Education Thread

[mu_hilltopper]

There are plenty of Catholic schools in Wisconsin that are voucher schools, some nearly completely funded by them.

[dgies9156]

There are plenty of Catholic schools in Wisconsin that are voucher schools, some nearly completely funded by them.

Of course there are. But keep in mind the difference between a state with between 5.0 million and 6.0 million and a roll-out of vouchers to a country with 320.0 million people. At some point, you cross a threshold where the federal bureaucracy and the state bureaucracy become involved.

[jsglow]

I'm not sure I know what you are saying, Glow.

It sounds like it is that giving blacks rights that were equal to those that whites enjoyed since our nations birth is what caused social unrest in the minority community. That allowing them to eat in the same restaurant as whites caused social unrest.

I'm guessing either I am reading you wrong or your message didn't come out as you intended.

Either way, I would like to hear your further thoughts on this.

No, of course not Jockey.  I was referring to the merits of the massive social welfare programs that were enacted, not rights issues like voting, discrimination, etc.  In other words, what dgies said.  And while I'm not revisiting it, I was suggesting that folks positions on education often mirror their positions politically.  I was purposefully not entering the fray.  Thanks for allowing me to clear that up. 

[SaveOD238]

There are plenty of Catholic schools in Wisconsin that are voucher schools, some nearly completely funded by them.

The one in which I teach is a prime example.  If we didn't have vouchers, we wouldn't be open. 

[Jockey]

No, of course not Jockey.  I was referring to the merits of the massive social welfare programs that were enacted, not rights issues like voting, discrimination, etc.  In other words, what dgies said.  And while I'm not revisiting it, I was suggesting that folks positions on education often mirror their positions politically.  I was purposefully not entering the fray.  Thanks for allowing me to clear that up.

Gracias. But, if I could ask your opinion on one more thing.....

Will more vouchers and school choice programs promote more segregation in schools? Is that the goal of some of the people pushing for more choice? There have been studies that show that this is the case. While minority parents are being given more choices about where to enroll their kids, these choices rarely extend to schools that are more integrated.

Often, the choices in minority school districts are between low-performing public schools and charters or voucher-schools with similar student bodies.

Betsy Devos has argued that it’s unrealistic to demand racial integration in charter schools. Why shouldn't we demand it?

I think we are seeing the results of her school of thought as schools are becoming more and more segregated.

[jsglow]

Gracias. But, if I could ask your opinion on one more thing.....

Will more vouchers and school choice programs promote more segregation in schools? Is that the goal of some of the people pushing for more choice? There have been studies that show that this is the case. While minority parents are being given more choices about where to enroll their kids, these choices rarely extend to schools that are more integrated.

Often, the choices in minority school districts are between low-performing public schools and charters or voucher-schools with similar student bodies.

Betsy Devos has argued that it’s unrealistic to demand racial integration in charter schools. Why shouldn't we demand it?

I think we are seeing the results of her school of thought as schools are becoming more and more segregated.

I don't mind you asking.  I hope you don't mind that I'm not interested in engaging the discussion.

[PBRme]

I only have a periphery knowledge of the Public Education system in the US.  I have been a volunteer in introducing and discussing STEM and the career prospects to several inner city Milwaukee schools.  My observations from my 5 plus years involvement.

The current problems with Education will not be solved by the current Education establishment.  Education is the most incestuous field I have ever experienced.  Teachers become Administrators, Principals, Vice Principals, etc.  No new blood from the outside world seems to permeate this environment.  There is a real group think and an us against the world mentality that prevents outside ideas or any form of real change. 

I’m old enough to have gone through the revolution in manufacturing.  I’m a Neutron Jack casualty.  Thousands of people were “rightsized” out of their existing positions but the end result was a more competitive sector producing better and more innovative products.

If we start by accepting that what we are currently doing is not effectively educating a significant portion of the students, regardless of other mitigating factors, then we need to try new and innovative ideas.

