posted
If I were going to make this thread with a title like "Republicans continue to hate public education" I'd make it principally about a study as to what right-wing state governments do with their education systems.
In general, it's not very good, but you also have to account for differences in state GDP per capita, rurality, etc.
THAT SAID what PA republicans are doing to the public education system there is both horrifically toxic and terrible as well as somewhat emblematic of neglect that the right TENDS to foist on education systems. Not that it's all that's wrong with american education (there's so much wrong there that it's not even remotely a joking matter) but it's definitely a serious problem and one conservatives need to get called out for.
quote: The schools may open without counselors, administrative staff, noon aids, nurses, librarians or even pens and paper, but hey, kids will have a place to go and sit.
sounds about right
quote:Things have gotten so bad that at least one school has asked parents to chip in $613 per student just so they can open with adequate services
yup, yup, yes indeed, this sounds real familiar
quote:And in a diabolical example of circular logic, the state argues that the red ink it imposed, and shoddy management it oversees, are proof that the district can’t manage its finances or its mission and therefore shouldn’t get more money.
AH YES. The NCLB-standard Funding to Fail debacle. Prove that a social system doesn't work by ensuring it doesn't work.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But Sam! Its been proven that public education doesn't work! Because the schools we took money away from with NCLB don't meet our metrics, ergo we need to take even MORE money away, put into charter schools instead and kill public education because it doesn't work right?
Also funding public education means more taxes, for services to the rotten plebs who don't deserve it because they made ~bad choices~, the ones who work hard will succeed anyways, so public education is SOCIALIST!
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i still do not at all make the bridge between what the article is pointing out vs. the claim that is made in the thread title
"republicans hate public education" is best fully explained as "the organizational aims of republicans, as usually dictated by the monied interest and groups that direct their policies in very well established patterns, often involve an institutional and calculated purposeful teardown of the current educational model, which has often been to the detriment of schools primarily managed by conservative state governments, and has resulted in a consistent pattern of red states having the most obviously imperiled and dysfunctional schools even when the issue of socioeconomic disparity is more than accounted for, and certain concerning trends inflicted on the public schooling system such as attempts to use charter schools as a hedge for funneling tax money to openly religious institution are primarily conservative operations and legacies and okay so I suppose the weakness of this is there is no way it will fit in a thread title shut up"
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Public education is one of those things that I think both parties handle improperly. Both parties want good education for our young, they just don't go about it the right way.
It seems to me that when talking about public education, it always comes back to unions. Democrats are beholden to them, Republicans hate them. Instead of coming to common sense conclusions that would benefit kids, they just argue about teacher benefits, pay, and funding.
Here in Las Vegas there are numerous things I hate about our school district. Besides being one of the biggest in the nation, they waste money left and right. They have a $120,000 chandelier in their administration office. They put up fully grown palm trees that cost $6,000 each in front of the high schools. (Dozens of them!) They then complain they do not have enough money for school books, etc. There is a ton of waste, but the administration just doesn't care. I have some hope that things may change, as our new superintendant is an AMAZING person that has been teaching here for over 25 years. He and my grandmother taught at the same school for about 10 years, and he was my sister's fourth grade teacher.
I actually like charter schools. They tend to be more frugal with their funding and the children really do get a good education. My wife works for a charter school management company here in Las Vegas, and I asked her if they had or planned on opening any charter schools in poor neighborhoods. She said that they currently have two here in Las Vegas, but they struggle to fill them. While the schools in wealthier neighborhoods have waiting lists of over 1,000 kids, they can't fill the two in poor neighborhoods. The charter schools are free and they hold enrollment fairs and participate in community events to help, but they struggle with filling the seats.
The charter schools in these neighborhoods generally have more technology and better facilities than the other schools in these locations. Clark County is notorius for giving less money to the schools in poor areas while pumping cash into those with wealthier residents. I don't know why the parents in these neighborhoods wouldn't enroll their children in one of the charters, but it may be due to misinformation or lack of understanding.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Public education is one of those things that I think both parties handle improperly. Both parties want good education for our young, they just don't go about it the right way.
