don't think anyone here misses the breakup of ma bell or regrets having only the post office to go to when they need a package. Both phones and mail have gotten better.
so would schools.
lazs
-
OK, Lazs. Let's say that catholic school can effectively handle 1000 students. What happens when 4000 new students show up with a voucher?
-
Hey the real issue is they are doing it without telling the parents...Sorry but to me that should be a law suit
-
(http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/umedia/20071020/cp.b9052270f5988515514256f2a28909e2)
-
Originally posted by rpm
OK, Lazs. Let's say that catholic school can effectively handle 1000 students. What happens when 4000 new students show up with a voucher?
They’d have to wait until they could be seated - my guess the temp solution would be portables until they built more class space and larger schools. The fact is a private school is 1000x more efficient with the money it receives and how it is spent from school/class sizes to teachers/admin salaries.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
They’d have to wait until they could be seated - my guess the temp solution would be portables until they built more class space and larger schools. The fact is a private school is 1000x more efficient with the money it receives and how it is spent from school/class sizes to teachers/admin salaries.
A 1000 times more efficient eh?
That "fact" wouldn't be an exaggeration now would it?
shamus
-
rpm... what happens is that the public school sees what people want.
that is the short answer and a good one. when the catholic school has 80 students in the class and they are all doing well.. the public school will have to give up on the excuse that they fail because we don't throw enough money at em.
When the catholic school does all this for half what it costs us to get nothing at the public school.. and then doesn't blame the parents...
maybe the public school will get with the program.
I will say that public schools as well as private should have the right to throw out any student who is too disruptive or will not learn for whatever reason. If that reason is that he doesn't speak the language then that student needs to go to a school that he is a citizen of.
I go and pick up my grand daughter who is in a catholic school.. and her friend who is in a public school zoo.. the catholic school has about 20% more students and is orderly and quiet with kids raising their hands.. the public school looks like the watts riots.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Shamus
A 1000 times more efficient eh?
That "fact" wouldn't be an exaggeration now would it?
shamus
depends on the public school board and the private school doesn't it
wanna argue which is more efficient? which is the real question anyways isn't it
-
I know a fifteen yearold who is a mom.
-
I wonder where that private school will suddenly find portable classrooms and the teachers to staff them?
Here's how it could play out...
School rushes out and buys portables (there goes all that extra tuition, and then some). Now, they have to hire teachers (the same ones laid off by the public system). School is now in debt.
Parents see their Little Johnny isn't getting that stellar education and decide to pull him out and move him to a different private school. The school is left with this massive debt to pay off. The kid gets no better education and is shuffled all over the place in search of this "magic bullet" of private school education they will get with a voucher.
It is a nightmare waiting to happen.
You want your kid to go to a different school? You are free to move to a new district or run for the School Board and change the one they are already in.
A voucher is not the answer.
-
1. Public schools seem to be a much easier place to get laid than they used to be. Where were all these skanks back when I was a teen?
2. Educating the populace is critical to the maintenance of a democracy. There is no way this can be accomplished without public schools.
-
Educating the populace is critical to the maintenance of a democracy. There is no way this can be accomplished
-
RPM,
A private school has an option that the public schools would love to have. They have the option to say no to a student. They do not have to take every body that walks or is pushed through the door.
-
According to Lazs magic voucher plan, if I have a voucher I can send my kid to any school I want. You can't force me to send my kid to a school I deem substandard if I have a voucher.
If you force my kid to stay in a school that is substandard and only going to get worse because they don't have any money you are punishing my child for receiving a bad education in the first place and rewarding the teachers that gave that bad education with new jobs at private schools.
Magic vouchers. Yeah, that's the ticket...
-
Substandard schools have children from substandard parents.
Look a little closer at the demographics before assuming its all the teacher’s fault.
-
substandard kids with substandard parents should not be in school.. sorry.. the public schools made the mess and now cleaning it up is gonna be painful but....
continuing to make it worse is not the solution. Blaming the parents for the substandard job teachers are doing is not going to solve the problem... the private school model is the good one... you don't raise the kids for the parents... you don't decide if they need to learn about sex. If they get pregnant.. they get thrown out.. get caught screwing.. thrown out. can't behave? throw em out now and save a lot of pain latter on.
How many "troubled kids from bad backgrounds" are we saving with all this crap? None really.. only those who want to be saved.. it is not their background.. it is them... kids act like the kids around em.. if you let the kids run the zoo and tell em nothing is their fault.. you get chaos... public school.
