Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    2:55 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Zero Tolerance = Zero common sense - It's time to homeschool Back to Topics
HotRod10

Champion Author
Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Apr 8, 2014 10:36:19 AM

The government schools have gone crazy. If it's not a kid getting strip-searched and "evaluated" for 5 hours for twirling a pencil, it's 2nd grade math problems an engineer can't figure out.

At least once a week, I see something that makes me say "Thank God my kids are homeschooled".

Have you considered homeschooling? If so, why haven't done it?

Won't even consider it? Why not?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2014 11:35:09 AM

From "PISA days are here again" (Part 2):

"Perhaps the most revealing PISA results are those from Finland, which has dropped from its previous top-ranked perch to 5th in science, 6th in reading, and 12th in math. As Education Week’s Rick Hess has noted,16 it’s silly to think that Finland’s schools “fell apart between 2009 and 2012” — just as silly as it was to think that “Finland had cracked the code of educational excellence.” As this post-mortem of Finland’s fall from PISA grace17 illustrates, the actual picture is more complicated. The variety of explanations offered — other countries got better, Finland got complacent, they were never really that good to begin with, Finnish students “have forgotten how to work” — demonstrates how PISA and other standardized tests are really more Rohrschach than rigorous assessment."

[Edited by: HotRod10 at 10/30/2014 11:36:22 AM EST]
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2014 11:00:02 AM

"Which has nothing to do with standards and everything to do with curriculum"

Again, you try to separate that which is inextricably linked. Standards determine curriculum.

"You again make my point."

You again misread what I wrote. I said "rigorous", not "uniform", by which I mean an approach that starts with the basics and moves to more complex after the basics are mastered. Common Core math is one approach out of many, and not a particularly rigorous one, since it doesn't require students to master the basics by getting the right answers, but rather supposedly focuses on the "concepts" of how math works. In reality it's a conglomeration of mathematical theories and "shortcuts" that only serve to confuse students, teachers, and parents alike.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2014 10:41:59 AM

"There are always counter arguments - even for something as straight-forward as vaccinations. That doesn't make them right."

Doesn't make them wrong either. Sometimes the "counter-arguments" are more valid than the viewpoint that was expressed first. The validity of an argument comes down to the facts that support it, not speculation, feelings, or fantasies about how things should be.

"Based on a blog? Why would I be offended by somebody else's opinion?"

You just seemed annoyed that anyone would dare to disagree with your assessment of the reasons for Finland's supposed success, or whether it is really a success story.

"They are talking about basic math..."

"Which most people refer to as 'everyday knowledge'. ;)"

Except that you conveniently skipped over the part where Finnish students lagged behind several countries (including a couple other European countries) and several US states on the TIMSS mathematics assessment.

The highly touted (at least by the fans of the Finnish system) PISA test purports to test "problem solving" skills, but success depends on the students' familiarity with the types of problems presented. If, for instance, the test entails
"figuring out how to work a new MP3 player, finding the quickest route on a map, or figuring out how to buy a subway ticket from an automated kiosk", then students familiar with MP3 players, maps, and subway kiosks will do well. It doesn't necessarily mean they can extrapolate that knowledge to other pursuits. They may be able to get to work, but it doesn't mean they can do the work when they get there.



[Edited by: HotRod10 at 10/30/2014 10:43:46 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2014 1:13:55 PM

"They are talking about basic math..."

Which most people refer to as 'everyday knowledge'. ;)

"Are you offended that the Finnish system isn't as perfect as you tried to make it out to be?"

Based on a blog? Why would I be offended by somebody else's opinion? We are all entitled to our opinion. Even your opinions don't offend me ;)

"I also found a few like the one I linked to, with a more in-depth analysis of their system, what really makes it work, and how it may not be as fantastic as it would seem based on a single metric."

There are always counter arguments - even for something as straight-forward as vaccinations. That doesn't make them right.

"The knowledge needed to advance into higher levels of science, medicine, etc. must be taught using a more rigorous approach."

Which has nothing to do with standards and everything to do with curriculum - ie "approach". You again make my point.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2014 11:58:03 AM

"So now you are saying that an inept government is highly effective in something?"

Effectiveness at achieving a goal is usually related to the level of motivation in achieving the goal. What's the government's goal here? More power for itself. Are they are motivated to achieve that goal? You bet. How does it achieve that goal? By controlling the populace. How does it control the populace? By controlling what populace learns.

