posted
My first thought when I heard this on the radio this morning was "Well, they can dish it out, but they sure can't take it."
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm pissed off. I also have strong opinions about "No Child Left Behind", and the NEA voices some of them quite well. Does that make me a terrorist, too?
I think we're forgetting what terrorists do, and what they are. The comment was totally inappropriate, and if we cannot question education in a civil manner without being labelled terrorists, then we really have a problem.
If the NEA is really a terrorist organization, then I think I'll join them. I'd rather focus on civilizing our youth in ways that actually WORK than kowtow to a Secretary of Education that doesn't know what it's like to work in the classroom under "No Child Left Behind".
posted
A lot of things the NEA has done get on my nerves and I certainly don't agree with them on everything - but I'm firmly standing beside Jenny on this.
quote:I think we're forgetting what terrorists do, and what they are. The comment was totally inappropriate, and if we cannot question education in a civil manner without being labelled terrorists, then we really have a problem.
The "terrorist organization" was intended as a joke, obviously, and it's only funny because there is a grain of truth in it. Just a grain.
I think the NEA has done some good things, but I also think they've done irreparable harm to the public school system.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seems to me there are two issues I need to sort out for myself in something like this:
First, do I agree or disagree with the speaker in terms of the group being criticized? For me, in this case, it's probably "no," although I've disagreed with NEA at other times when it comes to obstructionist attitudes about including kids with disabilities in regular classrooms.
Second, how do I feel about the nature of the criticism? Obviously, this was disgustingly out of bounds. Before 9/11, we used to make casual jokes about terrorism in this country but those times are gone.
Would conservatives think a simple apology would be sufficient if a prominent Democrat referred to groups like the NRA as terrorists? Not that some Democrats aren't capable of that kind of rhetoric - I just think shrugging off "jokes" about terrorism is totally at odds with how seriously the administration says we should take terrorism.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jeniwren I just said what the guy said, I just think it's funny that he said it, I don't agree with him, I just think it's funny.
Posts: 1900 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
And BTW Sndrake, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Nater Nader whatever, and Tom Dashal have all called us (The NRA) Terrorists. And no resignations have been demanded.
Rhaegar
[ February 24, 2004, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: Rhaegar The Fool ]
Posts: 1900 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hm. And yet you've threatened to shoot somebody on this thread alone, whereas -- as far as I know -- the NEA hasn't made that claim. Either you're not particularly representative of the NRA, or there's maybe more to that comparison. j/k
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Care to give quotes? And I'd be really surprised to see any that were said after 9/11. Things changed then.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh not after 9/11 the polls swung the other way, and yes Dean got an A form the NRA until he started running for Pres, at which point, his entire view on guns changed, polls you see.
posted
Dean has referred to the NRA as a terrorist organization? Fascinating, when? He's a strong support of many rights wrt firearms, so I find the idea more than a bit suspicious. But you do have a quote to back that up, right?
While you're at it, lets get the quotes from Daschle and Ted Kennedy. Nader isn't and hasn't been an elected official, so its somewhat hard to have ever called for his resignation. Besides, he is emphatically not a Democrat.
I forget the name of the rule, but it goes "Any debate that is argued long enough on the net will result in one side or the other being compared to Nazi's."
That has changed. Now replace Nazi with Terrorist.
My second thought--thank God we are complaining about this.
1) At present, if you are considered a Terrorist, you can be labeled an "enemy combatant" or some such.
2) People labeled as such, regardless of citizenship, can be arrested and carted off to military holding cells without the benefit of legal counsel, a phone call to anyone, or the government even mentioning to anyone that they have taken you.
Now we have a representative of the government labeling political enemies as "Terrorists." What is next? Could we have the military throwing "terrorist" liberal lobbyists into nameless jail cells?
Not likely.
Not in this country.
Not today.
My fear is, tomorrow.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fugu, do you seriously think that Dean would post a quote on his web site which would make aproximately an organization which trains 750,000 gun owners in safety and accuracy a year angry at him now do you?
Posts: 1900 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
If you can't shew such quotes, you were lying, or at best hideously misinformed. Grow up and learn to argue with facts.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because his positions on how states should treat guns are well within their standards, while his positions on how the nation should treat guns are less within their standards. When he's holding a state office the former is what he is rated on, and when he's running for a national office the latter.
I'm still waiting for those quotes.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:And BTW Sndrake, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Nater Nader whatever, and Tom Dashal have all called us (The NRA) Terrorists.
