Our kids are getting dummmerer

@laglen (19782)
United States
April 11, 2011 9:18am CST
But our Defense needs cuts? Makes no sense to me. We spend more money currently on education per student than we do the defense. A stronger defense keeps us safer. Does anybody argue with this? But our kids are not getting the education they deserve and throwing money at it is NOT working. Does anybody argue with that? There is NO proof that more money leads to a better education for our kids. Yet - boy wonder proposes MORE money on education. WHAT? he cant possibly be serious... right? President Obama. His 2012 budget increases federal education spending by 21 percent to $77 billion dollars. Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/04/08/taxpayer-calculator-education-spending#ixzz1JDxXCFAt After the obvious fact that we are broke, in crazy debt. We are trying to make cuts, and this is what our fearful leader has to offer? 2012 can not come fast enough!
7 responses
@JijiXcebu (129)
• Philippines
12 Apr 11
Technology makes up for dumb kids i guess. Just kidding. What I could say though is that kids learn faster these days because of the internet and what not. They kind of rely on these things. Unlike the old school books and encyclopedia.
1 person likes this
• United States
12 Apr 11
You can learn everything you learn in school on the Internet, and then some. The only real separating factor is "how" it's taught to you. In America, good teachers seem to be few and far between. They exist, surely, but you literally, by contract, cannot tell them apart. A bad, terrible, horrible, mean, nasty, bitter, hungover, inept teacher has the same "right" to teach kids as the teacher you want to give an apple in the morning and hug when you leave. In a lot of cases, kids would be better off learning from technology instead of some of these teachers.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
12 Apr 11
I agree, or a caring parent helping them along. I still have a child in school, I se ethe good the bad and the ugly. She does have one exceptional teacher that she has excelled with to a point that the teacher wants her to take college accounting courses since she has flown through the high school curriculum.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
12 Apr 11
Why do you think they fight home schooling so hard? Because of the one- on- one attention the child can excel. Because of the proven results of that one-on- one, from parents who often only have a 12th grade ed. themselves...it embarrasses them. Teachers are told and we are told that you have to have a college education to teach. I told an administrator once, I know my children better than your teachers, and whatever I LEARNED in those twelve years I can pass along. There are excellent curicuulums available for homeschooling and many groups that gather for social and athletic events for homeschoolers. Then we have the 'socialization' issue that professional educators are stuck on. We see where that has led...and it's not pretty. Trusting parents send off little Johnny to kindergarten, he knows no cuss words and he comes home from kindergarten spouting reproductive facts with gutter language. Not to mention, little girls wanting to look like Madonna, or is it Miley Cyrus now? My 12 year old granddaughter is popular, she has lots of friends.She is in cheerleading and track and field. She is on honor roll. You'd think she would never have a problem with bullying or teasing. And yet she comes home bawling cause one of the other girls has 'snubbed' her or has told her her clothes are not cool. She took so much grief for not having a cell phone, my daughter finally broke down and got her one against her better judgment. I remember being 12. And some of my worst memories are of just this sort of thing. That's the socialization they get. Their family values are ridiculed by their peers and not held up by the teachers. It worse in some areas of the country, better in others. But we live in a very conservtive religious area...and 8 girls in the MIDDLE SCHOOL are pregnant in a town of 10,000. Two of them claim it happened AT SCHOOL. If a rural area has such problems, what is going on in the inner city schools? I dislike speaking ill of teachers. So I will say that many here feel helpless, they have told me that they are effectively under a gag order and cannot say or do what they feel is needed to stop the insanity. I applaude their dedication. But as we saw in Wisconsin, not all teachers are altruistic nor are the students put first. It's time parents woke up and take charge of their children back. The days of the little red school house are long gone.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6311)
• United States
11 Apr 11
Go down the list of things done to improve a student's education. More money spent per student More materials in the classroom Government agents in schools (social workers, etc) More meals for kids in schools (full breakfast and an option-filled lunch) Easier cirriculum On and on Then go down the list on things done to improve a teacher's life and to pad the school system's stats Higher salaries and benefits Guaranteed employment if you can fly under the radar for two years Dumbed-down selective standards to funnel kids through Under the great guiding wing of the DOE Teacher shuffling to avoid firing (from one class/school to another) .. What neither of these lists include: Better teachers Less inept federal interference Outright dismissal of morons (teachers and students) ... The idea is not to fix schools. It's really not. Spenders, be they Republican, Democrat or otherwise, do not aim to fix problems with money. They only wish to be seen as doing something about the problem. When there's a problem, you can handle it a few ways. One, if you want to fix it, you can take your time, figure out what's wrong, and make the necessary changes, even if it's against your own best interest and the interest of those funding your career and upsets people. Two, you can throw money on it so everyday people feel that at least the problem is a priority. Shame on us. Shame. We've been fooled much more than twice! When they do say schools are under-funded, I say, "In comparison to what?" Even the "poor" schools are working with much more but producing far less.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
12 Apr 11
Great points and you are right about not wanting to actually solve the problem, just make it look like they are "working on it"
• United States
12 Apr 11
Of course Obama wants to give money to education and hence the teachers unions. They have an incestual relationship. Funds are taken from the citizen, go to the schools, then to teachers, then to the unions through involuntary contributions, then to the democrat party, and Obama's reelection campaign. Democrats will always fund any public organization run by unions. It is pure confiscation of citizens money to contribute to democrats. There is nothing democratic about the democrat party.
