You're tax $$ at work!

Non-Allegiance related. High probability of spam. Pruned regularly.
takingarms1
Posts: 3052
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:00 am

Post by takingarms1 »

MrChaos wrote:QUOTE (MrChaos @ Apr 21 2011, 07:56 PM) So when I say "Heyoka that attitude is going to hold you back my man." It is because I've got the $#@!ing merit badge for been there have friends who still live it. So Heyoka chin up man and taking what is rightfully yours is not shameful. How you use it and what you do with it can be. Keep on keeping on cause your chance will come. Cursing the man rarely is helpful
This is all so true it's ridiculous.

Most "rich" people didn't start out that way yano. The managing partner of my firm who owns a 2011 jaguar, a flat at the ritz in boston, a home on a private golf course on the ocean and a house in FL and more money than he knows what to do with started his law career working out of his car.
"You give my regards to St. Peter. Or, whoever has his job, but in hell!"
- - - -
Jimen
Posts: 1146
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:39 pm
Location: Boston-ish

Post by Jimen »

Bard wrote:QUOTE (Bard @ Apr 20 2011, 11:33 PM) Hell, Detroit just sent layoff notices to 5,714 of it's teachers and I have yet to see how that enrollment drop compares, ratio-wise, to the number of teachers being laid off and what that will do to class sizes.
They're not going to fire even half of those teachers, this is just exploiting a loophole in the teachers' contracts so they'll have a massive advantage come contract negotiation time. One common clause in teacher contracts is that in order to lay off a teacher at the end of the school year, the school must send that teacher a layoff notice by a certain date. This ensures that the teachers have ample time to find a new job and relocate before the start of the next school year.

The problem is that although the district is required to send a layoff notice to teachers they want to lay off, they don't have to lay off every teacher that received a layoff notice - it's nothing more than an informal notification and they're free to cancel it or even just outright ignore it. So what certain districts are doing, either in anticipation of drastic budget cuts or preparation for open war with the unions, is putting EVERYONE on notice. Essentially, you can think of those layoff notices as notification that the teachers are now eligible to be laid off. The district can choose to lay off as many (or as few) of those teachers as it wants, but right now they're all eligible. Of course, the district set the deadline at July 29th, which is very close to the last minute for them and far too late for the teachers, since school years in some places start as early as mid-August.

Needless to say, budget cuts aren't the only way we're weakening our children's education. Teaching is already one of the worst-paying ways to use a master's degree, and the work environment is steadily getting worse as well; class sizes are growing and job security is weakening.

QUOTE (TakingArms)Most "rich" people didn't start out that way yano. The managing partner of my firm who owns a 2011 jaguar, a flat at the ritz in boston, a home on a private golf course on the ocean and a house in FL and more money than he knows what to do with started his law career working out of his car.[/quote]
So he started out with thirteen years of mandatory education, at least four years of regular college, at least four years in a first- or second-tier law school, a rich acquaintances in the field of law willing to give him work and help him out, a car, and light enough skin that he could hang around a car for a significant period of time without being hassled by the police. I presume that he also had a home, a telephone, a refrigerator, some food, and access to a law library. Not exactly "nothing".
Image
Camaro
Posts: 2418
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:00 am

Post by Camaro »

Jimen wrote:QUOTE (Jimen @ Apr 21 2011, 04:19 PM) Needless to say, budget cuts aren't the only way we're weakening our children's education. Teaching is already one of the worst-paying ways to use a master's degree, and the work environment is steadily getting worse as well; class sizes are growing and job security is weakening.
Nay, I'd say the biggest reason why people don't want to teach is cause of the quality of children.

Public school teacher? No thanks! Maybe at a college level.
Image
Image
MrChaos
Posts: 8352
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 8:00 am

Post by MrChaos »

Girly

You have to know that I am NOT a member of the pile on Girly club. Matter of fact I enjoy you discourse even if I disagree. So it wasn't meant as kick in the face but rather a chance to vent. There was tmi specifically to establish I am not a stranger to his current position. So if you read the post in that reference and I would have considered the reaction yourposts can get for no reason probably it wouldn't have annoyed.you.