"How strange, 8th graders not having a firm grasp of college level concepts..."

They are talking about basic math that is the foundation for higher math needed for university-level studies.

"Your source is also lacking, given that their goal ("Utilising the market to improve the quality and availability of education") is the opposite of the Finnish model. Seems unbiased to me. <s>"

What's wrong? Are you offended that the Finnish system isn't as perfect as you tried to make it out to be? Everything is biased. The story you linked to was biased. Bias is inherent, unavoidable, and therefore irrelevant. What matters is the facts. The fact is Finnish students do well on a test that correlates with what is taught in their schools (imagine that!). By other metrics, ones that test math skills, for instance, they do rather poorly.

"I bet you typed into Google something along the lines of 'Finland school system bad'."

Actually I typed in "secret to success of finland's education". I found several articles similar to the one you linked to, touting the socialist political system as the key to their fantastic education system. I also found a few like the one I linked to, with a more in-depth analysis of their system, what really makes it work, and how it may not be as fantastic as it would seem based on a single metric.

"So, you are saying that 'everyday' knowledge isn't important? As in, knowledge and understanding you would use every day? Huh. Interesting POV you believe there."

Everyday knowledge is something that everyone should have and generally can gain by being curious and observing the world around them. The knowledge needed to advance into higher levels of science, medicine, etc. must be taught using a more rigorous approach.

[Edited by: HotRod10 at 10/29/2014 12:04:11 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2014 10:49:56 AM

"They are testing how well they will fall in line with the priorities of the national administration - indoctrinating children instead of educating them. They are systematically weeding out the teachers who will not bow to the government educational system and teach what they are told to teach."

So now you are saying that an inept government is highly effective in something?

Convenient.

"I figured you'd get around to that eventually - what we need to improve education is a full-blown welfare state. The problem is that even if we had the type of high-tax-government-provides-everything system like Finland, the US government would never give up the control over the education system."

The government hasn't given up control. It is a national system...

"First, while Finland scores well on PISA, this particular league table is designed to test everyday rather than curriculum-based knowledge."

So, you are saying that 'everyday' knowledge isn't important? As in, knowledge and understanding you would use every day? Huh. Interesting POV you believe there.

"This means that it lacks key concepts of importance for further studies in mathematically intensive subjects, such as engineering, computer science, and economics. This is an obvious defect: such subjects are likely to be crucial for developed countries’ future economic well-being."

How strange, 8th graders not having a firm grasp of college level concepts...

SMH

Your source is also lacking, given that their goal ("Utilising the market to improve the quality and availability of education") is the opposite of the Finnish model. Seems unbiased to me. <s>

I bet you typed into Google something along the lines of 'Finland school system bad'. I can't imagine why you managed to find an opinion in a blog that matched what you were hoping to find. What a surprise! It is on the internet, it must be true! "Bonjour"!

ROTFLOL!!
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2014 10:05:04 AM

"They think 'think' they are grading the teachers on how well they educate children,"

No, they know exactly what they are grading teachers on. They are testing how well they will fall in line with the priorities of the national administration - indoctrinating children instead of educating them. They are systematically weeding out the teachers who will not bow to the government educational system and teach what they are told to teach.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 29, 2014 9:54:04 AM

"The problem facing education in America isn't the ethnic diversity of the population but the economic inequality of society, and this is precisely the problem that Finnish education reform addressed. More equity at home might just be what America needs to be more competitive abroad."

I figured you'd get around to that eventually - what we need to improve education is a full-blown welfare state. The problem is that even if we had the type of high-tax-government-provides-everything system like Finland, the US government would never give up the control over the education system.

The education "miracle" of the Finnish system explained:

"First, while Finland scores well on PISA, this particular league table is designed to test everyday rather than curriculum-based knowledge. This means that it lacks key concepts of importance for further studies in mathematically intensive subjects, such as engineering, computer science, and economics. This is an obvious defect: such subjects are likely to be crucial for developed countries’ future economic well-being.

The Finnish fan club rarely talks about its mathematics performance in TIMSS, an international survey focusing more on curriculum-based knowledge – which plummeted over the last decade. Finnish eighth-graders today perform slightly lower than seventh-graders did in 1999, lagging the top-scoring nations by a considerable margin. Not so miraculous after all. It’s perhaps not surprising that over 200 Finnish academics in 2005 warned about complacency as a result of the PISA success. Others questioned whether it represents a victory at all since important knowledge had been sacrificed along the way.