Say both a few more times, and we will be convinced that there's an equivalence here between democratic misguidedness about standards based education, and Republican terrorizing of the working class and relentless, shameless hectoring of teachers and unions, and an absolute refusal to take any real responsibility for the millions of youths in our country who are underadvantaged by a lack of education- while they run repeatedly at public funds for voucher programs.
In that sense they are "both" to blame. Only in the sense that they are both political parties, and they have both not managed to save public schooling. The fact that one of them has openly been attacking its existence for 3 decades is not material to that point. Certainly, it seems, for your purposes.
quote: I actually like charter schools. They tend to be more frugal with their funding and the children really do get a good education.
Incidentally there data doesn't bear out this impression. Charter schools in rich areas do well- about equally as well as public ones do in rich areas.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have zero experience with charter schools so I can't really comment on them. I did go to a private school for three years (4th, 5th and 6th grades) and there is NO comparison between it and any public school I attended. Despite having almost no homework, I learned more in those three years than the rest of my time in public school combined.
Let's take math for an example. I was learning calculus and trig in private school. My first day back in public I was shocked to be taught LONG DIVISION! Seriously, long division? This is as far as public school can get their kids in 7 years? And what's worse, we worked on this almost all year. It wasn't until the end of the year that we started working on fractions. And my teachers, counselors and parents wondered why I slept through my classes.
Even high school was just rehashing all the same crap I already knew despite my high school being rated as the best public one in the state. Finally my junior year I got into an advanced geometry class and learned a few things. Still, I learned more math in a year of vo-tech machine shop than I did from math classes.
Most of my other subjects were the same. The only exceptions being one brilliant year of History I will never forget and an aging, cranky Architecture teacher that seemed to truly know everything about everything.
If that's the best public education can do, something needs to change drastically. I don't mean just tweaks to policy or a little extra funding, I'm talking a complete tear down and rebuilding of the whole system. Are the Republican ideas the right way to go? Probably not but seriously, they can't do too much damage as the system is already crap.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
We've been sending our kids to a charter school for the last 4 years. Our oldest daughter was in 2nd grade at the local elementary and was losing interest in education. She had always been so bright and interested in learning things, but her class went so slow that she was learning nothing most days, and it was starting to show in her attitude toward school in general.
We put her in the lottery for the charter school at the end of that year, and lo and behold, her name was drawn. The charter school has a bit more of a Montessori philosophy in which it lets the kids go at their own pace, with some flexibility to allow them to go ahead into material that challenges them, even if it's above their grade level. It didn't take long in 3rd grade for our daughter to bounce right back and begin to love school again. Our boys have similarly benefited from the ability to go at their own pace.
Other considerations aside, it's nice to have a school with a specific philosophy about education as an alternative to the mainstream system in the elementary schools. We were glad for the choice (and the bit of luck that got our daughter in). We didn't particularly want to homeschool, but that's where we were headed.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I learned algebra in 8th grade (public school). I learned long division in 4th grade.
In the private high school I went to, you couldn't learn calculus until 12th grade anyway.
I didn't go to particularly distinguished public schools, and my private school was a respectable prep school.
So no, Wingracer, your experience is not the best public school can do. Heck, there was a college friend of mine that went to one of the best public school systems in the country, and he was probably more prepped for college than I.
Of course, I grew up in a state that generally is very education-focused (MA). We also have one of the strongest teachers unions in the country.
It turns out that education outcomes, at an aggregate level, track socioeconomic indicators pretty well. Now one party wants to blame the people low on the socioeconomic ladder for their education problems, while another wants to blame people high on the ladder.
I believe the latter belief can effect actual change, while the former is trying to squeeze blood from a stone.