I would end all Federal involvement in Education.  The solution is not going to come from an universal rule making body.  We should be trying dozens of different approaches.  Personally I would grant diplomas following the successful completion of Sophomore year.  If you are planning on going to college you would go two more years and get an Advanced High School Diploma (or whatever you call it).  I’d allow students that can get a job to do so.  This would require massive changes in Child Labor Laws.  Many of the students I witnessed over the years could have probably been helped by removing them from the education system and putting them to work.   Then they also would not be disrupting the students that do want to learn.   You could take the money you save from the final two years and use it to fund other new ideas

I would try boarding schools   
I would try same sex schools
I would have Trade Schools in conjunction with Carpentry, Welding, Long-Term Care, Concrete, Electrical, Machining, Medical, and Plumbing Associations and Hospitals and Manufacturers.  I would allow paid employment during school/Training Hours maybe even subsidized for a short period of time.

I would do away with social promotion and allow anyone under 23 or maybe 25 to re-enroll with minimum commitment tests.

I would not allow the courts to use these as an alternative to other punishment

Current is not working.  It’s a massive failure.

There is a huge looming shortage of all kinds of workers and their wages will be going up.

I recommend getting involved.  It was personally humbling to come from the C-Suite and be ignored so completely.  In small group discussion some kids are really interested in what is available and what you do, etc.  Some have there own conversations and will not even acknowledge your presence or voice.

[Lennys Tap]

I only have a periphery knowledge of the Public Education system in the US.  I have been a volunteer in introducing and discussing STEM and the career prospects to several inner city Milwaukee schools.  My observations from my 5 plus years involvement.

The current problems with Education will not be solved by the current Education establishment.  Education is the most incestuous field I have ever experienced.  Teachers become Administrators, Principals, Vice Principals, etc.  No new blood from the outside world seems to permeate this environment.  There is a real group think and an us against the world mentality that prevents outside ideas or any form of real change. 

I’m old enough to have gone through the revolution in manufacturing.  I’m a Neutron Jack casualty.  Thousands of people were “rightsized” out of their existing positions but the end result was a more competitive sector producing better and more innovative products.

If we start by accepting that what we are currently doing is not effectively educating a significant portion of the students, regardless of other mitigating factors, then we need to try new and innovative ideas.

I would end all Federal involvement in Education.  The solution is not going to come from an universal rule making body.  We should be trying dozens of different approaches.  Personally I would grant diplomas following the successful completion of Sophomore year.  If you are planning on going to college you would go two more years and get an Advanced High School Diploma (or whatever you call it).  I’d allow students that can get a job to do so.  This would require massive changes in Child Labor Laws.  Many of the students I witnessed over the years could have probably been helped by removing them from the education system and putting them to work.   Then they also would not be disrupting the students that do want to learn.   You could take the money you save from the final two years and use it to fund other new ideas

I would try boarding schools   
I would try same sex schools
I would have Trade Schools in conjunction with Carpentry, Welding, Long-Term Care, Concrete, Electrical, Machining, Medical, and Plumbing Associations and Hospitals and Manufacturers.  I would allow paid employment during school/Training Hours maybe even subsidized for a short period of time.

I would do away with social promotion and allow anyone under 23 or maybe 25 to re-enroll with minimum commitment tests.

I would not allow the courts to use these as an alternative to other punishment

Current is not working.  It’s a massive failure.

There is a huge looming shortage of all kinds of workers and their wages will be going up.

I recommend getting involved.  It was personally humbling to come from the C-Suite and be ignored so completely.  In small group discussion some kids are really interested in what is available and what you do, etc.  Some have there own conversations and will not even acknowledge your presence or voice.

Most intriguing post in this thread. Thanks for sharing your experiences and ideas.

[Pakuni]

I only have a periphery knowledge of the Public Education system in the US.  I have been a volunteer in introducing and discussing STEM and the career prospects to several inner city Milwaukee schools.  My observations from my 5 plus years involvement.

The current problems with Education will not be solved by the current Education establishment.  Education is the most incestuous field I have ever experienced.  Teachers become Administrators, Principals, Vice Principals, etc.  No new blood from the outside world seems to permeate this environment.  There is a real group think and an us against the world mentality that prevents outside ideas or any form of real change. 

I appreciate your perspective, but I think you're way off here.
What's the alternative to hiring experienced people to run schools? And how is what the schools are doing any different from every other profession on the planet?
Are we better off with a system in which the people overseeing teachers and running schools have never been in the classroom? Where the people who shape curricula have no educational experience? Where the people who are hiring teachers have never taught?
Nobody would suggest hiring a high school teacher to run a tech firm. Or a veterinarian to serve as CEO of a car manufacturer. Or a chef to manage a professional baseball team.
But apparently one needs no knowledge of education to be a  principal.
This goes back to the silly notion that's been discussed previously in this thread that everyone seems to think they can teach. Apparently now everyone can also be a principal, curriculum director and superintendent, too.