MrChaos
Ssssh
Clay_Pigeon
Posts: 3211
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:00 am
Location: my pod

Post by Clay_Pigeon »

Camaro wrote:QUOTE (Camaro @ Apr 21 2011, 10:48 PM) Nay, I'd say the biggest reason why people don't want to teach is cause of the quality of children.

Public school teacher? No thanks! Maybe at a college level.
Obviously, I have a soap box here. I'll be brief.

My opinion is that a lot of issues with American education can be boiled down to a few points

1) Teaching is not a respected profession. For most recent examples, see the rhetoric RE: Wisconson, Indiana, Ohio, et al. People automatically assume I'm a $#@! up for being a teacher, despite the fact that I was offered a programming job out of college making only a little less than I do now (with a Masters and 12 years of experience). I turned it down, because I wanted to teach. On top of that, the current popular argument (re: waiting for superman) is that the problem with the American education system is bad teachers who waste taxpayer funds. I can't address that here, but this very excellent article does a great job of deconstructing that argument.

2) It's an American value that every child have access to (and be forced to obtain) the same education. This is a value that I share; I directly benefited from it. Nevertheless, it's a value that has consequences. Right now a third of my Precalc students are honestly not ready for the level of difficulty that the class requires. However, they have a right to take the course, and I have an obligation to teach them as best I can. In theory, yes, I should fail those kids. In practice, however, a teacher "self adjusts" to whatever the middle of the room is. To put it another way, I can only go as fast as the weakest student. The course isn't nearly as difficult as I would like it to be, and I don't think my kids would stack up well against students from other countries. If I only had the kids who were really ready for the class, it would be a different story. But I don't, and unlike the business world, I can't send defective parts back. I'm kind of fond of some of those "defective parts," but I'm also fond of the kids who are going at 3/4 speed because of them. TL;DR: We're never going to do as well as countries that "sort" kids into academic tracks.

3) Money matters. I'm not talking about school funding. That's a different fight that I don't want to have today (BREVITY FAIL!). I'm talking about the kids. Give me a list of standardized test scores from a suburban school and an inner city school, and I can probably tell you which is which. Poverty is a pretty good predictor of academic achievement, and schools in impoverished areas will have a hard time experiencing widespread success until some work is done to alleviate the symptoms of poverty (like coming to school with a full stomach, having clean clothes, having some place safe to be after school, not having to work a night shift, etc). Unfortunately, very few schools are equipped to really attack this 800 lbs gorilla, and the few that do are also sitting on a ginormous pile of cash.

4) Education just isn't a value in our country. We like to talk big about being #1 in education and blah blah blah, but watch the political rhetoric whenever someone with huge academic cred gets anywhere near an elected position. We have a myth in this country about eggheads sitting in ivory towers and theorizing while "real folk" actually go out and get stuff done.

5) Standardized testing sucks. The End. If it were used as an assessment tool, along with other measures of learning and growth (such as a portfolio), that would be a different story. But it's not, and I'm deeply disappointed that the current administration has turned out to be MORE conservative on this issue than the last one.

That's enough for now.

-T

PS. The kids aren't all that bad Camaro....even the defective ones.
Last edited by Clay_Pigeon on Fri Apr 22, 2011 4:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
"Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me." -2 Cor 12:9
"Never know how long I've waited, anticipated your smile pressed against mine." -Running
Camaro
Posts: 2418
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:00 am

Post by Camaro »