So Finland might not be so great after all, partly because its centralised curriculum has ignored certain concepts that are not tested in PISA. But where the country goes right is in the degree of choice and competition already at work in the system. While it’s true that Finland doesn’t have many free schools overall, its state system has still been competitive. In Helsinki, 37% of compulsory-age school pupils attend free schools. Most Finnish councils also have at least one Swedish-language school, to which all pupils have access. The choice is there.

Furthermore, in Finnish sixth form, which is not compulsory, choice is extensive. One in eight pupils attend free schools; in Helsinki, it’s one in three. Crucially, admission to all schools is determined by, firstly, pupils’ choices and, secondly, their grades in compulsory school – without any concern for where pupils live. This makes all sixth form schools in Finland more similar to grammar schools than comprehensive schools. Research suggests that this system improves achievement in lower grades, because pupils work harder to gain admission to top schools and programmes. In other words, the extremely competitive system that exists in sixth form also increases achievement in compulsory education.

So there you have it: Finland does school competition..."
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2014 6:55:16 PM

The problem facing education in America isn't the ethnic diversity of the population but the economic inequality of society, and this is precisely the problem that Finnish education reform addressed. More equity at home might just be what America needs to be more competitive abroad.

"What's more, despite their many differences, Finland and the U.S. have an educational goal in common. When Finnish policymakers decided to reform the country's education system in the 1970s, they did so because they realized that to be competitive, Finland couldn't rely on manufacturing or its scant natural resources and instead had to invest in a knowledge-based economy.

With America's manufacturing industries now in decline, the goal of educational policy in the U.S. -- as articulated by most everyone from President Obama on down -- is to preserve American competitiveness by doing the same thing. Finland's experience suggests that to win at that game, a country has to prepare not just some of its population well, but all of its population well, for the new economy. To possess some of the best schools in the world might still not be good enough if there are children being left behind."
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2014 6:52:11 PM

"And what is that metric? How well the teachers educate the children or how well they teach what those creating the tests want them to teach?"

What difference does it make? They think 'think' they are grading the teachers on how well they educate children, but they aren't even grading them as to how well they teach what in on the tests... It is an utterly pointless exercise, but yet carries a lot of weight, unfortunately.

"It's not a leap, it's about 2 very short steps away."

Given how far out in Left Field you are, I don't doubt your proximity...
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2014 3:12:40 PM

"Because they wanted to control the metric used to decide how teachers should be graded."

And what is that metric? How well the teachers educate the children or how well they teach what those creating the tests want them to teach?

"This is the leap where you lose me."

It's not a leap, it's about 2 very short steps away.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2014 1:21:35 PM

"The difference with the new tests is that local schools, and even the state, don't have any choice in what tests they are going to use."

I don't disagree with that, but since we both are in agreement over additional testing under CC...

"More testing is bad, but the real danger is in the federal government mandating the specific tests that must be used."

Again, I don't disagree with this either.

"If you keep turning a blind eye to that fact, or believing it can be "tweaked" into something it's not and will never be, you will wake up some morning and wonder when we became the Soviet Union."

This is the leap where you lose me.

"Why are they so adamant about using the CC tests instead of letting the states use their own?"

Because they wanted to control the metric used to decide how teachers should be graded. It has nothing to do with this phantom conspiracy to turn the US into the USSR that you believe so strongly in...
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2014 11:08:06 AM

"And there were already standardized tests in place historically."

The difference with the new tests is that local schools, and even the state, don't have any choice in what tests they are going to use. More testing is bad, but the real danger is in the federal government mandating the specific tests that must be used. As you pointed out, the schools end up teaching to the test, which results in the feds dictating what is taught. If you keep turning a blind eye to that fact, or believing it can be "tweaked" into something it's not and will never be, you will wake up some morning and wonder when we became the Soviet Union.

"there were already standardized tests in place to measure academic progress. Instead of replacing these (or simply continuing to utilize them), CC just added more."

Have you stopped to ask why? Why are they so adamant about using the CC tests instead of letting the states use their own? If you dare, think on that a while, research it a little, and you'll become as "paranoid" as I am.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 28, 2014 10:10:37 AM

"...if it didn't have the testing, it would not be a standard..."

Wrong.

"...and I apparently can't convince you to accept simple logic"

If only you were using simple logic.