If we start by accepting that what we are currently doing is not effectively educating a significant portion of the students, regardless of other mitigating factors, then we need to try new and innovative ideas.

But this is a false narrative. The reality is that the US is one of the most educated countries on the planet (8th, according to the World Economic Forum). People come here from around the globe seeking education. Are there areas we could do better? Of course. But the notion that we're not effectively educating a significant portion of the students, regardless of other mitigating factors, is patently false. Most kids in this country receive a quality education. Instead of messing with those kids by trying to change everything, let's focus on the ones being left behind.

As for your other suggestions, innovation is great and should be pursued arduously, but as a parent, the last thing I want is my kid of be a guinea pig in a school trying a host of unproven methods trying to find something that might work. I'll stick with a school that only uses methods that have been thoroughly tested and shown to work.

Lastly, I'd be very careful about forcing kids to decide their career path (i.e. college or vocation) at 15 years old. I had no clue what I was going to do at that age, and I'd venture to guess I wasn't an outlier.

[muwarrior69]

I appreciate your perspective, but I think you're way off here.
What's the alternative to hiring experienced people to run schools? And how is what the schools are doing any different from every other profession on the planet?
Are we better off with a system in which the people overseeing teachers and running schools have never been in the classroom? Where the people who shape curricula have no educational experience? Where the people who are hiring teachers have never taught?
Nobody would suggest hiring a high school teacher to run a tech firm. Or a veterinarian to serve as CEO of a car manufacturer. Or a chef to manage a professional baseball team.
But apparently one needs no knowledge of education to be a  principal.
This goes back to the silly notion that's been discussed previously in this thread that everyone seems to think they can teach. Apparently now everyone can also be a principal, curriculum director and superintendent, too.


But this is a false narrative. The reality is that the US is one of the most educated countries on the planet (8th, according to the World Economic Forum). People come here from around the globe seeking education. Are there areas we could do better? Of course. But the notion that we're not effectively educating a significant portion of the students, regardless of other mitigating factors, is patently false. Most kids in this country receive a quality education. Instead of messing with those kids by trying to change everything, let's focus on the ones being left behind.

As for your other suggestions, innovation is great and should be pursued arduously, but as a parent, the last thing I want is my kid of be a guinea pig in a school trying a host of unproven methods trying to find something that might work. I'll stick with a school that only uses methods that have been thoroughly tested and shown to work.

Lastly, I'd be very careful about forcing kids to decide their career path (i.e. college or vocation) at 15 years old. I had no clue what I was going to do at that age, and I'd venture to guess I wasn't an outlier.

The European system prepares people for specific jobs. Our system prepares people to think for themselves. In fact we here in America have the most powerful motivator in education: failure; and when we fail we have the power and FREEDOM to pull ourselves up and start over and completely go in a different direction and pursue that which makes us happy. It is just a shame that large segments of our population do not experience that freedom and waste it.

http://sites.psu.edu/berkmancivicissue/2014/03/26/12/

[PBRme]

Pakuni
responses  below

I appreciate your perspective, but I think you're way off here.
What's the alternative to hiring experienced people to run schools? And how is what the schools are doing any different from every other profession on the planet? 
I’m not in favor of hiring inexperienced individuals just adding some differently experienced.


Are we better off with a system in which the people overseeing teachers and running schools have never been in the classroom?
Maybe, I’ve never ran a 5 axis lathe, installed a water removal system, scheduled a manufacturing plant, etc.  but I have effectively managed these activities.  Different skill sets are required and sometimes you are unable to see things from inside that an outsider could provide perspective. 


Where the people who shape curricula have no educational experience? Where the people who are hiring teachers have never taught? 

You act like it is one or the other.  Maybe someone who is hiring the final product or the Education system could provide insight into what a future curriculum roadmap should include.  And your response would be to allow the system to remain closed to any of the other stakeholders.  Just trust the Education syste,.

Nobody would suggest hiring a high school teacher to run a tech firm. Or a veterinarian to serve as CEO of a car manufacturer. Or a chef to manage a professional baseball team. 
Or a nurse to run a hospital, or a window installer to run a construction firm, or a the person putting tires on a car to run an automobile company, or ??? Whose point were you trying to make?