I'm all for some amount of choice, but I think it is bad for our modern society to allow the sort of voucher legislation some states have implemented.
Posts: 7021 | Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer: I have zero experience with charter schools so I can't really comment on them. I did go to a private school for three years (4th, 5th and 6th grades) and there is NO comparison between it and any public school I attended. Despite having almost no homework, I learned more in those three years than the rest of my time in public school combined.
Yes. When you spend money on education, you get (often) a good education. The free market is good at this kind of thing.
Rich people can afford a good education. Look at me- I grew up in a rich family and I got a great education. A private one after the 8th grade (well, university was public). It's amazing how money can buy you quality teachers, equipment, sporting facilities, performing arts programs, gyms, and excellent teaching materials. We should ALL go to private schools that we pay for with our own money. That would be great- if we all had the money for that (12,000 a year for high school when I was going- way more now).
Where the Republicans frankly step out of the Earth's atmosphere is when they insist a voucher program wouldn't create a bunch of unaccountable private institutions that will swallow up the pool of available funds and deliver a minimum viable product. That's exactly what they'll do. It's not a free market solution if the funds for the poorest participants are fixed. Just isn't.
What the Republicans hate most is the middle class giving their money to taxes to pay the way for the poor. If you have to pay for their education (because of some silly constitutional article), you might as well get your taste on the come back- funnel tax money out of the public system and into the hands of the best connected businessmen. God forbid that money should end up in the hands of teachers and other middle class reprobates, or worse yet, be *wasted* on *non-essentials*, like sex education.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem I had with public school wasn't funding, facilities, number of teachers or anything like that. In fact, the public schools I went to had more of all that than the private school. I just felt it was a bad system. Everyone is forced to follow the same path at the same speed in the same courses. The things I liked about private school were things that don't require more money, just a different philosophy. If a party comes out wanting to do that, I will support them regardless of which one it is. Instead we get one party that just wants to throw more money into an already sinking ship and another that wants to sink all the ships and be done with them.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Where the Republicans frankly step out of the Earth's atmosphere is when they insist a voucher program wouldn't create a bunch of unaccountable private institutions that will swallow up the pool of available funds and deliver a minimum viable product. That's exactly what they'll do. It's not a free market solution if the funds for the poorest participants are fixed. Just isn't.
Correct. The most important element to fixing our ridiculously screwed educational system is to ensure that the default system is in operating condition. The voucher system has all the hallmarks of legislators not serving to make a system function, but being bribed to collapse an institution and open a market.
To super-simplify this discussion: it is absolutely reasonable that we do not trust the party that is jumping over itself to kick children out of Head Start and demolish pre-k programs for when it comes to "reform" of our educational systems in sum.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: The most important element to fixing our ridiculously screwed educational system is to ensure that the default system is in operating condition
I'm dying for someone to explain how a system that was designed during the early days of the industrial revolution, that treats children as if they were just running down a manufacturing line, is ever, ever, ever going to be useful in the modern world.
The modern public education system needs to be broken down and completely rebuilt from scratch. What we have now in every state (including those wonderful paragons of society like California and New York) is very little more than government sponsored day care. We can spend all the money we want to on the public school system, but until it is redesigned to work towards the needs of the modern world and how people actually learn, it's still going to be a gigantic pile of crap.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm dying for someone to explain how a system that was designed during the early days of the industrial revolution, that treats children as if they were just running down a manufacturing line, is ever, ever, ever going to be useful in the modern world.
reform and/or modeling after working systems, both domestic and foreign
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm dying for someone to explain how a system that was designed during the early days of the industrial revolution, that treats children as if they were just running down a manufacturing line, is ever, ever, ever going to be useful in the modern world.
reform and/or modeling after working systems, both domestic and foreign
The shockingly uncreative response of "Hey, lets just do whatever they're doing" rather than approaching the problem with just a little bit of ingenuity and thought, then? I guess when the people responsible for reforming the public education system (that does more to destroy creativity and original thought than improve it) are products of that system, that's the best we can hope for.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm dying for someone to explain how a system that was designed during the early days of the industrial revolution, that treats children as if they were just running down a manufacturing line, is ever, ever, ever going to be useful in the modern world.
reform and/or modeling after working systems, both domestic and foreign
The shockingly uncreative response of "Hey, lets just do whatever they're doing" rather than approaching the problem with just a little bit of ingenuity and thought, then? I guess when the people responsible for reforming the public education system (that does more to destroy creativity and original thought than improve it) are products of that system, that's the best we can hope for.