"Luckily, others are waking up the reality of what CC is..."

More paranoid delusions about indoctrination of kids to accept bigger, more intrusive government? LOL!!!

"Learn to read."

Aw, I expect much better from you than such an inane insult.

"Standards do dictate the content of the curriculum, but "standards" without testing are not standards, because compliance cannot be determined."

And, as I already posted;

"And there were already standardized tests in place historically. more have simply been added, so much more that we are at the point now where curriculum is based on the tests, rather than the standards."

Again, in case you missed - there were already standardized tests in place to measure academic progress. Instead of replacing these (or simply continuing to utilize them), CC just added more.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 25, 2014 9:41:58 PM

"So please, pick one argument and stick with it..."

I have. You're the one who's been inconsistent by trying to separate CC into components. It is a comprehensive package of standards with testing to determine if the standards are met. You admit that they can't be separated, and yet say you support the standards but not the testing. It's a package deal; if it didn't have the testing, it would not be a standard, it would be a scope and sequence document. If that's all it was, I wouldn't have a problem with it either. We prefer the one we currently use, but if others chose to use it, that would be up to them. Except, if the major college entrance exams are aligned to CC, then my kids would be at a disadvantage in applying to a college that uses those exams.

"I can't dispel fears based on paranoia, conjecture and innuendo..."

...and I apparently can't convince you to accept simple logic. Luckily, others are waking up the reality of what CC is, and you soon be in the minority.

"You said it yourself (regarding standards not determining curriculum);"

Learn to read. Standards do dictate the content of the curriculum, but "standards" without testing are not standards, because compliance cannot be determined. There is simply no way to know if the standards are met without testing.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 24, 2014 2:41:52 PM

"The adoption of CC by the states means accepting and agreeing to meet the standards as shown by the test scores."

And there were already standardized tests in place historically. more have simply been added, so much more that we are at the point now where curriculum is based on the tests, rather than the standards.

"As it is further implemented and the tests, including the college entrance exams, become fully aligned with the recommended reading material, it will become impossible to pass the tests without the recommended material being taught.

You're on your own on that one, I can't dispel fears based on paranoia, conjecture and innuendo...

"Still living in the fantasy, I see."

You said it yourself (regarding standards not determining curriculum);

"Without the mandate to prove the standards have been met, it's nothing more than a guide to what kids should learn. Those have been around decades and local schools could use them at will."

Standards have been around forever, as has curriculum being decided on by the local School Districts. So please, pick one argument and stick with it...

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 10/24/2014 2:43:50 PM EST]
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 24, 2014 2:33:28 PM

"CC, on its own (with no mandated testing, another program botched by the politicians) would be fine as it wouldn't have any bearing on curriculum."

It's all part of it. The adoption of CC by the states means accepting and agreeing to meet the standards as shown by the test scores. Without the mandate to prove the standards have been met, it's nothing more than a guide to what kids should learn. Those have been around decades and local schools could use them at will.

"Please, tell me how kids would be indoctrinated such that they would want to expand government control through literacy standards?"

Literacy standards, the "critical content" requirements, and the "sample texts" are the starting point. As it is further implemented and the tests, including the college entrance exams, become fully aligned with the recommended reading material, it will become impossible to pass the tests without the recommended material being taught.

"This should be interesting folks, grab some popcorn!"

Just don't choke on it.

"Standards do not determine curriculum."

Still living in the fantasy, I see.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 24, 2014 1:21:56 PM

"So, why are you holding out hope for a nationalized education system run by teachers..."

Why would you make that assumption? I know it isn't going to happen, but that doesn't change the fact that it is what 'needs' to happen...

"...rather than support getting the government out of education and returning to local control of education?"

Again - my being against NCLB and RTTT is exactly that.

"...and what have they pushed us towards? Common Core."

Wrong. CC is an add-on that was promoted in RTTT. CC, on its own (with no mandated testing, another program botched by the politicians) would be fine as it wouldn't have any bearing on curriculum.

"You can't have local control of the curriculum or anything else under a nationalized system."

Which only shows what you don't understand. You absolutely can have local control of curriculum under a nationally accepted standard. Standards do not determine curriculum.

"but that won't change the reality and you end up supporting what will destroy education and turn schools into indoctrination centers that work for a government bent on expanding its control."