But apparently one needs no knowledge of education to be a  principal. 
Not what I said but whatever fits your “siege mentality” narrative.  And again every organization I have been part of has run remedial/ continuing education programs, training, lunch and learn, etc.  The if you haven’t taught in the classroom you couldn’t possibly add value to the institution is ridiculous.


This goes back to the silly notion that's been discussed previously in this thread that everyone seems to think they can teach. Apparently now everyone can also be a principal, curriculum director and superintendent, too. 
Not everyone but certainly some people

But this is a false narrative. The reality is that the US is one of the most educated countries on the planet (8th, according to the World Economic Forum). People come here from around the globe seeking education. Are there areas we could do better? Of course. But the notion that we're not effectively educating a significant portion of the students, regardless of other mitigating factors, is patently false. Most kids in this country receive a quality education. Instead of messing with those kids by trying to change everything, let's focus on the ones being left behind. 
My post was specifically about my experience with inner city schools and declaring it a false narrative even allowing for your sanctimonious pomposity is more a reflection of comprehension and realizing distinctions (or lack thereof).  I am saying one size does not fit all.  Suburban schools may be ok (I’d still argue room for improvement) but many Urban schools are abject failures.


As for your other suggestions, innovation is great and should be pursued arduously, but as a parent, the last thing I want is my kid of be a guinea pig in a school trying a host of unproven methods trying to find something that might work. I'll stick with a school that only uses methods that have been thoroughly tested and shown to work. 
Even when any realistic metric would show the product to be inferior to competitors.  And AGAIN I was speaking specifically of failing inner city schools.  And "shown to fail" would be more accurate


Lastly, I'd be very careful about forcing kids to decide their career path (i.e. college or vocation) at 15 years old. I had no clue what I was going to do at that age, and I'd venture to guess I wasn't an outlier.
Not forcing anything.  AGAIN, my observation was there was a significant segment that had already checked out.  Requiring them to sit through two more years adds zero value (assuming they even show up), prevents them from entering workforce, consumes time, money, and energy from kids who want to be there.  And I specifically allowed for a return to the system when a person might be more mature, know what they want to do or at least what they do not want to do

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The European system prepares people for specific jobs. Our system prepares people to think for themselves. In fact we here in America have the most powerful motivator in education: failure; and when we fail we have the power and FREEDOM to pull ourselves up and start over and completely go in a different direction and pursue that which makes us happy. It is just a shame that large segments of our population do not experience that freedom and waste it.

http://sites.psu.edu/berkmancivicissue/2014/03/26/12/

I wouldn't say all Americans have the "freedom to pull ourselves up and start over and completely go in a different direction and pursue that which makes us happy." I think in theory everyone has the opportunity to pull themselves up but in actuality its only those with a certain level of privilege.

[Pakuni]

PBR ... was hoping for a civil discussion, instead get accused of a 'siege mentality' and ' sanctimonious pomposity.'
OK, then.

Anyhow, I'll address a few of your points and then allow you to get angry and insulting again. Fair?

1. To you point about outside viewpoints and "differently" experienced, that's why we have elected school boards. These, in theory and usually in practice, are people from outside the educational establishment - doctors, lawyers, stay-at-home moms, firefighters, marketing managers, etc. - who hold the ultimate authority in setting district policy and hiring the top administrators charged with carrying out that policy. Contrary to your claims, the system is not closed. The people with the most authority come from outside the establishment. Pretty much any law-abiding adult living in the community can run for a school board, and be elected by other stakeholders. And most school districts have numerous other committees, panel, commissions, etc., in which members of the public can serve and help shape policy.

2. Nobody here said one without teaching experience can't add value. That's a total straw man. Rather, I disagreed with your suggestion that teaching experience is a negative - incestuous is the word you used, to be exact - for principals and administrators. You're entitled to that belief, but I'd venture to guess I'm in the majority when I say I want the person in charge of my kids' school to have some working knowledge.

3. Not forcing anything? Perhaps I misunderstood, but didn't you say kids should go to high school for two years and then decide whether they wanted to go to college  or get a job? How is that not forcing a career choice on a high school sophomore?
Saying "a return to the system" is nice and all, but studies show very few kids who leave high school early ever go back, and most of those who do struggle and drop out again before graduating.
Perhaps a better solution - one that's actually being introduced all over the country and has wide bipartisan support - is the addition of more vocational training and apprenticeships within the high school environment. That way, kids aren't closing off all their options, yet can still pursue a non-college path if that's their preference.

