Author Topic: Overzealous Teacher (Read 2973 times)

ChopSaw · « **Reply #120 on:** March 18, 2006, 01:51:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Donzo
Excellent question

(eagerly awaits chopsaw's reply)

Sorry to disappoint you, Donzo. I happen to think this is acceptable. Read the last paragraph of my post on 3/18/06 11:45 AM.

ChopSaw · « **Reply #121 on:** March 18, 2006, 01:52:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Morpheus
I would like to meet him. Just want a couple minutes alone with him. To talk.

I hope you're talking about the teacher who was recorded.

Donzo · « **Reply #122 on:** March 18, 2006, 04:32:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ChopSaw
Tell you what I could support. Take parents who wish to send their children to a private school, parochial or otherwise. Calculate the amount of money they contribute through taxes to public schools. Refund them that money and let them do as they will with it as long as their children do get an education and don't go to public school. How's that sound?

LOL. Wouldn't a voucher achieve the same thing????
How would you calculate what you are proposing?
I pay taxes (I have kids), some of my taxes go to public education.
My neighbor pays taxes (He has no kids), some of his taxes go to public education as well.
Given this, the percentage of what I contribute through taxes to public education is small since everyone contributes. The amount of money I would get refunded would be nowhere near the cost per student that is received by public education from taxes.

Eveyone pays taxes.
Some of that money goes to public education.
People who want vouchers get them and do what they want with them provided that it goes toward their kids getting an education.

What is so wrong with that?

mora · « **Reply #123 on:** March 18, 2006, 04:51:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Donzo
Eveyone pays taxes.
Some of that money goes to public education.
People who want vouchers get them and do what they want with them provided that it goes toward their kids getting an education.

What is so wrong with that?

They might get "wrong" kind of education. That's the reason they oppose it.

Donzo · « **Reply #124 on:** March 18, 2006, 05:26:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mora
They might get "wrong" kind of education. That's the reason they oppose it.

And the people wanting to use vouchers may think that send their kids to a public school would result in them getting the "wrong" kind of education. So what then? They foot the bill to send their kids where they want them to go. Shouldn't they get the same benefits as those that do not think twice as to where their kids go to get an education?

Majority rules. Let the people vote on the issue and we'll see what happens. I say let there be vouchers and let the parents decide how to use the vouchers (provided, of course, that they are used to send the kids to an accredited school).

Those opposed make it sound as if a kid is sent to a parochial school it's a bad thing. Maybe to the person opposed, but the family is doing what they think is right for their kids.

Morpheus · « **Reply #125 on:** March 18, 2006, 07:25:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ChopSaw
I hope you're talking about the teacher who was recorded.

ChopSaw · « **Reply #126 on:** March 19, 2006, 03:40:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Donzo
LOL. Wouldn't a voucher achieve the same thing????
How would you calculate what you are proposing?
I pay taxes (I have kids), some of my taxes go to public education.
My neighbor pays taxes (He has no kids), some of his taxes go to public education as well.
Given this, the percentage of what I contribute through taxes to public education is small since everyone contributes. The amount of money I would get refunded would be nowhere near the cost per student that is received by public education from taxes.

Eveyone pays taxes.
Some of that money goes to public education.
People who want vouchers get them and do what they want with them provided that it goes toward their kids getting an education.

What is so wrong with that?

A voucher would not achieve the same thing. You've concluded that for yourself at the end of your first paragraph. The calculations can be done. It isn't that difficult. They wouldn't get as much money as is spent per student in public schools. That is not my problem. On the other hand they would not be contributing to what they don't want to do with their children. When people start using my money for things I don't care to contribute to, it becomes my problem. While it is the responsibility of every citizen of this country to contribute to the education of the nations children, that does not mean we must contribute to a religious education we may find offensive. Nor does it mean we must contribute funds to other private schools thereby taking money away from the public schools. Public schools may not offer the best education possible, but they do offer the best chance for all the children to receive a basic education. There simply is not enough room in private schools for all the children now attending public schools. Even if there were you would still find many family's without the funds to send their children there even if they had a voucher. If you have a problem with the quality of public schools, do something to fix it rather than try to cripple it.