Which CC has zero influence on. But that would be reality too... Please, tell me how kids would be indoctrinated such that they would want to expand government control through literacy standards? This should be interesting folks, grab some popcorn!
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 24, 2014 12:26:03 PM

"When have I ever said this was plausible? I have maintained that this is what needs to happen - I never said it would be easy."

So, why are you holding out hope for a nationalized education system run by teachers, which isn't going to happen, rather than support getting the government out of education and returning to local control of education?

"I don't disagree, we are on the wrong path given what NCLB and RTTT have pushed us towards."

...and what have they pushed us towards? Common Core. You say you oppose everything that CC is, yet still support it. Standards without testing are not standards, they are guidelines. Curriculum not aligned with the standards and testing results in failure to meet the standards as measured by the tests.

You can't have local control of the curriculum or anything else under a nationalized system. It just won't work that way. You can live in some fantasy where it could work, but that won't change the reality and you end up supporting what will destroy education and turn schools into indoctrination centers that work for a government bent on expanding its control.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 24, 2014 10:35:46 AM

"Common Core now has less support from teachers than from the general population, because they're the ones that are seeing the effects first. I just hope the understanding spreads before it's too late to undo the damage."

Which is entirely due to the additional standardized testing required. As I have already posted... See below.

"Good luck with that! The federal government relinquishing control over something? When has that ever happened? Or were you under some delusion that an educator could be put in charge of the US Dept. of Ed.? Is that working at the state level? Politicians and bureaucrats is all you'll find in the state offices. Even those who are former educators become politicians; it's the nature of public office."

When have I ever said this was plausible? I have maintained that this is what needs to happen - I never said it would be easy.

"Not yet, but that is the end result of nationalizing the education system. More and more teachers are starting to recognize it; eventually you will too."

I don't disagree, we are on the wrong path given what NCLB and RTTT have pushed us towards. I have said this over and over. The Teacher's Unions have been saying the same. I just made that comment?
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 24, 2014 10:27:38 AM

Support for Common Core is plummeting, especially among teachers.

"...a significant loss of support over the last year — especially among teachers, whose approval rating dropped from 76 percent in 2013 to only 46 percent in 2014. Overall support for the Core dropped from 65 percent last year to 53 percent in 2014..."

Common Core now has less support from teachers than from the general population, because they're the ones that are seeing the effects first. I just hope the understanding spreads before it's too late to undo the damage.

"...educators, and not politicians, need to make policy for Federal education standards..."

Good luck with that! The federal government relinquishing control over something? When has that ever happened? Or were you under some delusion that an educator could be put in charge of the US Dept. of Ed.? Is that working at the state level? Politicians and bureaucrats is all you'll find in the state offices. Even those who are former educators become politicians; it's the nature of public office.

"It DOESN'T mean that the government is deciding all curriculum,"

Not yet, but that is the end result of nationalizing the education system. More and more teachers are starting to recognize it; eventually you will too.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 24, 2014 9:16:00 AM

"That's like saying there's a problem with the engine in your car, so you want to remove the engine and then it'll be fine."

Um, no...

"Like it was before the government got involved."

Yes - which is why educators, and not politicians, need to make policy for Federal education standards...

""How to implement standards through curriculum is still dependent on the local authority (School Board and Superintendent)"?"

That is still the case today. You simply misread what was posted;

"Then the curriculum would be based solely at the discretion of the local school districts."

See that word "solely"? It means that they still retain control of curriculum but that there is influence from outside that might limit their options.

It DOESN'T mean that the government is deciding all curriculum, as you seem to believe.

Nice try ;)



[Edited by: Weaslespit at 10/24/2014 9:16:33 AM EST]
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 23, 2014 5:42:44 PM

"CC on its own, however, would be fine if its standardized testing were removed."

Yeah, good luck with that. That's like saying there's a problem with the engine in your car, so you want to remove the engine and then it'll be fine.

"Then the curriculum would be based solely at the discretion of the local school districts."

Like it was before the government got involved. Like it is in private schools. Similar to how homeschooling works.

Btw, what happened to your position yesterday, that "How to implement standards through curriculum is still dependent on the local authority (School Board and Superintendent)"?
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 23, 2014 8:54:55 AM

"There is no local control of the curriculum anymore, there is only teaching to the test.There is no local control of the curriculum anymore, there is only teaching to the test."

I partially agree with that. We are indeed teaching to the tests, and have been, ever since NCLB was implemented (prior to CC).