4. "Or a nurse to run a hospital, or a window installer to run a construction firm, or a the person putting tires on a car to run an automobile company,"
I'm not sure what your point is here? That a teacher who becomes a superintendent is analogous to a tire installer becoming CEO of GM? If you'd like me to explain how bad that analogy is, I will.

[forgetful]

Pakuni
responses  below

I was going to respond to Pakuni with a +1, but will now reply here instead.

I’m not in favor of hiring inexperienced individuals just adding some differently experienced.


Maybe, I’ve never ran a 5 axis lathe, installed a water removal system, scheduled a manufacturing plant, etc.  but I have effectively managed these activities.  Different skill sets are required and sometimes you are unable to see things from inside that an outsider could provide perspective. 

You act like it is one or the other.  Maybe someone who is hiring the final product or the Education system could provide insight into what a future curriculum roadmap should include.  And your response would be to allow the system to remain closed to any of the other stakeholders.  Just trust the Education syste,.

You are acting here as if the administrators only have teaching experience.  Those in administrative jobs usually have specialized training in education, school finance, management etc.  They are very well trained and have different experiences, and training that positions them to understand the complex aspects of the education process.  On top of that, administration often has people with business training, psychology etc. 

It is not closed to any of the other stakeholders.  It is just found that people with some actual education experience are better suited for the job.  Frankly, your stances here have no merit, because the premise that it is closed to outside stakeholders is false. 

But apparently one needs no knowledge of education to be a  principal. 
Not what I said but whatever fits your “siege mentality” narrative.  And again every organization I have been part of has run remedial/ continuing education programs, training, lunch and learn, etc.  The if you haven’t taught in the classroom you couldn’t possibly add value to the institution is ridiculous.

You are right, that almost every organization runs remedial/continuing education programs.  The vast majority contract out to firms run by people who are trained as educators, who provide the curricula/materials to educate those at the firm.  Often, then the actual program is taught by someone with specific training in what is going to be taught.  The bottom line is, the systems you are talking about rely on teachers/educators for the actual teaching materials. 

The reason they contract out to them is that they have specific training on different teaching methods, there relative utility and success rate and how to implement them properly to be most effective. 

Everyone can sing, and most in their life have done so, but if you are producing a record you are not going to grab someone off the street to sing the lyrics, you will bring someone in who has been trained and has a proven track record to get it done. 

My post was specifically about my experience with inner city schools and declaring it a false narrative even allowing for your sanctimonious pomposity is more a reflection of comprehension and realizing distinctions (or lack thereof).  I am saying one size does not fit all.  Suburban schools may be ok (I’d still argue room for improvement) but many Urban schools are abject failures.

Here you have another massive logical fallacy.  You now say that you are speaking specifically from your experience with inner city schools, but you are suggesting that this is an inherent problem with the education system.  Simple logic refutes that.  If the problem was in the system, then it would be a universal problem.  The fact is that our education system is one of the best in the world. 

The question should be then, is there something that makes this not work in inner cities.  The answer is a simple yes.  I have also worked with inner city schools and the problem is not in the education structure/system.  It is in the homes, and the community.  The biggest problem for inner city schools is poverty and hopelessness.  That even if you work hard and do well, you almost will never escape the reality of your situation.  That leads the majority of students to give up, as they have no hope.  The lack of seriousness on the part of the majority, exacerbates the problem.

Many of the things you ask for, e.g. vocational training, are offered at some inner city schools or as after school programs.  Many are not attended, because they still do not offer any hopes of escaping poverty. 

If you have an interest in improving education in some areas, I'd advise for you to immerse yourself in inner city schools (that are successful), and in suburban schools that are successful.  Talk to the educators and administrators about problems/concerns and ideas of improvement.  In other words research it through experience and training and then see what you think is the best way to rectify the inner city school problems. One of the biggest problems you'll find is that no one wants to provide funding for many of the ideas of the educator experts.

[dgies9156]

I wouldn't say all Americans have the "freedom to pull ourselves up and start over and completely go in a different direction and pursue that which makes us happy." I think in theory everyone has the opportunity to pull themselves up but in actuality its only those with a certain level of privilege.