Clay_Pigeon wrote:QUOTE (Clay_Pigeon @ Apr 21 2011, 07:19 PM) 2) It's an American value that every child have access to (and be forced to obtain) the same education. This is a value that I share; I directly benefited from it. Nevertheless, it's a value that has consequences. Right now a third of my Precalc students are honestly not ready for the level of difficulty that the class requires. However, they have a right to take the course, and I have an obligation to teach them as best I can. In theory, yes, I should fail those kids. In practice, however, a teacher "self adjusts" to whatever the middle of the room is. To put it another way, I can only go as fast as the weakest student. The course isn't nearly as difficult as I would like it to be, and I don't think my kids would stack up well against students from other countries. If I only had the kids who were really ready for the class, it would be a different story. But I don't, and unlike the business world, I can't send defective parts back. I'm kind of fond of some of those "defective parts," but I'm also fond of the kids who are going at 3/4 speed because of them. TL;DR: We're never going to do as well as countries that "sort" kids into academic tracks.
Back when America had excellent schools... well when California had decent schools at least, kids were put into academic tracks.
Image
Image
MrChaos
Posts: 8352
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 8:00 am

Post by MrChaos »

Disclaimer I have a huge mancrush on PidgeyPie

I had a taste of being a teacher while in college for a program geared to encouraging minorities into engineering and science careers. Unlike Clay I had a class full of kids who had to be a teacher's wet dream. Motivated intelligent ..... they were competing to go to school during the summer ffs. It was glaringly obvious which students came from which district. It wasn't ability rather the chance to excel. At the end of the program many parents requested a conference to hear the kid's progress. To a parent they were stunned when I tell them their child was easily a year behind their suburban counterparts at the eight grade level and two behind the eleventh graders. What do we do? The answer was move. Environment matters
Ssssh
Jimen
Posts: 1146
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:39 pm
Location: Boston-ish

Post by Jimen »

Moving wouldn't fix that disparity. In fact, it would probably make it even worse, because the differences you noticed weren't actually due to location. Rather, it's due to the big problem Clay mentions: poverty; location is simply an indicator of economic status. You seem to be asking "why don't people who live in bad areas just move to the suburbs?", but I must be misunderstanding you because that would be an incredibly stupid question to ask.
Image
Icky
Posts: 1436
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:00 am

Post by Icky »

Clay_Pigeon wrote:QUOTE (Clay_Pigeon @ Apr 22 2011, 12:19 AM) <Good arguments>
Completely agree.

Also, and I think this may be one of the most important issues, parents have a sense of entitlement for education now. And that sense of entitlement means they expect teachers and schools to force all the knowledge into their kids' brains without any sort of parental involvement or assistance.

In a lot of families, learning stops at school and never enters the home. If the kids don't learn, it must be the teachers' faults, since it's their JOB, right?
Terran wrote:QUOTE (Terran @ Jan 20 2011, 03:56 PM) i'm like adept
Broodwich wrote:QUOTE (Broodwich @ Jun 6 2010, 10:19 PM) if you spent as much time in game as trollin sf might not be dead
takingarms1
Posts: 3052
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:00 am

Post by takingarms1 »

Jimen wrote:QUOTE (Jimen @ Apr 21 2011, 10:19 PM) So he started out with thirteen years of mandatory education, at least four years of regular college, at least four years in a first- or second-tier law school, a rich acquaintances in the field of law willing to give him work and help him out, a car, and light enough skin that he could hang around a car for a significant period of time without being hassled by the police. I presume that he also had a home, a telephone, a refrigerator, some food, and access to a law library. Not exactly "nothing".
What a nice set of assumptions that are mostly wrong! 4th tier law school, poor family from a poor city that you've never heard of on the east coast with high crime, and all that 'mandatory education' after high school he paid for himself. All those "rich acquaintances" he has now were connections he made while working his way up the ladder - he had zero family connections when he started. And I realize you've never had the experience so I will tell you that most law school students that I know did not come from wealthy families and at times had to choose between buying books and their next meal.

Once again, most people who end up rich in the US didn't start out that way. I know it's hard for you to conceive but some rich people actually earned it.
"You give my regards to St. Peter. Or, whoever has his job, but in hell!"
- - - -
Post Reply