CC on its own, however, would be fine if its standardized testing were removed. Then the curriculum would be based solely at the discretion of the local school districts. This is what the teachers, as well as the Teachers Union, want.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 22, 2014 1:59:33 PM

"And we agree hotrod that NCLB and RTTT are disasters."

Common Core is just the next step from NCLB, which became the threat used to coerce the acceptance of CC - accept CC or you'll have to meet the requirements of NCLB. RTTT provided the bribe to the states.

"Nationalization of the education system would be fine if the standards developed were developed by educators, rather than politicians and lawyers."

It might be better run by educators, but it's an impossible dream. A nationalized education system will be administrated by the national government, no way around it. Even a system that is not nationalized, but funded in any substantial percentage by the feds, has to fall in line with the mandates of the feds. That's the teeth in NCLB and CC. The feds say "jump" and the state education departments ask "how high" because they can't, or won't, risk losing the federal funding.

"How to implement standards through curriculum is still dependent on the local authority"

Come back to reality, Weaslespit. There is no local control of the curriculum anymore, there is only teaching to the test. The standards and tests dictate the curriculum, otherwise the teacher and the school are labeled failures because they didn't teach the kids what was needed to pass the tests.

Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 22, 2014 10:44:42 AM

And we agree hotrod that NCLB and RTTT are disasters. Nationalization of the education system would be fine if the standards developed were developed by educators, rather than politicians and lawyers.

How to implement standards through curriculum is still dependent on the local authority (School Board and Superintendent) who are indeed controlled by the community.

Teacher's Unions are a far cry from the UAW, to which your comments more accurately reflect. Teachers Unions have openly fought against NCLB, etc...
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 22, 2014 10:19:58 AM

Thanks for linking to that story, Weaslespit.

As I said before, I have nothing but respect for the good, caring teachers. They are doing their best to cope with a system that increasingly doesn't allow them to do their job. My heart goes out to people like the one the story talks about, and I wish I could offer her some hope that it will get better. Sad to say, but as Common Core gets more fully implemented, it will only get worse.

I'm sure I got your hackles up with that last line, but take a look at where all these changes are coming from that are so frustrating the good teachers out there. Do you not see that all the things that are driving this woman (and many other good teachers) toward quitting are the result of nationalizing the education system? Where do you think all of the new requirements of how to teach, what to teach, and all the new testing requirements are coming from? Is it from the local school boards or parents? No, it's being dictated by the requirements of Common Core, which most of the states adopted because of the bribes and coercion from the feds.

This is the result I have been trying to warn about. More and more good teachers are starting to realize they have been kept in the dark and misled by their union leadership that cares more about their own power than whether their members are able to do their jobs well. The union leadership never was interested in improving education. The goal of any labor union is to improve the working conditions and job security of its members. The quality of the outcome is at best a secondary consideration, and more often is sacrificed to meet the goals of the union. In the case of the teacher's union, they have sacrificed not only the quality of the educational system, but in the process, the working conditions of the teachers who care about the children they are supposed to be educating.

From what I've read, there are those teachers who love the new system because they have everything provided for them and they don't have to plan or think about what they're going to teach, and those who hate it because it doesn't allow them the flexibility to teach effectively. The woman in the story is obviously in the latter group, and she has my sympathy.

Correcting the problem begins with identifying the source of the problem, and it's not people like me. The problem is that education has been taken over by the government and is no longer responsive to the local community. Good teachers who care about the students being educated, rather than indoctrinated, are being pushed down or being pushed out by a system that seeks to grow its power.


[Edited by: HotRod10 at 10/22/2014 10:21:57 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 22, 2014 8:25:09 AM

"There are amazing teachers, young and old, veterans and rookies, who are starting to eye the exit door. These teachers feel overworked, underpaid, undervalued, deflated, and emotionally and physically exhausted."

People like hotrod who think that Teachers are nothing special and that anybody can do what they do are indeed a big reason why good teachers are quitting.

They truly believe that they are helping but are only making the situation worse, which is in lockstep with our ignorant politicians.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 5:20:41 PM

"And who is the one that asserts gender identity?"

The person wishing to use the facilities, of course, but we trust everyone to be honest, right?
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 4:47:24 PM

"Um, what system is in place now that is stopping 'any' sexual predators (regardless of how they are dressed) from entering women's facilities?"

