quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
You honestly believe there are communities who would care what they produce, as long as they produce like minded minime's of themselves?
Pst... btw... you do realize that most schools are now run at the local level...

Then, do they not get what they deserve?

No children do not deserve to have their education stolen and replaced with this bullshit.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

The Dept. of Education was created in the 70's. Have we been served well? No. No, we haven't. Are we doing better or worse since then? Worse.

So, ending public education, as we know it, may very well be the best thing for public education.

Universities across America will set their own standards. And, truthfully, they really do do that now. And, if Harvard wants to limit their recruitment to certain Districts or States, who cares? Let 'em. And all the kids that are "Harvard material" not from those areas will go on to get great educations, perhaps even of the same quality, and Harvard won't get to claim them as Harvard grads.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

The Dept. of Education was created in the 70's. Have we been served well? No. No, we haven't. Are we doing better or worse since then? Worse.
So, ending public education, as we know it, may very well be the best thing for public education.
Universities across America will set their own standards. And, truthfully, they really do do that now. And, if Harvard wants to limit their recruitment to certain Districts or States, who cares? Let 'em. And all the kids that are "Harvard material" not from those areas will go on to get great educations, perhaps even of the same quality, and Harvard won't get to claim them as Harvard grads.

And yet you neglect to mention the transfer problems.

quote:


Education in this country is only as good as parents want to make it. Do we have problems? sure. The problems will only grow by leaps and bounds by allowing local communities to write their own standards.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

Transfer problems?!? That would be for the people to rectify, not government. What's the recourse now? If I don't like the school district I live in, what do I do? I can move to a better district (which my family did in 2006). Chalk it up to bad luck, accept it, and let my kids get an education that isn't as good, pay for private school (without having the funds to do so), send them to a charter school (lots of public funding issues there, eh?), or homeschool. The military can't move to a different school district, but can do all the rest.

quote:

How do you get from "only as good as parents want to make it" to "the problem will only grow by leaps and bounds by allowing local communities to write their own standards?"

quote:

How, exactly, does letting DC dictate standards across the Nation, get parents more involved?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Yeah, because a community that would support that would obviously be all about supporting schooling and being involved in their kids' educations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Relativity#cite_note-0
The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Transfer problems?!? That would be for the people to rectify, not government. What's the recourse now? If I don't like the school district I live in, what do I do? I can move to a better district (which my family did in 2006). Chalk it up to bad luck, accept it, and let my kids get an education that isn't as good, pay for private school (without having the funds to do so), send them to a charter school (lots of public funding issues there, eh?), or homeschool. The military can't move to a different school district, but can do all the rest.

If each "district" has a different set of standards......
You continue on from there

quote:

quote:

How do you get from "only as good as parents want to make it" to "the problem will only grow by leaps and bounds by allowing local communities to write their own standards?"

District A is heavy into science
District B is heavy into creationism
District C is poor, no computers
District D is jock town

quote:

quote:

How, exactly, does letting DC dictate standards across the Nation, get parents more involved?

it doesnt....

quote:


it standardizes the requirements for an education.

quote:


How does standardizing the educational system across the nation prevent parents from getting more involved in their children's education?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

You decide where to send your kid to school.

quote:

When a school isn't reaching college admission standards, do you think anything will change, or will these communities continue to isolate? When "jock town" is producing lots of athletes, but they can't pass college entrance exams, will jock town adapt?

quote:

But, if the biggest factor in academic success is parental involvement, what does it matter what the standards are if the parents aren't involved? If you want to fix education, you need to find a way to increase parental involvement, not set National standards.

quote:

Never said it did. Did say that it didn't help parents get more involved, to which you even agreed. There is a high correlation of academic success with the amount of books that are in the house. Does that mean we can increase academic success by supplying each family with a veritable library of books?

quote:

So, tell me again, how it is we're going to determine who does and who doesn't merit higher education?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

You decide where to send your kid to school.