And yes RPM... the voucher system is magic.. just like internet providers and UPS and cell phone companies and cable tv.
What is not magic is letting government run anything but the courts and the army.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Eagler
depends on the public school board and the private school doesn't it
wanna argue which is more efficient? which is the real question anyways isn't it
Ok the state here pays about $7500.00 per student here for public education, I'm having a hard time finding a private school that can do it for $7.50, but I understand that at times some must make grandiose statements in support of their positions.
No need to argue that private schools are more efficient, I am all in favor of all public employees having their pay and benefits slashed they are too high in my opinion, but I am not going to say that they are a 1000 times higher than the private sector, that would be rather silly now wouldn't it?
shamus
-
Originally posted by lazs2
What is not magic is letting government run anything but the courts and the army.
lazs
Gotta agree with you on that point, Lazs. That's not magic, it's fantasy. A good fantasy, but fantasy none the less.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
substandard kids with substandard parents should not be in school.. sorry.. .
lazs
This is quote material. So are you saying only rich parents should be able to have kids get education? or only the smart?
Should we have an IQ test when they apply for kindergarten? We can always extend abortion to the age of 5 to get rid of these substandard kids...
What a joke.
It would not surprise me that private schools are more efficient.
They don't have to actually be accredited by the state, anyone can open a private school. they also don't require that the teachers actually have teaching degrees, A math teacher could have a liberal arts degree and still teach Math.
With the no child left behind act. It actually makes it more difficult for public schools to find teachers because of the added requirements for education for teachers. Private schools don't have any of that.
Btw I actually agree with cutting teachers Salary and benefits. I also like the idea of vouchers in theory, But i don't believe it is going to solve anything but make it cheaper for rich parents to put there kids in private school.
-
Originally posted by rpm
You may not even know...
link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303521,00.html)
:huh
"Parents in Portland who want their children to have access to the clinic must sign a waiver each year that details the services it offers."
"Of the 500 students at King, 135 have permission to use the clinic"
NY times (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/us/21portland.html?em&ex=1193112000&en=578ad4cb4adf6179&ei=5087%0A)
OMG 135 whole kids who have permission!! the frik'n sky is falling!! alert the media! He fails to mention parental permission is needed, but does mention "It is ironic that the week my book "Cultural Warrior" comes out in paperback"..
"However, that medical care is kept secret from the parents, in the birth control area.".. because of the state’s confidentiality laws.
Besides all this low budget drama, any kid smarter than a 5 year old can get their hands on a free Plan B from most any pharmacy. If you've ever got a plan b, its not un common to see some terrified teen out front crying about getting pregnant and pimping adults to get them a free pill.
-
Originally posted by Trell
They don't have to actually be accredited by the state, anyone can open a private school. they also don't require that the teachers actually have teaching degrees, A math teacher could have a liberal arts degree and still teach Math.
"A math teacher could have a liberal arts degree and still teach Math."
i knew a "teacher" in public school that had a teaching degree in history, he was teaching science.
he would come to us uneducated auto mechanics for advice on the subject, he did not even know how to determine the mechanical advantage of a pulley system.
you can imagine the kind of science "education" those kids got from him.
-
Xm, look at that again. If you give permission for any medical treatment by the school they can recieve contraception. Most parents have opted to refuse medical treatment for their kids. Now if the kid gets hurt or sick at school, they can't touch him.
-
Vouchers work. Competition breeds success. Handouts lead to failure.
Policymakers, unlike scientists, don't have the luxury of conducting controlled experiments to test competing solutions to social problems. But when it comes to reforming failing public schools, something close to that is occurring in two California school districts: Oakland and Compton.
The districts, comparable in many respects, are opting for completely different approaches to fixing their schools. And so far, Oakland's policy of giving parents more choice is showing far more success than Compton's strategy of micromanaging classrooms.
Oakland and Compton are not identical, of course. Compton, located in the outskirts of Los Angeles, does not have the gorgeous San Francisco Bay scenery of Oakland. It has a quarter of Oakland's population and no wealthy neighbors. But they are both high-crime inner cities. Both have a large Hispanic and black population, and a small Asian and white population. Average family incomes are comparable—about $40,000 for Oakland and $33,000 for Compton.