In response to your second paragraph; if they're sending their kids to a parochial school, they can do so on their own dime. Not mine. For reasons, read the other posts I've made to this thread.

What's so wrong? The attempt to force people to support religion is what's wrong. We should be free to support the religion of our choice or not. Attempting to deprive the poorest of the nation is what's wrong. Not being willing to fix public schools if you see a problem is what's wrong. Attempting to use taxes to aid a select group of people is what's wrong. Taxes are collected from all of us by government to ideally assist all of us. This is America.

ChopSaw · « **Reply #127 on:** March 19, 2006, 03:49:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Donzo
And the people wanting to use vouchers may think that send their kids to a public school would result in them getting the "wrong" kind of education. So what then? They foot the bill to send their kids where they want them to go. Shouldn't they get the same benefits as those that do not think twice as to where their kids go to get an education?

Majority rules. Let the people vote on the issue and we'll see what happens. I say let there be vouchers and let the parents decide how to use the vouchers (provided, of course, that they are used to send the kids to an accredited school).

Those opposed make it sound as if a kid is sent to a parochial school it's a bad thing. Maybe to the person opposed, but the family is doing what they think is right for their kids.

But they don't foot the bill. A voucher isn't just the money they put into taxes to send their children to school. A voucher is, as you've concluded yourself above, more money than that. A voucher would contain not only the money they put into the system but a portion of the money everyone puts into the system.

I don't know about where you live, but in my neck of the woods we have voted. The proposal for vouchers was resoundingly defeated. Not so oddly, for exactly the reasons I've been describing.

Let me be very, very clear on this. I do not consider sending children to a parochial skill to be a bad thing. I consider asking me to contribute to it to be a bad thing. I consider attempting to cripple the public schools to be a bad thing.

lazs2 · « **Reply #128 on:** March 19, 2006, 09:21:24 AM »

Ok.. so, you are Ok with vouchers if the schools do not teach any religion. Or... are you? You go on to say that vouchers would destroy public schools...

How is that possible? if public schools do a good job and have a good agenda for raising kids then parents will continue to use their money to support the public schools. They also have a huge inventory of infrastructure that utilized properly (competitively) would give them a huge advantage... all they would have to do is dump all the agenda and replace it with teaching for result... unless you feel that is either unworthy of impossible?

This is the fearful part. just as it was fearful to think that the post office or phone service would be destroyed if it no longer had a monopoly.

I call you a socialist because you seem to feel that giving everyone a bad education so long as it is government controled is better than letting schools compete for tax dollars and getting some schools doing better than others and.... as in the case of the post office... all the schools getting better results till all come up with about the same results.

I am not in the least religious but unlike you.... I don't see the christian teachings as a problem.... most are common sense moral guidelines that would not harm any child... that should be up to the individual parent in any case. If you believe that parents should raise children and you also believe that all of us should pay for childrens schooling in the form of taxes then it is only logical (all heated and bunko rhetoric asside) that the parents should decide what kind of school their children attend so long as test scores are within parameters.

Lastly... while giving the parents (and grandparents and uncles and ?) the money socialism extorted from them personaly would be a step in the right direction.... it would fall short.

You are assuming that every other tax payer in the land is OK with the public school system. That only a small amount of malcontents want kids to achieve higher learning than the public school mill.

Ultimately, it would have to go to a vote. I have no children at this time and pay a lot of taxes. My interest is in a strong America and that means the best teaching for children possible and..... best teaching means best results on test scores.

It has been shown that your way is failing and that the more money you throw at public schools the worse they do. You have no solution for this problem yet you wish to throw out any real solution based simply on your hate of religion and fear of taking away socialism. That is the only way I can read what you write.

lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #129 on:** March 19, 2006, 09:31:18 AM »

and... redmund wa is not the rest of the country by any means.. vouchers are defeated by the huge war chest that the extremely powerful teachers union has and uses on fear adds and you know it. Redmund is a very rich area and probly has better public schools than most with a lot more money thrown at em... they probly spend 5 times what michigan private school tuition of $2500 a year is. And... I bet the results are still worse.

If even a portion of a parents taxes were refunded to him to go to private school then more private schools would open and.... even more people would see the example. The teachers union war fund won't last forever.