You send them where you can afford to send them. I do hope you see the problem with your logic here.

quote:

quote:

When a school isn't reaching college admission standards, do you think anything will change, or will these communities continue to isolate? When "jock town" is producing lots of athletes, but they can't pass college entrance exams, will jock town adapt?

Nope, because colleges wont worry about it then. And you dont address the computer problems... the science programs... just zero in on jock town.

quote:

quote:

But, if the biggest factor in academic success is parental involvement, what does it matter what the standards are if the parents aren't involved? If you want to fix education, you need to find a way to increase parental involvement, not set National standards.

It matters because the lack of parental involvement wont change simply because standardization is gone.

quote:

Never said it did. Did say that it didn't help parents get more involved, to which you even agreed. There is a high correlation of academic success with the amount of books that are in the house. Does that mean we can increase academic success by supplying each family with a veritable library of books?

I did agree. I also believe that removing the standards will not improve parental involvement, thereby negating your supposition that children will be better off without them.

quote:

quote:

So, tell me again, how it is we're going to determine who does and who doesn't merit higher education?

Who does and doesn't merit higher education? How does anyone get to decide who does or doesnt merit an education? Should a jock get one simply because he can catch a football? no, but they do all the time. Is it fair that a child from a wealthy district gets better scores in science, thereby going to better schools than an equally bright student from a poor district? or one that doesnt want to teach that child evolution?
No one gets to decide if that child "merits" a better education.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

There is no problem with my logic. You are making the assumption that someone can't change their location/lifestyle/job/etc. to provide for a better education for their kids. Then again, with a voucher system, one could have more flexibility in choosing a school...

quote:

So, if a community lowers it's standards, colleges are going to lower their standards? Not likely. There is a definite prestige involved with one's graduates, so incoming students of low quality won't simply be accepted because because because because, because of the wonderful kids they are.

quote:

The standards are not exactly the issue here. We can set that standard wherever we want. How about you and I start a drive to increase the educational standards for graduation? We could set them to the point where no one could graduate until they have a certain level on the SAT/ACT tests. I'm thinking 700 reading and 700 math (assuming, of course that the SAT scoring system is still the same as it was in my youth; I know the ACT has changed, but I have no idea what it changed to). A combined 1400 (in my youth, each category had a top score of 800, so 1600 combined was the highest you could score) would be required. Our educational system would soar! Our kids would immediately become smarter, better educated, and we could rule the world!!

Forget that a standard isn't addressing the real issue. Forget that raising the bar for a school district without the school actually having any way to reach the bar won't help the schools, at all.

Are you also going to tell me that the Department of Education does nothing more than set national academic standards?!?

quote:

Jocks aren't necessarily meriting an education, tazzy. Don't even imply that the reason schools lure jocks is to get them an education. Schools are attracting jocks to make money (sports revenues) and attempt to increase student numbers to suck up more Fed/State money. The NCAA tracks graduation rates and a school can get docked if they drop too low. What is to be done when you admit too many athletes who can only play a sport without being able to spell their sport? You can lower your graduation standards for those kids, so more of them graduate. That's not exactly smart, is it? Plus, that will lower the standards for all the students, which won't increase prestige over the quality of their graduates. Colleges could simply massage the grades of the athletes who can't merit the actual grade. That way, only the stupid athletes (as opposed to the non-stupid athlete majority) would be involved, and will be far less likely to impact the quality of their graduates.

quote:

Why does a child from a wealthy district get better scores in science? Are you going to state that poor districts can't educate kids, or that per pupil spending is an indicator of academic success? No one stated anything about not teaching evolution, just about including creation or intelligent design.

And, yes, there are people who decide who merits more education. And, I'm going on record as stating that. I'm even going on record as stating that the parents are the single largest decider of whether their kids merit further education.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
There is no problem with my logic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Yeah, because a community that would support that would obviously be all about supporting schooling and being involved in their kids' educations. Which, btw, is the single largest contributing factor to academic success.

Now, please explain how the largest contributing factor to academic success is helped by any of the shit coming out of DC (regarding education).