So we should totally ignore methods used by schools with excellent track records simply because it's unoriginal?
I agree that the system needs a complete overhaul and some new ideas but to not learn from the past's failures and successes would be foolish.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer: I have zero experience with charter schools so I can't really comment on them. I did go to a private school for three years (4th, 5th and 6th grades) and there is NO comparison between it and any public school I attended. Despite having almost no homework, I learned more in those three years than the rest of my time in public school combined.
Yes. When you spend money on education, you get (often) a good education. The free market is good at this kind of thing.
Where the Republicans frankly step out of the Earth's atmosphere is when they insist a voucher program wouldn't create a bunch of unaccountable private institutions that will swallow up the pool of available funds and deliver a minimum viable product. That's exactly what they'll do. It's not a free market solution if the funds for the poorest participants are fixed. Just isn't.
Would you agree that where Democrats step out of the Earth's atmosphere is thinking that a standardized, "One size fits all" approach learning curriculum does nothing but help the rich kids get a better education while leaving the poor kids behind?
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: So we should totally ignore methods used by schools with excellent track records simply because it's unoriginal?
No. We should ignore them because they are most likely reacting to failings in the existing system, which has deep fundamental flaws that limit its capacity for success. Further, any attempt to emulate the presumed methods of success attained by those schools are not guaranteed to work when implemented at larger scales. It's far better to examine the ways humans obtain and retain knowledge and rebuild the system with a focus on maximizing students' potential for self learning.
quote: Great, Boris. What would such a system look like and how would it be funded?
Well, let's see...How about we stop saying that the most important factor in a child's advancement through school is their age? Switch that to knowledge and you give significant powers of success to students. Suddenly their advancement is completely under their own control and the social dynamic changes from one of seniority to one of knowledge (possibly).
Or stop exclusively using "one answer only" problems. In the real world, there are usually many different solutions to a problem and numerous ways to arrive at the same solution. Help students figure things out in a way that works for *them* and you'll see much greater levels of learning than when you just teach one way to solve a problem and expect students to use only that.
Stop focusing on rote memorization and start teaching kids how to get the information they need to solve problems. Memorizing facts and numbers used to be important, but it's less so now.
Teach people to teach themselves. Too many people graduate high school and college and decide that they no longer have to learn anything else. Help people realize that learning should be a lifetime goal.
I could go on for a while about ways that the current system fails to produce much beyond mediocrity. As for how it's funded...We could save a whole hell of a lot of money by encouraging families with one or more adults that do not leave the home for work to utilize online learning solutions. A single teacher can teach a lot more students when they don't have to act as a babysitter as well.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Boris: The shockingly uncreative response of "Hey, lets just do whatever they're doing" rather than approaching the problem with just a little bit of ingenuity and thought, then?
That sure is a shockingly uncreative response you're speaking of, here, but fortunately nobody in this thread has responded with that. While your post would suffice in the event that this actually came up, how would you reply to what I actually wrote?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sam, how does "reform and/or modeling after working systems, both domestic and foreign" not equate to "Do whatever someone else is doing that seems to be working", exactly? Or were you trying to say something else but didn't?
After all, modeling and reforming based on what other nations or systems are doing is...well, it's basically just doing what someone else is doing, now isn't it?