I can't disagree with this more. My degree from MU was in Journalism and I went into the field. By the mid-1980s, it became clear that I would not accomplish what I hoped to do in Journalism. It also was becoming clearer that the media was changing and I needed a profession with a long-term capability to contribute to our family's well being.

Even then it was clear that contributing to our family's well-being was not coming from journalism.

My employer offered as a perk a commitment to pay 75 percent of the costs of what it called "higher education," so long as my supervisors signed off on it. The other 25 percent at the time was tax deductible. The perk was largely used by our administrative and support staff to pursue BA or BS degrees. But, the perk was available to anyone who was a full-time employee. Up to that point, nobody had used it for an MBA or other law degree.

I changed that almost overnight.

I was awarded an MBA 2.75 years after I started, largely by going to school at night and studying heavily on weekends. I earned my degree and am now a Managing Director for a large consulting firm. Ironically, after I did it, four of my departmental colleagues did the same thing and the cost of the program shot through the roof (Serves 'em right for not paying us!).

So yes, YOU CAN CHANGE! I wasn't privileged. I was a lowly journalist with a lowly journalist's salary. If I was truly special, there there are an awful lot of truly special people in the world!

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

dgies, I've already debated this ad naseum in the minimum wage thread so I'm not going to repeat it all here. I don't know you, but my guess is that you do have some level of privileged higher than who I was referring to. A vast majority of those living below the poverty line in theory have the opportunity to pull themselves up but very few are ever going to do a job solely because it makes them happy. They are going to do whatever job they can get that will allow them and their family to survive.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I don't think the education system is as broken in our country as many seem to think it is. Our higher education system is ranked #1 in the world. Our primary and secondary education is among the top 5% of countries in the world. It could absolutely be improved but I don't think we need to trash the whole system and start over.

I love the idea of more apprenticeship and internship programs in high schools. Give students an opportunity to get real world job experience at white collar jobs or valuable trade jobs. It gives them valuable skills, experience, and better opportunity to succeed in college or to succeed when entering the work force after graduation. I think the Christo Rey schools have an excellent model for this. I haven't read any studies about their effectiveness but I have met several graduates of those schools and they all loved their experience.

I think home ec is a subject that is sorely undervalued in American high schools. There should be more class time dedicated to practical skills like creating a personal budget, writing a resume, writing a cover letter, doing taxes, how to dress professionally, how to cook, how to eat a nutritious diet, how student loans work, etc. Many students come to college or enter the work force with no experience in these areas and they are expected to know all of this information. The lack of education on student loans and making a good decision on college is especially troubling. Many student who have never been educated are making decisions that will put them in debt for the next few decades of their lives.

[jesmu84]

I don't think the education system is as broken in our country as many seem to think it is. Our higher education system is ranked #1 in the world. Our primary and secondary education is among the top 5% of countries in the world. It could absolutely be improved but I don't think we need to trash the whole system and start over.

I love the idea of more apprenticeship and internship programs in high schools. Give students an opportunity to get real world job experience at white collar jobs or valuable trade jobs. It gives them valuable skills, experience, and better opportunity to succeed in college or to succeed when entering the work force after graduation. I think the Christo Rey schools have an excellent model for this. I haven't read any studies about their effectiveness but I have met several graduates of those schools and they all loved their experience.

I think home ec is a subject that is sorely undervalued in American high schools. There should be more class time dedicated to practical skills like creating a personal budget, writing a resume, writing a cover letter, doing taxes, how to dress professionally, how to cook, how to eat a nutritious diet, how student loans work, etc. Many students come to college or enter the work force with no experience in these areas and they are expected to know all of this information. The lack of education on student loans and making a good decision on college is especially troubling. Many student who have never been educated are making decisions that will put them in debt for the next few decades of their lives.

Much like sex ed, why should the burden of these things be placed on the school system? These things are to be taught through parents/family.

[Pakuni]

Much like sex ed, why should the burden of these things be placed on the school system? These things are to be taught through parents/family.

Because ...
1. Having a populace educated in these matters - including sex ed - is good for society as a whole.
2. Many parents are either incapable or unwilling to teach their kids about these things (and, just my opinion, it's the kids who need it most who have the least willing and able parents).

[jesmu84]

Because ...
1. Having a populace educated in these matters - including sex ed - is good for society as a whole.
2. Many parents are either incapable or unwilling to teach their kids about these things (and, just my opinion, it's the kids who need it most who have the least willing and able parents).