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Then, do they not get what they deserve?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

There is no problem with my logic. You are making the assumption that someone can't change their location/lifestyle/job/etc. to provide for a better education for their kids. Then again, with a voucher system, one could have more flexibility in choosing a school...

No no no no no.
I am saying without standardization transferring between school systems will become a night mare.

quote:

quote:

So, if a community lowers it's standards, colleges are going to lower their standards? Not likely. There is a definite prestige involved with one's graduates, so incoming students of low quality won't simply be accepted because because because because, because of the wonderful kids they are.

Not a sports fan? There is a lot a college will do to have a winning season.

quote:

As far as the other examples? You are right, they wont change their standards... which means those students will be screwed. Isnt that the whole point Santorum was getting at? That not everyone should have a college education?

quote:

quote:

The standards are not exactly the issue here. We can set that standard wherever we want. How about you and I start a drive to increase the educational standards for graduation? We could set them to the point where no one could graduate until they have a certain level on the SAT/ACT tests. I'm thinking 700 reading and 700 math (assuming, of course that the SAT scoring system is still the same as it was in my youth; I know the ACT has changed, but I have no idea what it changed to). A combined 1400 (in my youth, each category had a top score of 800, so 1600 combined was the highest you could score) would be required. Our educational system would soar! Our kids would immediately become smarter, better educated, and we could rule the world!!
Forget that a standard isn't addressing the real issue. Forget that raising the bar for a school district without the school actually having any way to reach the bar won't help the schools, at all.
Are you also going to tell me that the Department of Education does nothing more than set national academic standards?!?

Hahahahaha
The primary functions of the Department of Education are to "establish policy for, administer and coordinate most federal assistance to education, collect data on US schools, and to enforce federal educational laws regarding privacy and civil rights."[10] The Department of Education does not establish schools or colleges.
Unlike the systems of most other countries, education in the United States is highly decentralized, and the federal government and Department of Education are not heavily involved in determining curricula or educational standards (with the recent exception of the No Child Left Behind Act). This has been left to state and local school districts. The quality of educational institutions and their degrees is maintained through an informal private process known as accreditation, over which the Department of Education has no direct public jurisdictional control.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Education
No, it doesnt. But maybe it should since you are so worried about our place in the world and all.

quote:

quote:

Jocks aren't necessarily meriting an education, tazzy. Don't even imply that the reason schools lure jocks is to get them an education. Schools are attracting jocks to make money (sports revenues) and attempt to increase student numbers to suck up more Fed/State money. The NCAA tracks graduation rates and a school can get docked if they drop too low. What is to be done when you admit too many athletes who can only play a sport without being able to spell their sport? You can lower your graduation standards for those kids, so more of them graduate. That's not exactly smart, is it? Plus, that will lower the standards for all the students, which won't increase prestige over the quality of their graduates. Colleges could simply massage the grades of the athletes who can't merit the actual grade. That way, only the stupid athletes (as opposed to the non-stupid athlete majority) would be involved, and will be far less likely to impact the quality of their graduates.

Graduation Rates
The Federal Student-Right-To-Know Act (SRKA) requires institutions to publish the graduation rates of entering full-time beginners* according to a standard methodology developed by the U.S. Department of Education. Graduation rate information is provided for the traditional first-time, full-time fall semester beginning cohorts*, as well as for students involved in intercollegiate athletics.
http://www.iu.edu/~uirr/reports/compliance/federal/index.shtml
Tsk tsk.... no Dept of Ed, no need to follow the Graduation Rate program or its requirements.

quote:

quote:

Why does a child from a wealthy district get better scores in science? Are you going to state that poor districts can't educate kids, or that per pupil spending is an indicator of academic success? No one stated anything about not teaching evolution, just about including creation or intelligent design.
And, yes, there are people who decide who merits more education. And, I'm going on record as stating that. I'm even going on record as stating that the parents are the single largest decider of whether their kids merit further education.