If there were nothing in place, there would be nothing to change, and you've been arguing for nothing. Obviously, in most places in the US there are still laws in place that make it illegal for biological males to use women's facilities.

"8 (1) CONSISTENT AND UNIFORM ASSERTION OF THE PERSON’S
9 GENDER IDENTITY; OR
10 (2) ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAT THE GENDER IDENTITY IS
11 SINCERELY HELD AS PART OF THE PERSON’S CORE IDENTITY."

How consistent does the assertion have to be? What evidence is used to determine a "sincerely held" identity? Just because some politician wrote it and got it passed, doesn't make it a good law.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,872
Points:1,838,230
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 4:18:17 PM

"8 (1) CONSISTENT AND UNIFORM ASSERTION OF THE PERSON’S
9 GENDER IDENTITY; OR
10 (2) ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAT THE GENDER IDENTITY IS
11 SINCERELY HELD AS PART OF THE PERSON’S CORE IDENTITY."

And who is the one that asserts gender identity?
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,136
Points:2,989,595
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 3:34:37 PM

Or California's education law, where the definition is in Section 210.7 of the Education Code: <<“Gender” means sex, and includes a person's gender identity and gender expression. “Gender expression” means a person's gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth.>>
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,136
Points:2,989,595
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 3:24:13 PM

OK, when they write a law about these things, they don't just say, hey, if a dude goes in the ladies' room, that's cool.

They define what it means to be transgender. And then the law applies only to people who meet the definition.

E.g., Maryland's bathroom bill.

"(E) “GENDER IDENTITY” MEANS THE
5 GENDER–RELATED IDENTITY, APPEARANCE, EXPRESSION, OR BEHAVIOR OF A
6 PERSON, REGARDLESS OF THE PERSON’S ASSIGNED SEX AT BIRTH, WHICH MAY
7 BE DEMONSTRATED BY:
8 (1) CONSISTENT AND UNIFORM ASSERTION OF THE PERSON’S
9 GENDER IDENTITY; OR
10 (2) ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAT THE GENDER IDENTITY IS
11 SINCERELY HELD AS PART OF THE PERSON’S CORE IDENTITY."

[Edited by: sgm4law at 10/21/2014 3:24:23 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 3:01:45 PM

"I know, your argument was we should only let legitimate transgender biological males use women's facilities, but not the sexual predators masquerading as transgendered."

Um, what system is in place now that is stopping 'any' sexual predators (regardless of how they are dressed) from entering women's facilities?

Another strawman.

"If a complaint is made by a user of the facilities, the operator of said facility would ask the person to leave."

How long does it take you to use the restroom? I dunno about you, but by the time anybody came to tell me I needed to leave, I would most likely already be long gone anyway...

"If the person refuses, the police would be called to escort the person out."

What - 30 minutes later? An hour later? If that be the case, the person in there most likely is mentally ill and not 'really' there to just use the facility. Oh, like a sexual predator...

Huh. Strange how that is already an issue that you don't seem to care about.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,872
Points:1,838,230
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 2:53:28 PM

"OTOH, if you can't discriminate based on biology, a guy can walk into the local municipal gym, go into the women's locker room, and when questioned say that he identifies as a woman. If the law says they cannot discriminate based on biological gender, then there is no legal basis to restrict his access to the women's locker room."

Oh come on hotrod...nobody would want to do that. I mean, we have no perverts in our society that would figure out that if they declare all facilities open to whomever wants to use them (see Houston's issue) there would be no males take advantage of that, would they?

Obviously this guy is just a transgender individual expressing his rights as a female trapped in a male's body.

Obviously this guy was born with a vagina on the inside.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 2:36:49 PM

"If they can't tell, the "law", or custom, cannot be "enforced"."

If no one knows, then the the whole argument is moot. There's no reason to change the law. If a biological male can pass for a woman, and no one knows otherwise, then there's no complaints and life goes on.

OTOH, if you can't discriminate based on biology, a guy can walk into the local municipal gym, go into the women's locker room, and when questioned say that he identifies as a woman. If the law says they cannot discriminate based on biological gender, then there is no legal basis to restrict his access to the women's locker room.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,136
Points:2,989,595
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 1:51:35 PM

<<If a complaint is made by a user of the facilities, the operator of said facility would ask the person to leave.>>

First step is that someone has to be able to tell that the person using the facilities is equipped with the wrong equipment. If they can't tell, the "law", or custom, cannot be "enforced".
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 1:38:14 PM

"Considering that isn't the argument,"

I know, your argument was we should only let legitimate transgender biological males use women's facilities, but not the sexual predators masquerading as transgendered. That would be a fine solution if you can tell me how to make a legal distinction between the two, without discriminating. So far, you have ignored that gaping hole in your argument.