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
For starters, Boris, there is a difference between modeling changes based off of the successes of other educational systems and copying whatever they are doing — i.e., 'let's just do whatever they're doing.' Secondly, there's an and/or operator in that sentence which denotes that there are plenty of avenues of potential reform not necessarily related to said modeling.
quote:After all, modeling and reforming based on what other nations or systems are doing is...well, it's basically just doing what someone else is doing, now isn't it?
quote: modeling changes based off of the successes of other educational systems
says something completely different than this:
quote: reform and/or modeling after working systems, both domestic and foreign
Note how the first statement is much more specific, while the second is broad and vague. I guess the public school system didn't teach you much about communicating successfully. Basically, what you meant to say is not what you said.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
golly boris, "reform and/or modeling after working systems, both domestic and foreign" doesn't mean "Hey, lets just do whatever they're doing" and you strawmanned a bit when you said that's what it means. The end.
So I could also have written "there is a difference between modeling after working systems and copying whatever they were doing" and the point remains completely unchanged. So I said what I said and you strawmanned, congratulations.
I don't know how many posts this needs.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess the public school system didn't teach you much about communicating successfully.
Also just as a reminder so you don't get started down your traditional schtick, Boris: you have a tendency to be a condescending and pointlessly jerky poster — like you're being here, straight out of the gate, opening shots and all — but then like clockwork complain about other people's attitudes towards you and play vigorous prosecution cards. Don't do that. Or, I guess, to be even better about it, learn not to be a condescending jerk by default in the first place.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: you have a tendency to be a condescending and pointlessly jerky poster — like you're being here, straight out of the gate, opening shots and all...
...Or, I guess, to be even better about it, learn not to be a condescending jerk by default in the first place.
This is an exact description of yourself. It's amazing you take time to criticize the behavior of others but don't criticize your own.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
My kids are going to a Title 1 school and I think that school is doing pretty well. They still have classes that are a bit too large IMO (2nd grade has 24 students per class) but they are using some pretty strong learning models and the curriculum includes a lot of innovative stuff.
Maybe it could be better but it's not state-funded daycare. They take their jobs seriously and work hard at them, and do a fantastic job at engaging and working with a diverse bunch of kids.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: you have a tendency to be a condescending and pointlessly jerky poster — like you're being here, straight out of the gate, opening shots and all...
...Or, I guess, to be even better about it, learn not to be a condescending jerk by default in the first place.
This is an exact description of yourself. It's amazing you take time to criticize the behavior of others but don't criticize your own.
Why is it exactly that you really blatantly run away from me when I'm calling you out on your own (similarly) clockwork tendencies, but always return to take potshots at me in another thread, as though you've ever really kept something remotely resembling an upper hand over me?
One of us, either Boris or me, is the first to engage the other with condescending and belittling language. Can you identify which one it is? Do you understand why that is relevant? If you don't, I don't think Boris will benefit very much by your attempt to calvary in and help with an overwordy "NO U"
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: you have a tendency to be a condescending and pointlessly jerky poster — like you're being here, straight out of the gate, opening shots and all...
...Or, I guess, to be even better about it, learn not to be a condescending jerk by default in the first place.
This is an exact description of yourself. It's amazing you take time to criticize the behavior of others but don't criticize your own.
Why is it exactly that you really blatantly run away from me when I'm calling you out on your own (similarly) clockwork tendencies, but always return to take potshots at me in another thread, as though you've ever really kept something remotely resembling an upper hand over me?
One of us, either Boris or me, is the first to engage the other with condescending and belittling language. Can you identify which one it is? Do you understand why that is relevant? If you don't, I don't think Boris will benefit very much by your attempt to calvary in and help with an overwordy "NO U"
It wasn't my intention to hurt your feelings but you really need to be made aware of the negative impact of your behavior and the way others perceive your "style" of posting. You go into crusader mode every time someone with even a slightly conservative ideology posts in a thread. You can pretend you're all nice and sincere until the other person is condescending or snarky but we have your entire posting history to prove otherwise. Another example of your characteristic approach (this is illustrated by your last response) is that you become more immature and petty when someone comments on your unsavory posting habits.