@laglen (19782)
• United States
15 Apr 11
It the old watch my right hand while my left hand relieves you of your wallet!
@hofferp (4739)
• United States
12 Apr 11
Lots of good points made above, so I won't drag this out. But I'm one of those for killing the Department of Education, if nothing else, downsizing it to "pea" size. The local communities know what's best for their kids, not a bunch of idiots in Washington. And throwing more money at it isn't the answer!
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
13 Apr 11
Our kids futures should not be on the political agenda at all! You are so right in your statement advocating the elimination of the DOE...parents have NO SAY with them. Bring the responsibility back down to the community level where the results of said education ultimately end up. The DOE has one agenda...social engineering. And frankly, I've had enough of that.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
15 Apr 11
I agree, in my opinion, this is a good campaign point. I think most thinking individuals agree that this should be a local issue.
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
12 Apr 11
We need to change where the funding goes. One point overlooked in the recent budget fight is the fact that the Republicans restored the Washington DC Voucher plan that President Obama canceled. Students under the voucher were doing better than when they were in the public schools. We have been pouring money into education at every level, Federal, State and local with no results. Maybe we should give vouchers to parents and let them choose the school they want their children to attend. From what I have read where vouchers or school choice is available the students do better and acheive more. Even homeschoolers are now out performing public school students. What you would get is a contract between the school and the parent with each side setting forth certain conditions. Schools to improve test scores and parents to insure the students attendance and behavior. Teacher pay would be indirectly connected to the performance of the students. Every time the government, at any level, gives more money there are strings attached. You must teach this or require students to learn these things or no money. Let the schools establish their own criteria and parents can judge the school by their performance record. How many students make it into college, get a job or complete the HS Degree.
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
12 Apr 11
But that would be a free market plan, supply and demand works! And we know the liberals hate that sort of thing. I sorta take exception to your saying...'even' homeschoolers are now out performing public school students. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_the_United_States#Colonial_Era This site is good for understanding the history of edcuation in the US. Note that in the colonial days it was the church, or community and parents who were ultimately responsible for edcuation. When we come to the modern era, it is Dewey who stands out. Notice that he said: "to prepare him for the future life means to give him command of himself; it means so to train him that he will have the full and ready use of all his capacities." Dewey insisted that EDUCATION AND SCHOOLING ARE INSTRUMENTAL IN CREATING SOCIAL CHANGE AND REFORM. He notes that "education is a regulation of the process of coming to share in the social consciousness; and that the ADJUSTMENT OF INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITY on the basis of this social consciousness is the only sure method of SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTION.".[46] Although Dewey's ideas were very widely discussed, they were implemented chiefly in small experimental schools attached to colleges of education. The problem was that Dewey and the other progressive theorists encountered a highly bureaucratic system of school administration that in general was not receptive to new methods. UNESCO advisor and socialist philosopher Bertrand Russell: It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the state with money and equipment...When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in control of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
15 Apr 11
Bob I agree with you 100%. I think there should be competition in schools and most definitely choice. This has been proven to work, that is what scares them. The teachers because the majority are worthless, and the union because they want members which equal dues. Debra - I think it is great that this is all coming to light. I just wish more people would pay attention to the design
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
11 Apr 11
I have a great idea. Put the military in charge of the schools. And send the teachers to Afganistan.
1 person likes this
@terryt52 (245)
• United States
11 Apr 11
that is the best idea i have heard..yeah...
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
12 Apr 11
specifically the administrators
@terryt52 (245)
• United States
11 Apr 11
Just what the school systems need MORE MONEY...I am so tired of this education bull crap. It does not go to better educate the children. If so maybe The King Obama should tell us how. Oh Yes..Higher salary and benefits for the teachers. Even the ones that do not deserve to be teaching and they are kept because the union protects them. Not on books my children never bring home books just home work and I am the one that has to figure out what they want done. Oh and the no child left behind well they are making special needs children being left behind and the extra federal money that these children get are not being spent on them. Maybe longer school hours would be nice being my children have to walk a half hour in the morning at the beginning of school and extra gym because our children are fat. We really need to get the unions and all the bad teachers out of the school systems and start fresh. May be the king needs to worry about our military and give a raise to them teachers are over paid.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19782)
• United States
12 Apr 11
or maybe less time in indoctrination. I dont think longer school hours are neccessary, I think they should be more productive in the hours they have.
• United States
7 Aug 11
I found this searching old discussions and it struck me that despite agreeing with you in the basic argument, I do feel the need to argue one point. "We spend more money currently on education per student than we do the defense." Based on the 2010 Budget, Education was $46.7 Billion and Defense (not counting Homeland Security) was $663.7 Billion. Even with about $81 Billion from the Recovery Act added to Education, The US spending on Education is not even close to the Military spending. Of course, as I said, that doesn't mean I think that Education money is wisely spent! And someone suggested the military should run the schools or something, and I would support that. The reason Catholic schools out perform traditional school districts partly comes down to discipline. Plus the military is more anal about tracking expenditures and would make each dollar per child spent count for more. In the inner cities, the presence of a military school would not only be a deterrent to violence but an option for comradery and brotherhood in replace of the gangs. Of course we risk the comparison to China so there would have to be some concecessions on dress code and discipline to encourage the creativity that stricter schools lack. It could be made to work if it didn't freak everyone out too much. Happy Summer Vacation (which should be elimnated as well!) -The Evil Teacher Rat