They both became targets of a state takeover and a large financial bailout in the last decade. And the federal No Child Left Behind Act for two years in a row has ranked them both among California's 162 districts "in need of improvement."
In short, the two districts have similar student bodies, similar challenges, and—until now—a similar history of failure. But Oakland is beginning to break away from this history, and the reason is the weighted-student-formula program it embraced some years ago and fully implemented last year.
Under this program, kids are not required to attend their neighborhood school, especially if it is failing. Rather, they can pick any regular public or charter school in their district and take their education dollars with them; more students therefore means more revenues for schools. Furthermore, as the name suggests, the revenues are "weighted" based on the difficulty of educating each student, with low-income and special-needs kids commanding more money than smart, well-to-do ones. Schools have to compete for funding, but the upside is that they have total control over it.
Compton has stuck to a completely different approach that does not involve empowering parents—or decentralizing control to schools. Instead, it has tried to fix its failing schools by mandating "classroom inputs." To this end, all Compton schools over the last few years have been ordered to reduce class size by 12 percent, improve teachers' credentials, adopt a tougher curriculum, and even clean up bathrooms.
What are the results so far? Oakland schools have shown a remarkable flexibility in responding to student needs, while Compton has stagnated. In 2003-04, for instance, Oakland's high schools offered 17 Advanced Placement classes. Last year, they increased this total to 91, or about one AP class for every 143 students. By contrast, Compton's AP offerings went up by two that year, to one class for every 218 students. Oakland students also are taking high-level math and science courses more frequently. About 800 high school students studied first-year physics last year—nearly triple the number taking the course in the 2004 school year.
More to the point, of course, are student-performance measures. Oakland kids have shown major improvement on the California High School Exit Examination, which all students must pass in English and math before graduating from high school. Sixty-two percent of high school students passed the English-language-arts portion, compared with 57 percent in 2005—a 5-point gain—and 60 percent passed math, a 6-point jump from the year before. By contrast, Compton showed no gains in English—staying stuck at 58 percent—and posted a 2-percentage-point drop in math, from 50 percent to 48 percent.
Similarly, Oakland's score on the state's Academic Performance Index—a numeric grade that California assigns to its schools based on the performance of their students on standardized tests—went up by 19 points. Compton, in contrast, gained only 13 points. Yet even this overstates Compton's performance, because almost all of its gains came at the elementary level, where students are not so intractable. Compton's middle schools lost an average of 6 points, while Oakland's gained an average of 16 points. Meanwhile, half of Compton's high schools lost points on the API score—including Compton High, where now fewer than 6 percent of males are proficient in reading, and fewer than 1 percent in algebra. Conversely, Oakland high schools gained, on average, 30 points. Even Oakland's economically disadvantaged and limited-English students have shown major improvements. In 2006, its economically disadvantaged students gained 60 percent more on the performance index than Compton's, and its English-language learners gained 120 percent more.
Nor is Oakland's progress in any way anomalous. Oakland borrowed the weighted-student program from San Francisco, where the approach has already had six years of success. San Francisco kids in every grade level in every subject have consistently performed above the state average. Since 2001, its low-income students have posted gains of 83 points, 16 percent more than Los Angeles' and 25 percent more than Compton's. Last year alone, San Francisco students overall earned the highest API test scores of any urban district—97 points higher than Los Angeles and 150 points higher than Compton. Even San Francisco's minority, poor, and special education students have shown major improvements. English-language learners, a challenging group, gained 12 points in 2006, compared with zero points for Los Angeles'. Similarly, San Francisco's special education students gained 19 points that year, whereas Los Angeles' gained only 1 point.
What's more, a wide array of schools have cropped up in the city, catering to practically every student need and interest by offering dual-language programs, college-preparatory classes, performing-arts electives, and advanced math and science courses. In fact, every public school in San Francisco is fast developing its own unique blend of size, pedagogic style, and course offerings.
Meanwhile, Oakland hosted a daylong fair last month at which the district's 120-plus schools could vie with each other to entice parents, handing out information about course offerings, highlighting accomplishments, and answering questions. In short, schools are being forced to sell themselves to each and every parent. Compton and the majority of low-performing schools nationwide that can count on a captive audience have no such plans.