I (and likely others on this board) lose interest in discussions with you due to your antagonistic and disparaging remarks, not because your position is impervious to counter-arguments. You conflate the effect of what you say with how you say it. That's a classic example of poor communication skills.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: You can pretend you're all nice and sincere until the other person is condescending or snarky
I don't have to pretend. Whether or not you are ably aware enough of my actual M.O., I don't open up with hostilities against a person. Hell, I even played it straight with Boris after his last extended leave.
I'm going to ask you the questions again, and see if you run from them. Take a good look at this thread and then answer: one of us, either Boris or me, is the first to engage the other with condescending and belittling language. Can you identify which one it is? Do you understand why that is relevant?
quote:I (and likely others on this board) lose interest in discussions with you due to your antagonistic and disparaging remarks, not because your position is impervious to counter-arguments.
You actually lose interest in discussions with me the minute I straightforwardly ask you a question which exposes something in your line of attack that you don't think you can wriggle out of. No jokes, you now have a well-established pattern of getting caught with a question, vanishing at that exact moment, and then the next you interact with me is to start the entire song and dance over again by taking a potshot at me. It's why I call it out for being such obvious simpering.
I'm sure plenty of people like you lose interest in discussions with me. That's fine. I'm obviously antagonistic to you (and I have good reason to be!). Keep telling me as frequently as you can manage how you have lost interest in discussing with me. Meanwhile, this thread is trying to be about education.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're antagonistic to other members as well as entire groups of people. And your "questions" typically coincide with you becoming unbearably boorish and condescending. I guess we all have well-established patterns.
You made a comment about Boris' general tendencies yet your question is specific to this thread. I'll still answer it anyway. You both engage each other in the same calloused manner. Knowing your past interactions that's not a surprise. Considering the stupidly obtuse thread title in this case, though, I don't fault Boris too much for his somewhat negative tone. The thread title (in this instance, but not exclusively) is not your fault but if you didn't fight snark and condescension with even worse snark and condescension you could uplift the quality of conversation instead of further degrading it. Who began what and when is relevant to you because you want to feel justified. A question for you: Do you think comments peppered with sarcasm, snark, and gross exaggeration advance or hinder discussion at Hatrack?
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer: I have zero experience with charter schools so I can't really comment on them. I did go to a private school for three years (4th, 5th and 6th grades) and there is NO comparison between it and any public school I attended. Despite having almost no homework, I learned more in those three years than the rest of my time in public school combined.
Yes. When you spend money on education, you get (often) a good education. The free market is good at this kind of thing.
Where the Republicans frankly step out of the Earth's atmosphere is when they insist a voucher program wouldn't create a bunch of unaccountable private institutions that will swallow up the pool of available funds and deliver a minimum viable product. That's exactly what they'll do. It's not a free market solution if the funds for the poorest participants are fixed. Just isn't.
Would you agree that where Democrats step out of the Earth's atmosphere is thinking that a standardized, "One size fits all" approach learning curriculum does nothing but help the rich kids get a better education while leaving the poor kids behind?
Yes.
However, I would like to take this opportunity to note that while I generally agree with the above statement, I am fully aware of your lame attempt to score points in your endless "both sides" nonsense non-argument against who knows what. Rationality I suppose. The Republicans are *far* *far* worse in this regard, including pertaining to the above view of education as a national political issue.