I'd really like to take you seriously. Could you either give real quotes and sources to back this up or can we just assume this is something you decided to claim because it sounded good?
(edit to add: hate it when someone makes the same request and posts it while I'm typing. Gotta get faster...)
posted
I have a printed issue of the NRA Magazine in which the Ted Kennedy quote is, but the majority of the NRA information passed out is printed not digitized.
posted
Hm. I would be highly skeptical of a NRA pamphlet as an accurate source of quotes from prominent advocates of gun control, y'know. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Its quite simple, then. Just put a reasonably unique part of the quote, in quotations, into google, then search for it. Since pretty much anything controversial kennedy has said is posted online, it should turn up.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or do the next best thing. You know - what people did pre-internet stuff.
Offer a citation with the quote(choose your style - ADA, MLA, etc . . . ) and then interested folks can go to the library and look it up for themselves.
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
When the Secretary of Education said that, he did not MEAN that teachers are terroroists. I firmly believe that. I think the NEA took the ball and ran with it, to gain political "hand."
What he said was totally out of line, and one of those things he will probably kick himself for for the rest of his life, but I think he meant the antagonism ANY lobbyist group uses to get their way. He simply did not think it through, and made a very inappropriate remark in front of a roomfull of governors that will probably cost him his career.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think (hope, rather, because otherwise it speaks rather sadly as to the requirements we have) that the revelations of widespread corruption in Houston schools would have already sunk his career. Either he knew about them and was corrupt, or did not know about them and was incompetent (that something suspicious was happening at the schools was readily apparent in the more detailed statistics; if he did not follow up and find out what, he was not doing his job).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Paige should be leaving, just to save his boss a little face.
There are some parts of NCLB that I agree with wholeheartedly, like the requiring of all teachers to be adequately degreed instead of grandfathering into the job, and there are a few parts that have been altered to the point where they are ineffective for helping children. I often hear many teachers around here, where I live, speaking out against NCLB, but I've also noticed that while they speak out against test scores and quotas, nearly half of them have begun to take night classes at a local college. I didn't realize there were so many people teaching who are, in my opinion, not qualified for the job! Just that single thing has gotten the basic NCLB support from me. Now all that needs to be done is fixing the testing techniques and quotas.
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course, Bush has already voiced support for expanding the testing in its current, broken, form to a whole 'nother grade level.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is no excuse for calling the NEA terrorists. This man holds public office. He is a representative of the people. He should learn to put his brain in gear before he speaks.
I am a member of the NEA by default. I felt I needed the protection (insurance) and support of my local chapter. I do not agree with everything they do and I do not support them in many of their decisions (and definitely not in their choice of candidates, usually). The changing of NCLB is one agenda I support because the Federal government is once again sticking their nose into State business. They are requiring mandates without backing them with funding.
I work very hard at my job. I have been working for 10 years and I make $30,000/year. I usually have from 24 to 30 students in my classroom and I usually spend around $1000-$1500 of my own money on my students and for teaching supplies. I have taken classes every year. NOT because they were required, but because I wanted to make sure I was doing the best job I could.
I resent the Federal Government labeling me as unqualified until I have taken their tests.
I could go on and on, but I will spare you. I am a teacher, not a terrorist.
Posts: 277 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You could graduate from the best law school in the country and work for a law firm for years, but you're still not qualified to be a lawyer until you take the bar exam.
Posts: 1794 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doesn't ten years experience count for something? It's not the test, I can and will take it. It's the fact that I am being labeled as "unqualified" to teach.
Posts: 277 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, speaking of terrorists, there was a local teacher's strike recently. I heard a rumor the al Qaida was going to be there. I just had to see for myself. It turned out I'd heard wrong. It was just some guy named Al Cady. He turned out to be a really neat gut, actually.
Posts: 1794 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ha! Funny . . . By the way, I want to get paid as much as a lawyer, too, after I take "the test".
Posts: 277 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, I started typing that in before your last question was posted. I don't want you to think I was trying to change the subjet or ignore your question or anything.
Posts: 1794 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
#1 Dan_raven, I still refer to many of my teachers as Nazi’s, and I’ve yet to call one a terrorist.
#2 No child left behind, well for lack of a better word, blows. It may be wonderful for the small minority of students who would other wise fall between the cracks, but for students like me, it only slows us down.
#3 I also strongly object to Standardized testing, it may tell the government something, but I have always scored "below normal" and I have a 3.8 GPA. Does that say anything about how accurate their tests are.