What's more remarkable is that Oakland's turnaround happened at a time when the state had initiated a hostile school takeover, triggering protests from the community and the school board. The state-appointed administrator for the Oakland schools was forced to hire a bodyguard because of threats to his life at community meetings. But because the weighted-student formula decentralized control to individual schools and effectively put parents in charge of enforcing accountability, principals were insulated from this ugly infighting, allowing them to focus on what matters: students. In essence, this mechanism proved stronger than district politics.
The success of the weighted-student-formula program has not gone unnoticed. The Washington-based Thomas B. Fordham Foundation last year touted the approach as an important tool for school reform. Former U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige has praised it in The New York Times. Although most teachers' unions resist handing control of school funds to principals, out of fear that this might dilute their ability to enforce such union work rules as seniority-based promotions, some unions have given cautious approval to the concept.
Nationwide, close to 10,000 schools are considered to be failing under the No Child Left Behind Act, hundreds for more than five years. Yet less than 1 percent of students in these schools manage to transfer to a higher-performing school, even though they have that right under the federal law. Political leaders can change this by building on Oakland and San Francisco's modest experiment in school choice. No student deserves anything less.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Xm, look at that again. If you give permission for any medical treatment by the school they can recieve contraception. Most parents have opted to refuse medical treatment for their kids. Now if the kid gets hurt or sick at school, they can't touch him.
Yes, but the parents know contraception is available and have signed on anyway... so the parents know its available to their kids. Thats where the issue ends and becomes nobody else's business but the family.
If one of those kids gets contraception.. thats for their family to sort out, not some politician or media blow hard with a book to sell. I'd imagine a suspicious parent could also opt out of the schools program and put an end to it that easily.
Otherwise it's no big deal, if some parent out there gives the school permission to hand out contraception to little Jenny the 11 year old, that's their business. Jerry Springer need to make a living too.
If a kid gets sick they wont touch them?, they let them rot to death?..
Darwinism at work.
All of which ignores the availability of FREE Plan B pills from pharmacies, take the kids school given contraception away, they'll go get plan b without permission or anyone knowing.
None of you chick magnet "players" out there know about Plan B?? its a FREE live saver for the morning after treating some chick you met at the bar like a farm animal. Toss one of these down her throat before kicking her out and you'll have no worries of her waiving a freshly urinated on EPT in you & your girlfriends face while eating lunch.
-
^^ enlightened post for sure there eh?^^
-
trell.. what are you saying? are you saying that poor kids are less smart and well behaved than rich kids cause... I sure as hell didn't say that.
I said substandard kids with substandard parents. I mean that if the kid can't or won't learn... regardless of his social status or regardless of the school he is in...
that school should be able to throw him out. He is only dragging everyone else down.
It always seems to me that it is the liberals who equate poor.. with "stupid".
lazs
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Toss one of these down her throat before kicking her out and you'll have no worries of her waiving a freshly urinated on EPT in you & your girlfriends face while eating lunch.
Experience talking here? :cool:
-
Originally posted by lazs2
It always seems to me that it is the liberals who equate poor.. with "stupid".
lazs
no but it usually works the other way around - stupid = poor minus the lottery winners :)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
trell.. what are you saying? are you saying that poor kids are less smart and well behaved than rich kids cause... I sure as hell didn't say that.
I said substandard kids with substandard parents. I mean that if the kid can't or won't learn... regardless of his social status or regardless of the school he is in...
that school should be able to throw him out. He is only dragging everyone else down.
It always seems to me that it is the liberals who equate poor.. with "stupid".
lazs
No but it sounds like you are saying that anyone that cant afford a private school should not be able to go to school?, Is that the case?
and what about kids that have issues, ones that are mentally challenged?, should they not go to school because it might drag the rest of the kids down??
just trying to find out how you want this perfect private school to work.
-
Bottom line in voucher debate: Those sending their kids to private school do not want to pay school tax.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Bottom line in voucher debate: Those sending their kids to private school do not want to pay school tax.
but they still have to pay, they just don't have to pay twice, once to support poor education and again to educate their children.
-
Originally posted by Trell
Btw I actually agree with cutting teachers Salary and benefits. I also like the idea of vouchers in theory, But i don't believe it is going to solve anything but make it cheaper for rich parents to put there kids in private school.
So, how much should teachers make?
What kind of benefits should they have?
How educated should they be? Should they need a Masters?
Should they be required to continue their education throughout their careers?
Beyond when the students are in school, how much should they work?
How does your suggestion compare to other jobs with similar expectations?