Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Notso Slim, SASS #67301

I want your opinion.

Recommended Posts

Hola, El Capitan Cahill ~

 

I agree with much of what you elucidate here.

 

Aside from the "Great Society," reformists like Martin Luther King, JR, were advocating equal opportunity, not a free hand-out. He was speaking to and for people who wanted a chance to vote, elect representatives, to work for equal wages, and not be denied buying a house in certain neighborhoods by the color of their skin. Unfortunately, all of that was lost with the assassinaton of King and Robert Kennedy (like him or hate him, many perceived him to be an advocate of equality). When non-violence failed, and peaceful efforts were so brutally repressed, we had revolution in the streets.

 

Most of us remember the riots in the cities that followed these murders. The anger that was unleashed and the looting. Scenes of smash and grab, people carrying TV's out of ravaged storefronts.

 

The failure of the political process stemmed from that time, and I (IMHO) believe that the disintegration of mores and of how education is valued stem from that time period.

 

Where we agree is that education is no longer valued by many as the gateway to a better life; where we disagree is that this devaluation is attributable to single-parenthood.

 

Your arguments are well reasoned, compadre, and I have enjoyed this discussion. But you and I probably ought to cease this side-chat before we get the thread pulled.

 

Look forward to meeting you sometime,

Su amigo

eGG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hola, El Capitan Cahill ~

 

I agree with much of what you elucidate here.

 

Aside from the "Great Society," reformists like Martin Luther King, JR, were advocating equal opportunity, not a free hand-out. He was speaking to and for people who wanted a chance to vote, elect representatives, to work for equal wages, and not be denied buying a house in certain neighborhoods by the color of their skin. Unfortunately, all of that was lost with the assassinaton of King and Robert Kennedy (like him or hate him, many perceived him to be an advocate of equality). When non-violence failed, and peaceful efforts were so brutally repressed, we had revolution in the streets.

 

Most of us remember the riots in the cities that followed these murders. The anger that was unleashed and the looting. Scenes of smash and grab, people carrying TV's out of ravaged storefronts.

 

The failure of the political process stemmed from that time, and I (IMHO) believe that the disintegration of mores and of how education is valued stem from that time period.

 

Where we agree is that education is no longer valued by many as the gateway to a better life; where we disagree is that this devaluation is attributable to single-parenthood.

 

Your arguments are well reasoned, compadre, and I have enjoyed this discussion. But you and I probably ought to cease this side-chat before we get the thread pulled.

 

Look forward to meeting you sometime,

Su amigo

eGG

 

 

In the period just before the turn of the 20th century, the education, poverty, and marriage before producing children rates for blacks and whites were roughly the same, and for the poor, were not much different than from the working class.

 

After the Great Depression things began to change, as liberal minds sought to CREATE a society where abject poverty did not exist. Unfortunately, that is like trying to create bread without yeast. When one disconnects the VALUES necessary for success from the outcome, when the rude, ignorant, and uncaring eat as well as the rest, and the "society" created is nothing more than a "voluntary-admission" prison of the soul, the results as flat, hard and tasteless as the unleaven bread.

 

By disconnecting the value of the poor man to his family, he became a "back door" accessory not to be seen by the welfare ladies, lest the check be cut off, and his children raised themselves knowing that they too had no value in connecting their women to a way of life except in that very basic sense.

 

What does it mean to succeed in cabrini Green or any of the tens of thosands of LBJ ghettos? Stay ahead of the man, and that's about it. When we GIVE folks the stuff of life, we excise the values necessary to achieve success on their own, our "generousity" selects for duplicity and willfull ignorance instead of for hard work and honesty.......... Tough love would be required to find a better track.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the period just before the turn of the 20th century, the education, poverty, and marriage before producing children rates for blacks and whites were roughly the same, and for the poor, were not much different than from the working class.

 

After the Great Depression things began to change, as liberal minds sought to CREATE a society where abject poverty did not exist. Unfortunately, that is like trying to create bread without yeast. When one disconnects the VALUES necessary for success from the outcome, when the rude, ignorant, and uncaring eat as well as the rest, and the "society" created is nothing more than a "voluntary-admission" prison of the soul, the results as flat, hard and tasteless as the unleaven bread.

 

By disconnecting the value of the poor man to his family, he became a "back door" accessory not to be seen by the welfare ladies, lest the check be cut off, and his children raised themselves knowing that they too had no value in connecting their women to a way of life except in that very basic sense.