JT Stryker, student in good standing in almost all respects (except for my lack of respect for authority)
[ April 10, 2004, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: J T Stryker ]
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"It may be wonderful for the small minority of students who would other wise fall between the cracks,"
They are not really a minority, and NCLB does not really help them. So far, all I have seen is special programs being taken away in favor of an "inclusion" system which is designed to have more kids taught be less people.(not tomention art, gym, music, and after school sports) Start to watch in your community, to see how many programs for emotionally disturbed children and adolescents are all of a sudden housed in the school. Some students need, and benefit from, separation from the group.
I heard a joke somewhere: "If all the children are left behind, then none of them are, right?"
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:"I didn't realize there were so many people teaching who are, in my opinion, not qualified for the job!"
So, in your opinion, what qualifies a teacher for the job?
Holding at least a bachelors in the field they are teaching, not just some ambiguous lib art degree. For elementary level, a wider berth can be allowed, but from 6th grade up the demand for actual qualification should not be shirked or grandfathered in just because you know someone who knows someone. There are many teachers, both today and when I was in school, who have their jobs because of such things. I don't approve of that. Teachers are the ones we place our faith in to impart knowledge to our kids, and I'll not have someone doing it who couldn't even follow through scholastically themselves.
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doesn't ten years experience count for something? It's not the test, I can and will take it. It's the fact that I am being labeled as "unqualified" to teach.
If you don't hold a degree in what you teach, why should I trust you with my child's education, which would be far more important to me than your pride? Were I to want to learn to fix cars, I would ask a certified mechanic to teach me. Were I to want to learn how to fly, I would seek a trained and licensed pilot. If I want my child to learn literature and mathematics and history and biology, I want it taught by people who have verifiable proof of having studied it and a certified degree of expertise. You may not like that, but ask yourself if you'd fly in an airplane flown by some guy who says, "it's okay, I learned how to fly from my gardener!"
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, fugu, I also want teachers to be paid more, but that's not going to happen until there is a justifiable reason, like having qualified educators.
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're not going to get many people to double major in education (english, education, they both start with e, what's the difference ) and a subject of interest in order to become educators if the pay sucks. Plain and simple.
At least if you raise the pay and scale up the hiring requirements (following a well advertised progression) over time you have a snowball's chance in heck of it working, but just raising the education requirement without giving a suitable increase in pay is going to result in one very easy to predict outcome: teacher shortage. Its basic economics (the only big reasons there are some really qualified teachers today are externalities anyways, except in certain very high risk schools that have raised the pay exceptionally already, and even that's due to the violence externality, you'd have to raise the pay a lot at the vast majority of schools before you started hitting the people who would do it for the money).
Unfortunately, teaching is not so easily learned in a college classroom. it is learned in the school classroom. Period.
I agree that people should know their stuff. Granted. However, there is alot more that goes on in a school day than teaching math and literature. Before that can happen, the kids need to sit in their seats, know the rules, feel they are being respected, not be bullied by other kids. The middle school Queen Bee, the girl who rules the grade with her nasty story-telling and threats, needs to be kept in line.
It would be easy to make that a requirement for teaching. In fact, it is a requirement. And young, "qualified" teachers are being eaten alive.
There needs to be a middle ground. Respect for time served. Those ten years sure DO mean something! But I think a teacher should continue to learn. There are very few people I work with who don't want to.
A new teacher(whether young or not) should have to work with a master teacher for a period of time.
All teachers should work with all ages of kids before they teach, to see how they develop. (I have learned more about teaching from my own two kids than from any book or professor)
In short, teachers should know their stuff, but part of that stuff can't be taught. It must be experienced.
posted
I'm not willing to accept being a skilled babysitter as trumping qualifications for teaching the actual material. They can be wonderful at child outreach, as far as I care, but if they don't know the subject they are teaching, then I don't want my child being taught by them, because they are unqualified teachers, and highly qualified babysitters. I don't want our schools to be daycare, I want them to be learning institutions. Besides, wasn't spending time as a student teacher a requirement for becoming a certified teacher, on top of having a degree? If not, it sure should be. You can get that experience in a curriculum, because I know at least two teachers (I only know two personally) who were required to do student teaching before ever being hired, and substitute teaching is recommended for those who want to enter the education field. Perhaps substituting should also be made a requirement. Don't preach to me how someone can't get that experience without "being there," because frankly, it isn't that difficult to be there. The difficult part is being certifiably qualified.
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Either you're not particularly representative of the NRA, or there's maybe more to that comparison. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
j/k
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