Sorry. Didn't think I needed the teal.

[Pakuni]

Sorry. Didn't think I needed the teal.

In hindsight, your sarcasm should have been obvious, but one never knows these days.

[dgies9156]

dgies, I've already debated this ad naseum in the minimum wage thread so I'm not going to repeat it all here. I don't know you, but my guess is that you do have some level of privileged higher than who I was referring to. A vast majority of those living below the poverty line in theory have the opportunity to pull themselves up but very few are ever going to do a job solely because it makes them happy. They are going to do whatever job they can get that will allow them and their family to survive.

TAMU, c'mon.

Yes, my privilege is having a set of decent, caring parents who believed in education. Both of 'em did. My privilege is having a set of parents who stood with us when they needed to and corrected us when we needed it. My parents made sure we had a roof over our head, food to keep us going and the discipline to take advantage of the God-given abilities we had.

If that's privilege, I plead guilty and openly offer the same to my children who are now in college.

I would note that neither of my children are extremely gifted or impoverished. As a consequence, I'm paying the full rate at an Illinois university. Based on the cost structure of the university, I'm putting about 1.5 students through college for each of my own children. I accept that and hope the 1.5 students end up with degrees and find a way to foster the growth of the State of Illinois.

You're beginning to make us sound like some stuck-up, European kingdom. We're not and if you think we are, take a walk through the commons at Texas A&M. Sure the frat boys and girls are there. But I'll betcha if you look, you'll find some folks from the Valley whose family has given all they could to get their children to A&M. Or, an oil-worker's daughter from Houston. They know what I know ... you can still do anything if you make the effort and put your mind to it.

[jesmu84]

TAMU, c'mon.

Yes, my privilege is having a set of decent, caring parents who believed in education. Both of 'em did. My privilege is having a set of parents who stood with us when they needed to and corrected us when we needed it. My parents made sure we had a roof over our head, food to keep us going and the discipline to take advantage of the God-given abilities we had.

If that's privilege, I plead guilty and openly offer the same to my children who are now in college.

I would note that neither of my children are extremely gifted or impoverished. As a consequence, I'm paying the full rate at an Illinois university. Based on the cost structure of the university, I'm putting about 1.5 students through college for each of my own children. I accept that and hope the 1.5 students end up with degrees and find a way to foster the growth of the State of Illinois.

You're beginning to make us sound like some stuck-up, European kingdom. We're not and if you think we are, take a walk through the commons at Texas A&M. Sure the frat boys and girls are there. But I'll betcha if you look, you'll find some folks from the Valley whose family has given all they could to get their children to A&M. Or, an oil-worker's daughter from Houston. They know what I know ... you can still do anything if you make the effort and put your mind to it.

That's way more than a lot of people have. So, yes, you are indeed privileged.

[mu_hilltopper]

I don't think the education system is as broken in our country as many seem to think it is.

Agree, with a caveat.  Really, we have three school systems in the US.  Urban, suburban, and rural.   Each have some similarities, but unique strengths and weaknesses.   Any conversation about "fixing" the "system" is silly unless it specifies which type of district being addressed.  Most suburban districts are succeeding, most urban districts are failing .. with rural districts as a mixed-bag, floating near the average.

There are, however, three top unifying characteristic strengths:  Parents, parents, parents.

If Johnny has parents who are engaged and actively installing language and critical thinking software on their children from the day they were born .. the school district they attend will be quite good. 

If not .. the district still has a shot to "meet expectations" but more often than not, will be considered a failing district.    All the other chatter is around the edges.  The end.

[Lennys Tap]

Agree, with a caveat.  Really, we have three school systems in the US.  Urban, suburban, and rural.   Each have some similarities, but unique strengths and weaknesses.   Any conversation about "fixing" the "system" is silly unless it specifies which type of district being addressed.  Most suburban districts are succeeding, most urban districts are failing .. with rural districts as a mixed-bag, floating near the average.

There are, however, three top unifying characteristic strengths:  Parents, parents, parents.

If Johnny has parents who are engaged and actively installing language and critical thinking software on their children from the day they were born .. the school district they attend will be quite good. 

If not .. the district still has a shot to "meet expectations" but more often than not, will be considered a failing district.    All the other chatter is around the edges.  The end.

Sad but true.