STEM and expansion of standardized testing is not only seriously flawed, it is seriously wrong-headed. That does not, in any way, establish an equivalence between the overall badness of Republican and Democratic aims. There is no comparison. The former are attempting to destroy the system. The latter are attempting, with breathtaking lack of alacrity, to make it work better. My admitting that they are both bad is not my admitting that they are both equally bad. On the contrary, were the Democrats not hobbled to a national establishment that was forced to face down the barbarically stupid Republican minority in order to get anything done, then Democrats would be free to split up into factions which argue about *how* to fix the problem, and not *whether* to fix it.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Boris: Or stop exclusively using "one answer only" problems. In the real world, there are usually many different solutions to a problem and numerous ways to arrive at the same solution. Help students figure things out in a way that works for *them* and you'll see much greater levels of learning than when you just teach one way to solve a problem and expect students to use only that.
Do you read much about what teachers are actually saying they want to do in the public education system? Because this kind of thing is pretty high on the list. No help from anyone in Washington, granted, but the problem is not the teachers or the methodologies, it's the demand for outcomes that, surprise surprise, don't encompass testing for or developing metrics for this kind of learning. I realize you didn't imply fault with teachers- but I wanted to point out where it lies. This pattern has been stepped up to an extraordinary degree since the early 2000s, and is not slowing down now.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You didn't really answer the question, but you point out you can't fault Boris's tone to Sam because Elison R. Salazar who is not Sam made a thread title that Sam disagreed with openly.
posted
Actually, capax, Samprimary didn't ask if they both behaved that way but rather who did first, here.
Second, I don't know which 'we' you're referring to. Even when conservative-leaning active posters were much more abundant, you were on the far right of *that* and considerably more combative and hostile in tone than most people your 'side'.
Put another way, while there's certainly a case to be made for your 'Samprimary is a jerk' campaign, you're remarkably ill-suited to be its spokesman.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Actually, capax, Samprimary didn't ask if they both behaved that way but rather who did first, here.
Samprimary was the first to post in the thread. His early comments weren't direct interactions with Boris, but this is a public forum, of which Boris is a part. When it comes to indirect hostility and condescension, the offender don't get to chose which members internalize and respond to the remarks.
Put another way, Samprimary is upset because he was the direct recipient of what he, in earlier posts, was putting out indirectly. I merely highlighted his unabashed hypocrisy. That you think I'm ill-suited to do so isn't my concern right now.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: ...there's certainly a case to be made for your 'Samprimary is a jerk' campaign...
If you (or anyone else) really believe this then why don't you say more? Even some variation of "What you said is right but the way you said it is wrong" could do wonders to increase the quality of discussion on this forum.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is a sign of how bad you are at hearing things you don't want to hear. I've said almost *exactly* what I did hear to Samprimary on multiple occasions. If you don't believe me, ask him yourself or do some digging but in either event, capax, for this and other reasons you're a very poor mascot for 'what we should do to raise the bar around here'.
It's not about a stern, moral wisdom disapproving of rudeness. You just don't like the guy or many of his views-the habit of ironic condescension you so object to is simply an easier target.
As for the rest, you moved the goalposts. Samprimary asked a direct question which you've evaded twice now, while insisting he's being disrespectful. Suppose for the sake of argument you're right about how awfully offensive his earlier posts were-in any event they weren't directed specifically to Boris. In that pairing, the line of condescending thinly veiled insults was crossed first by Boris-with outright overt insults, in fact. Doing that while demanding victim hood status is something of a habit for him, and that remains true whether Samp chaps your ass or not.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, note that Boris loudly and even repeatedly I think declared he was through with this place. So no, he wasn't really a member until he reappeared, if we were to take him at his word.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Suppose for the sake of argument you're right about how awfully offensive his earlier posts were-in any event they weren't directed specifically to Boris. In that pairing, the line of condescending thinly veiled insults was crossed first by Boris-with outright overt insults, in fact.
Show me these "outright overt insults" from Boris to Samprimary in this thread.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dude, his second post in the thread and his first to Samprimary. Furthermore his first post, too, was general and rife with scorn and antagonism.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Further, the overall tone of the thread you were so quick to criticize Samprimary for? His first words in the thread were to challenge its title and explain why the reality was, in his opinion, much more nuanced and less awful than the title.