Until you can adequately explain how to legally bar sexual predators masquerading as transgenders from women's facilities while allowing "real" transgenders to use those facilities, you are arguing for legally allowing sexual predators to use women's facilities.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 1:25:57 PM

"Who is enforcing such a ridiculous law?"

If a complaint is made by a user of the facilities, the operator of said facility would ask the person to leave. If the person refuses, the police would be called to escort the person out. I'm surprised someone with "4law" in their name would not understand the basic principles of it.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 1:18:35 PM

"That's still as stupid as it was the first time you made the argument."

Considering that isn't the argument, I agree, it is stupid...

Nice strawman though.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,136
Points:2,989,595
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 1:07:08 PM

<<I was saying we don't allow, by law, biological males to use women's facilities around here.>>

Who is enforcing such a ridiculous law?
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 12:50:47 PM

"Only if you ignore reality and pretend attacks from sexual predators in female restrooms will only occur once transgendered rules are applied..."

As long as sexual predators are going to assault women anyway, we should make it easier for them by granting them legal access to women's facilities? That's still as stupid as it was the first time you made the argument.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 21, 2014 9:51:25 AM

"Talk about non-sequitur..."

Only if you ignore reality and pretend attacks from sexual predators in female restrooms will only occur once transgendered rules are applied...

SMH
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 20, 2014 9:23:46 AM

"Tell that to the thousands attacked throughout the world every day..."

Talk about non-sequitur...
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 20, 2014 12:54:07 AM

"Tell that to the women in that shelter in Toronto."

Tell that to the thousands attacked throughout the world every day...

"So, because people violate the law, the law should change. That's a great idea. Besides, I'd like to see your evidence. I haven't seen anyone caught around here."

One has nothing to do with the other - that is called a non sequitur.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 19, 2014 9:45:47 PM

"It doesn't make it any less safe."

Tell that to the women in that shelter in Toronto.

"You don't have to, they do it already anyway..."

So, because people violate the law, the law should change. That's a great idea. Besides, I'd like to see your evidence. I haven't seen anyone caught around here.

[Edited by: HotRod10 at 10/19/2014 9:50:40 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 19, 2014 12:10:32 PM

"I was saying we don't allow, by law, biological males to use women's facilities around here."

You don't have to, they do it already anyway...

"unless you are trying to suggest that allowing sexual predators access to women's facilities would somehow make it safer for the women."

It doesn't make it any less safe. Tough to grasp, I know.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,619
Points:61,195
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Oct 18, 2014 11:53:05 PM

"So with the 'known' predators taking advantage of women in the women's restroom, we aren't doing anything to protect them already?"

You need to work on your reading comprehension. I was saying we don't allow, by law, biological males to use women's facilities around here. So, you have it completely backwards, unless you are trying to suggest that allowing sexual predators access to women's facilities would somehow make it safer for the women.

Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:16,615
Points:545,605
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Oct 17, 2014 4:42:07 PM

"I had to wonder if she tried to make something of it who would be in the wrong?"

Apparently you were lucky you weren't taken advantage of...
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,387
Points:150,775
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Oct 17, 2014 4:34:25 PM

This reminds me of the time I got surprised by a woman in a mans bathroom.
I had to wizz really bad, walked from front to rear of this large store, stepped in side of the men's room and there was a woman in front of the first stall facing the urinals. She was waiting on her kid while the hubby was near the bathroom but slightly down the aisle outside of the bathroom. I didn't think there were urinals in the women's bathroom but I stepped out side to check the signage. Yep I was in the right place, by now I am ready to pee my pants. I step back in and start peeing; she is standing there watching me. trying to think do I give it a couple extra shakes to insult her or what? As I finished peeing I turned towards her as she was still watching I decided to call her a pervert. She quickly turned around and said sorry. I think she was trying to piss her hubby off for not taking the boy to the bathroom. Sure the women's bathroom was empty, the store was almost empty. I had to wonder if she tried to make something of it who would be in the wrong?

[Edited by: streetrider at 10/17/2014 4:36:46 PM EST]
Post a reply Back to Topics