In my examples I put a system heavy into creationism. Do you deny there will be districts that will delete evolution as part of their program?

quote:

As far as the bolded part...
Im going on record as saying money is the single largest decider.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

Tsk tsk tsk... you forget that the NCAA levies penalties for programs not meeting it's graduation rates. That's not a Federal, DoEd policy. That's the NCAA.

quote:

NCLB prevented Federal funding if you didn't comply. That's more than simply setting standards. That's extortion or bribery, depending on your viewpoint.

quote:

Definitely a sports fan, and far too many colleges have some of the best football teams money can buy. However, the NCAA can keep a lid on the standardized test scores, or, perhaps, create their own required tests...

quote:

I would say that not everyone should get a college education. Not everyone is going to need an education. Not everyone will merit an education. The kid that grew up fixing cars with his Dad... does he really "need" a college education, or does he just need to keep doing what he's doing?

quote:

There may be areas that do that. But, knocking Santorum for that and not for his bill that just required creation to be taught, too, is wrong. I absolutely believe you are playing that up too much, tazzy. I doubt there will be many that would delete evolution from the curriculum.

quote:

What money? What money are you talking about? Is it the money spend paying teachers? Is it the money spent on the school's teaching aids? Is it the money spent on building ever new and expanding structures? Is it the money spent per pupil? Is it the money the parents make?

What money are you talking about?

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
There is no problem with my logic.

I'm wondering if you've misapplied a study. I haven't actually seen where you cited it (maybe I missed it) so I can't say.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Yeah, because a community that would support that would obviously be all about supporting schooling and being involved in their kids' educations. Which, btw, is the single largest contributing factor to academic success.

Now, please explain how the largest contributing factor to academic success is helped by any of the shit coming out of DC (regarding education).

What I'm wondering is where your "single largest contributing factor" claim comes from. Does the source you are getting this from fail to differentiate between information and disinformation the way you do or were they only looking at actual education?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Tsk tsk tsk... you forget that the NCAA levies penalties for programs not meeting it's graduation rates. That's not a Federal, DoEd policy. That's the NCAA.

There is no Graduation Rate without the Dept of Ed.

quote:

quote:

NCLB prevented Federal funding if you didn't comply. That's more than simply setting standards. That's extortion or bribery, depending on your viewpoint.

Thank you for proving my point. Without the Dept of Ed, those rules are out the door.

quote:

quote:

Definitely a sports fan, and far too many colleges have some of the best football teams money can buy. However, the NCAA can keep a lid on the standardized test scores, or, perhaps, create their own required tests...

They could... they wont. Big colleges make way too much money.

quote:

quote:

I would say that not everyone should get a college education. Not everyone is going to need an education. Not everyone will merit an education. The kid that grew up fixing cars with his Dad... does he really "need" a college education, or does he just need to keep doing what he's doing?

As computerized as cars have become? Yeah, he does.

quote:

quote:

There may be areas that do that. But, knocking Santorum for that and not for his bill that just required creation to be taught, too, is wrong. I absolutely believe you are playing that up too much, tazzy. I doubt there will be many that would delete evolution from the curriculum.

There are states, like Texas, wanting to do just that.

quote:

quote:

What money? What money are you talking about? Is it the money spend paying teachers? Is it the money spent on the school's teaching aids? Is it the money spent on building ever new and expanding structures? Is it the money spent per pupil? Is it the money the parents make?
What money are you talking about?

The money to actually attend college.

quote:

The money parents need to pay bills so they have to work two jobs just to make ends meet.

quote:

The money required to attend the better schools so those kids can get into a good college.

quote:


It all revolves around money.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

Really?!? Without the DoEd, there would be no one graduating?!?

quote:

Those are from within the DoEd. Setting your curriculum locally isn't true when you have to set it the way someone else not local wants you to set it. And, getting funding from the Fed's means you, essentially, become the bitch for whatever they decide. Again, that's not local, and you will get school districts and teachers that end up doing things to protect themselves rather than educate the children.

quote:

And, herein lies the problem. You are saying that college admissions is basically corrupt to the almighty dollar, that the NCAA is corrupt to the almighty dollar, so you want to put the federal government, which is ridiculously corrupt to the almighty dollar, in charge?

quote:

That's partially true. Cars are becoming more and more computerized. However, the equipment to test the cars and fix the cars are keeping pace. The mechanic just has to know which buttons to push to deal with the computerized stuff. The rest still relies on his/her skills with fixing cars. Mechanics aren't out re-programming, pulling resistors, capacitors (flux or otherwise), inductors, etc. to solder new pieces into a bad board. They replace the board, which comes with easy connectors.

quote:

Damn. I missed that DoEd program that pays people to pay bills and make ends meet.

quote:

But, but, but, we have the DoEd. Our schools are great! [/sarcasm]

What schools are you wanting to make better? Are you not talking about some sort of voucher system that allows education bucks to follow a student to the school of their choice (which I did mention earlier; which is a program heavily advertised against by Unions)?

quote:

Precisely. Which is why the only way to ensure each and every kid gets the same opportunity for success is to remove them from their homes and raise them in government run daycares, for free. If not, then those with money will have better opportunities than those without. Those with money will tend to have more involved parents, too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Really?!? Without the DoEd, there would be no one graduating?!?

No, the Dept of Ed sets the standard for the Graduation Rate... lol

quote:

NCLB was one of the worse pieces of legislation for our children to ever have been signed into law. I think the intentions were good, it backfired.

quote:

But killing the program when a reversal of that law could set so many things straight is plain stupid.

quote:

quote:

Those are from within the DoEd. Setting your curriculum locally isn't true when you have to set it the way someone else not local wants you to set it. And, getting funding from the Fed's means you, essentially, become the bitch for whatever they decide. Again, that's not local, and you will get school districts and teachers that end up doing things to protect themselves rather than educate the children.

Considering local funding is 44% of their budget. who is going to keep up with the 56% of the budget? Think that wont harm the schools?

quote:

quote:

And, herein lies the problem. You are saying that college admissions is basically corrupt to the almighty dollar, that the NCAA is corrupt to the almighty dollar, so you want to put the federal government, which is ridiculously corrupt to the almighty dollar, in charge?

LOL... they have been corrupt for years. Only need to look at Penn State for that answer. All the Feds do is level the playing field a bit more.

quote:

quote:

That's partially true. Cars are becoming more and more computerized. However, the equipment to test the cars and fix the cars are keeping pace. The mechanic just has to know which buttons to push to deal with the computerized stuff. The rest still relies on his/her skills with fixing cars. Mechanics aren't out re-programming, pulling resistors, capacitors (flux or otherwise), inductors, etc. to solder new pieces into a bad board. They replace the board, which comes with easy connectors.

No, they are reading the computers designed to read the memories in these cars, replacing memory boards and such. I can work on a carburator... a fuel injector, no way.

quote:

quote:

Damn. I missed that DoEd program that pays people to pay bills and make ends meet.

Damn you need to take the blinders off. You do like your one trach way of thinking. Money makes education possible on many fronts. Not only tuition, books, meals, but also the lack of when mom and dad can only make enough to pay the bills, but not also the tuition, and Jr has to wait till he outgrows the age limit to declare himself as his own household.

quote:

But, but, but, we have the DoEd. Our schools are great! [/sarcasm]
What schools are you wanting to make better? Are you not talking about some sort of voucher system that allows education bucks to follow a student to the school of their choice (which I did mention earlier; which is a program heavily advertised against by Unions)?

quote:

quote:

Precisely. Which is why the only way to ensure each and every kid gets the same opportunity for success is to remove them from their homes and raise them in government run daycares, for free. If not, then those with money will have better opportunities than those without. Those with money will tend to have more involved parents, too.

Goose-stepping again?

quote:

Nope, there are many ways to ensure that. Such as a livable wage. Such as a viable educational system. Such as a free college education... instead of some idiot insisting the children of our country dont merit an education.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)