You picked a particularly bad discussion to attempt to prove what a jerk Samprimary, capax. It's plain to all that you believe that but if you want to use a specific discussion, be prepared to be challenged on it. For example: you've still not answered his question.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I answered the question. You can continue to insist that I didn't but it makes you look totally unreasonable.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, you didn't. I just reread your posts-your 'answer' was to reject the question, sort of, but also to halfway admit the answer was 'Boris' but it didn't matter because of how mean Samprimary has been in the past and at the beginning of this thread (though you never showed where). Here's how it's plain you didn't answer the question: because it was one of two answers.
Anyway, your latest post accusing me of the appearance of unreasonability while ignoring multiple other questions and points is...well, quite in keeping with your style.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: I answered the question.
Here's the worst part of this -- I think you are being sincere when you say this. Even though you didn't answer the question, you really think you did and people who recognize the truth and can even explain this with patience are written off as "totally unreasonable".
quote:Show me these "outright overt insults" from Boris to Samprimary in this thread.
And if you still need to be shown this, then you are the worst candidate for lecturing anyone on selective blindness here.
Anyway, this is fun, continue.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just for the sake of clarity or whatever, I am going to put the question right next to the "answer"
quote:one of us, either Boris or me, is the first to engage the other with condescending and belittling language. Can you identify which one it is? Do you understand why that is relevant?
quote:You both engage each other in the same calloused manner. Knowing your past interactions that's not a surprise. Considering the stupidly obtuse thread title in this case, though, I don't fault Boris too much for his somewhat negative tone. The thread title (in this instance, but not exclusively) is not your fault but if you didn't fight snark and condescension with even worse snark and condescension you could uplift the quality of conversation instead of further degrading it. Who began what and when is relevant to you because you want to feel justified.
Ok so you're not going to answer the question but you'll say that you'll excuse boris's behavior because after all that was a doozie of a thread title or whatever.
I also like how you put the onus on me to not do what boris was doing. You won't fault boris for being a jerk (he gets a pass you see), but if I'm gonna call it out for what it is suddenly I am the one who deserves your jump-out-of-the-woodwork SHAME, SHAME ON YOU.
Yeah call me when you answer the question. It's real simple, and it's still there.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I remember of public school in the UK, it wasn't that bad. Apart from the class being expected to all pray to the Christian god together.
I was only there through the 3rd grade, but at least for math each student could go at their own pace. There would be separate workbooks, going up in complexity, and the students would work through each one at their own pace. When it was "maths time," the students working on each book would group up together, ranging from groups a couple years ahead to a couple years behind. Then, the teacher would spend her time going from group to group, teaching and helping as needed.
It seemed a fine system to me.
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Ok so you're not going to answer the question...
I see the cause of your confusion. You must have missed this part of the exchange where I answer the question:
quote:Samprimary was the first to post in the thread. His early comments weren't direct interactions with Boris, but this is a public forum, of which Boris is a part. When it comes to indirect hostility and condescension, the offender don't get to chose which members internalize and respond to the remarks.
Again, my first statement was that your general behavior is exactly as you described Boris'. You insist on focusing on this thread, hence your question. I obliged because the case can be made solely on your interactions in this thread. You and Rakeesh become indignant when you think I haven't answered a question yet my question (in this thread and others) go unanswered. Calm down. My description of your behavior is vindicated with every comment you make...
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's not an answer to the question he asked, and by the way-show which remarks prior to Boris's arrival match your characterization. And while you're at it, please address the problem of your characterization matching his actual first post in the thread-challenging the dubious thread title that you claim gave Boris license to lay on with the insults.
And for (self) pity's sake, stop talking as though there's some silent majority just waiting on your word to decide what to think. Multiple times now you've spoken as though you had some popular support, as though it were a given, when...where is it? Why does this silent but major support mean you get to avoid, repeatedly, multiple direct challenges?
Why does your dislike of an individual *still* make you such a hack?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