I will probly help to pay for my grand daughters private school education when she is old enough... she will get the kind of advantage that a lot of kids won't.... that is your "fairness" because... we will pay for it...

In my area right now... that means that I will also support... through my taxes... the worst school system in a state with a laughable system.

That is the kind of fairness you advocate.

And... yes I do think you are a socialist. Am I wrong?

lazs

Silat · « **Reply #130 on:** March 19, 2006, 01:33:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
silat... the study said that private schools (christian/catholic) outperformed public schools... they had to cook the books to get even close.. they took the grades of certain "socio economic" groups (and this is not clear) and tried to compare. It is not that simple and raw results are what I am interested in.

I had seen a New York test (hopefully someone can find it) that took the students that were unteachable or very low performers and put them in a catholic school and all of them dramaticaly improved.

chopsaw.... Soo.... what you are most against is that tax money may be used to support a christian school even if it is the best thing for the children and it is a case where there is choice... This is dogma at it's worst to me.... I believe that the type of society that you want is a bad one... with no differences in how children are raised... no variety..

I think that public schools now teach in a very offensive way to a lot of parents... why not let those parents decide?

Why not at least let them have their portion of the taxes to spend on any school they want?

I am saying that the best schools will come out on top with a voucher system and parents will have more control over what their children are taught and will be able to put their kids in schools that get good results. I think that the competition would force public schools to have to focus on...

on frigging educating instead of inductrinating and.... getting more and more money for doing a worse and worse job.

Your fear of religion seems silly and harmful to me... but maybe you have a good reason... I am willing to hear it. How would it harm the kids?

How would it harm us?

lazs

There are many studies disputing your assessment.
I as a citizen do not want to pay for others to get the CULT based education of their choice. A strong public education system benefits the USA.

nirvana · « **Reply #131 on:** March 19, 2006, 01:39:29 PM »

Those that graduate school with a diploma, not a drop out G.E.D. should be guaranteed a job before those with G.E.D.s even if it is at a place like McDonalds. Why? Well it's guaranteed employment, a benefit of education. If you couldn't get it through your head that it would be a good idea to finish school, why should you get paid while someone who did their fair share get laid off for a year?

ChopSaw · « **Reply #132 on:** March 19, 2006, 03:51:54 PM »

lazs2,

You've obviously become cranky over this issue and I'm finding the bulk of your comments to be silly. As far as accusing me of being a socialist? Well that's in a class of absurdity all its own. This has gone far off thread topic and I really don't care to spend the time on you any longer.

Donzo · « **Reply #133 on:** March 19, 2006, 09:29:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ChopSaw
But they don't foot the bill.

"They", being the parents wanting to send their kids somewhere other than public schools do foot the bill for their child's education. All I am saying is that they should receive some compensation for this.

Family A pays taxes and send their kids to public schools.
Family B also pays taxes and pays to send their kids to private school.

Okay Family B, you can be equal with Family A if you abandon your desires to have your child educated in the manner you see fit. Otherwise you can pay for it yourself but we are going to take some of your tax dollars and pay for other kids to go to school.

Fair?

Using your arguments, I am opposed to my tax dollars going to fund public education that does not work.

Why not give all vouchers and let them put it toward the education they want their child to receive?

Leslie · « **Reply #134 on:** March 20, 2006, 12:44:52 AM »

God should be acknowledged in public schools. How can there be a good solid education while denying that fact?

I attended a parochial school from 7th to 9th grades. It was non-denominational, but based on Baptist. The school was strict, but fun because there were good teachers there, and they mostly weren't authoritarian. In the whole school, the authoritarians were the principals.

But one thing about that school, and some may argue with me here, I learned a lot of things that I wouldn't have learned at public school. I did go to public school 10th through 12th because I wanted to join a HS fraternity. Fraternities weren't allowed at the private school. They almost gave it some thought, but frats didn't fit in with learning to live as we learn, and they would not allow it.

Public school was for me a choice because of the fraternity. It was fun for a change. Dancing wasn't allowed at the private school. Everything that had anything to do with hippies was frowned upon, including underground newspapers from California. And rock music? Thing about it is, the majority of the teachers were pretty liberal and didn't preach. Chapel was required, but most of the students enjoyed that, as it was a chance to get out of class where serious education was taking place. The classes were not easy.

Les