 

What does it mean to succeed in cabrini Green or any of the tens of thosands of LBJ ghettos? Stay ahead of the man, and that's about it. When we GIVE folks the stuff of life, we excise the values necessary to achieve success on their own, our "generousity" selects for duplicity and willfull ignorance instead of for hard work and honesty.......... Tough love would be required to find a better track.....

 

Bravo. Beautifully and accurately worded my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rugers.

Best

CR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer 'student' is fine and dandy for a high schooler or college kid.

 

But the younger student needs proper upbringing (parent) and competent teachings (teacher) to learn correctly...and have the discipline to learn.

 

Lets put it this way - when a student graduates he/she usually thanks their parents, teachers, and sometimes God.

 

Nope - it's a joint effort. We all gotta do our part.

 

GG ~ :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's teachers are hampered my too many rules, regulations, meetings, and 'paperwork'.

 

 

elfego :FlagAm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who has the ultimate responsibility for the scores/grades/knowledge of US school students?

A long time ago I learned that you can delegate authority - but you can never delegate responsibility.

 

You own the responsibility for your child, even if you delegate authority to the teacher.

 

Shadow Catcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made a sign for my classroom. It's right next to my desk so I will see it often.

 

"They may not remember what I taught them but they will never forget the way I made them feel"

 

The most important part of my job and also the most rewarding is helping a child to know they have self worth.

Without self worth there is no reason to try....there is no hope.

 

If parents would teach their children to respect themselves and others.... and teach them the other basics of life....

then teachers could teach reading, writing, math, etc.

 

I remember how shocked I was when I realized most 4th graders don't know their own address, phone number, parents real names....

much less basic manners....

I always say "yes mam, or yes sir" when I speak to my students.

I respect them so they respect me.....and they trust me to treat them fairly and with love.

Children want to be discipled.... taught right from wrong....held accountable.

When they are not.... they lose respect for their parents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who has the ultimate responsibility for the scores/grades/knowledge of US school students?

 

The student, in a three way partnership with parents and teachers.

 

-C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without question the parents. Our kids, our responsibility. Teachers have to teach multiple children. We have to make sure ours understand that they are there to be taught and to learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who has the ultimate responsibility for the scores/grades/knowledge of US school students?

Both.

 

The parents should be making sure little Billy and little Susie are doing what the teacher assigns AND if the teacher is half stepping, complain long, loud, and continuously until the teacher toes the line or gets replaced. If the teacher doesn't teach, the kids can't learn.

 

I know it will earn me some enemies, but I wish folks would stand up to the teacher's unions and do away with tenure completely. It is more of a stumbling block for getting rid of incompetents than it is anything else. Make teacher's pay raises based on a merit based system (those that teach well get paid more). Come to think of it, only sign 1 year contracts with teachers and make keeping the job merit based, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both.

 

The parents should be making sure little Billy and little Susie are doing what the teacher assigns AND if the teacher is half stepping, complain long, loud, and continuously until the teacher toes the line or gets replaced. If the teacher doesn't teach, the kids can't learn.

 

I know it will earn me some enemies, but I wish folks would stand up to the teacher's unions and do away with tenure completely. It is more of a stumbling block for getting rid of incompetents than it is anything else. Make teacher's pay raises based on a merit based system (those that teach well get paid more). Come to think of it, only sign 1 year contracts with teachers and make keeping the job merit based, too.

 

Contrary to popular belief, in the districts I am aware of at least, tenure does not keep administrators from getting rid of teachers for cause. It does mean they have to go through the proper procedure if they so desire. It does add protection for teachers, particularly those who have reached the higher pay ranges due to time and education, both of which can make it very difficult to get a job elsewhere if they leave a district.

 

As for merit pay, I personally have no problem with it if it can be set up properly, and recognizes that teaching children is not an assembly line process. It seems every proposal I hear doesn't recognize the fact that children have not only different cognitive abilities, but different home lives, and face different challenges which have a direct impact on their ability to learn, which is, after all what is being measured for purposes of merit pay. Heck, some children have their situations change in particular years which makes it challenging for them to learn. Anyone who has been deployed can probably tell that it changed things for their children. I know it did for mine.

 

As for annual contracts, that sounds like just the thing if you want to take control away from teachers completely and give it to administrations, most of whom would likely be more than willing to deny a contract for a teacher high on the pay scale in order to bring in a young teacher who costs the district less money.

 

Not an enemy, but hopefully providing food for thought.

 

Edit: I should say I have no love for the NEA or even the state organizations, but I firmly believe that collective bargaining at the local level is important to maintain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.