17th December 2003, 10:46 AM
Quote: Well the problem can't be underfunding, because the Christian schools I went to had far, far less money than the local public schools and the teachers were paid far, far less than public school teachers, but we got a better education. As an example, when we had new kids come to the school, they would be so lost for the first few months because they had to catch up to where we were at.
Another example: When I had to do drivers training, they only offered it at the public high school. The teachers were rude, angry, and made it very clear that they didn't care whether you learned anything or not. It really surpised me because I was used to teachers who actually did care, who would take the time to make sure you understood the concept, and who pushed you to learn more and try harder. Yes, I worked a lot harder than friends who went to public schools, but I learned a lot more than they did too. And isn't that the point of school? I thought it was.
And as for discipline- I never saw anyone at my school get hit or spanked or whatever else. That is not the kind of discipline needed at school. But the teachers also did not put up with lazyness or bad attitudes either.
And my point is not to say that all public school teachers are stupid and worhtless and don't care. But the system is screwed up, and the system needs to be changed. If you are so sure your way of doing school is better anyway, why are you so afraid of competition? That sounds like a big talking sports fan who is afraid of his team playing the defending champs because he knows that what he has been saying is nothing but blah blah blah and he doesn't want anyone else to know.
I liked my (public) schools... sure, in some places, mainly urban areas, public schools are bad, but that is hardly true about the whole system. First, in many parts of the country there are major teacher shortages because school teachers get paid so badly very few people want to be teachers. The result is schools have to keep teachers that aren't as good because there is a shortage anyway... and we can't afford to pay teachers better because school funding is, as always, very low and one of the first things to get cut in a shortage.
Oh, and as for quality of public schools...
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_ham...education/
How about this study? 88% of New Hampshire students questioned thought they were getting a good education, and 77% said they were going to go to college... and 73% said their teachers challenged them. I'd say that that goes against what you think it s true in public schools.
Oh Weltall, that brings up an important point. More people these days are going to college than ever before. And it isn't even close. That says something about our education system, and it sure isn't bad!
Quote:Clarify one thing for me. What part of SCHOOLS GET MORE FUNDING THAN EVER BEFORE YET STUDENT PERFORMANCE IS AT AN ALL-TIME LOW did you not understand?
The part where I believe that student preformance is actually at an all-time low, that's what!
Quote:And then you say that raising standards and expectations is bad. That it is wrong and discriminatory that we should expect our students not to be the worst in the whole freaking WORLD.
I'll give you points for honesty, but seriously, are you so terribly deluded that you believe any of this? Are you saying, with a straight face, that it is OKAY that our students achieve NOTHING in school? Can you really be essentially personifying the worst stereotypes of liberals, the idea that throwing more money at things will fix them, and actually BELIEVE it?
You come across as wanting government control over education, no matter how awful and wasteful it is, out of hatred for Christianity and some twisted, evil version of 'fairness' you possess. Everything you said above proves that.
Look, I think that yes, there are a lot of bad teachers out there and that urban schools in many cases are indeed quite bad. But there are a lot of public schools that are not, such as the ones I went to...
Oh yeah, and by far the best way to improve the quality of a school is to improve the quality of the teachers. And to do that you need to pay them well... then you will actually get applicants and will be able to afford to do something about the not so good teachers you can't when you don't have any money.
Sure, in other countries there is better preformance in schools. But you know what? Most of those are public schools, not private ones, in the areas that are better that us...
Yes, increasing standards in tests is in theory a good way to force schools to improve. However, this law does not do it in a good way. As I said, it forces you to have equal performance in subgroups that you have in the general student population -- a major problem in states like this where those groups sometimes have just a few people! And when you need 100% of students to take a test to not be called a "failing" school, it's absurdly easy to "fail". Look, 100% isn't reasonable. You need to set goals that can be met... as it is they are trying to get every school to fail.
For instance, this year I think 130 schools in Maine "failed" the rules. I somehow doubt that even a fraction of that number of schools in Maine are actually bad schools. It just proves how this law is mostly here to kill the public school system so that Bush can justify giving more money to religious schools.