Public schools are a lie.....

[Jazzyjen]

Austin, you are right about the money aspect. It is a real shame that what could have been a good idea became bastardized by greed.

Ps- does anyone know why Texas chooses the content of curriculums sold in the U.S.?

[Bella99]

Austin, you are right about the money aspect. It is a real shame that what could have been a good idea became bastardized by greed.

Ps- does anyone know why Texas chooses the content of curriculums sold in the U.S.?

Because Texas buys more textbooks than any other state. Sadly, Gov. Goodhair has managed to pack the state's schoolboard with a bunch of bible-thumping nitwits. (No disrespect to the bible, but it doesn't belong in biology class.) Many years ago the voters of Texas chose George W. over Ann Richards for Governor, thus unleashing a plague of financial doom, wars and stupidity on our country that continues to this day in the form of Rick Perry.

[Conuly]

Ps- does anyone know why Texas chooses the content of curriculums sold in the U.S.?

Texas and California are hugely influential because they only allow approved curricula in their schools and also because they have large school systems. So all the publishers want to be able to be sold there.

[emmiedahl]

The idea of a national curriculum scares me, because a significant proportion of the country consists of absolute morons who elect people so stupid I'm surprised they remember to breathe.

As an example of what I'm talking about, until recently California took no national funds for sex education programs, so that our state could teach kids comprehensive sex education at our own expense. Had we a national curriculum our state's kids would have been stuck with abstinence only education, and we'd have a teen pregnancy rate like that of Texas.

Considering the number of creationists, climate denialists, abiotic oil nuts, St. Reagan worshippers and other reality impaired people in the federal government, I'd much rather we be left to set our own standards.

I get that. Who would we trust to create the national system? I don't know. I kind of feel the same way about healthcare; I want it nationalized, but I am not sure I trust the government to do it well. How did we get so fucked up in this country that we can't trust our legislators with picking out a kindergarten science book?

I guess I am just really happy that (even though we are not wealthy) my kids live in a pretty wealthy school district and get music, art, PE, and some science. I wish all of the American children had that, and more. When I hear about other countries who have national school systems, their kids are getting a really great education. They are learning real science and a better range of literature and history.

[jenny_islander]

I think that any kind of national curriculum would be a nightmare--imagine the "But slavery was good for Africans" apologists getting that crap into textbooks nationwide, or the "Climate change is a LIBRUL LIE" denialists, or . . .

But I would love to see a book and/or site detailing what assorted non-governmental organizations have recommended for different subjects and which textbooks explicitly refer to them. For example, I'm using Nebel's Building Foundations of Scientific Understanding, which uses standards promoted by the National Science Teachers Association. I heard about it through word of mouth. It would be handy to be able to look up other science textbooks that refer to it and compare them. Are there similar standards for classroom readers (by a national council of people who want kids to enjoy reading), math books (by a national council of people who want kids to be good at math), etc.? Wouldn't it be nice to know with one click?

[Austin]

I guess I am just really happy that (even though we are not wealthy) my kids live in a pretty wealthy school district and get music, art, PE, and some science. I wish all of the American children had that, and more. When I hear about other countries who have national school systems, their kids are getting a really great education. They are learning real science and a better range of literature and history.

We could really learn a lot from Finland, whose students score higher than any other country in the world except for South Korea. I would argue that the price that South Korean students pay is not worth first place, as Finnish students spend the least number of hours in the classroom, and South Korean students are highly pressured and have long school days and school years.

Finland has few non-native speakers relatively, so that's different from the USA. But they have determined that start school later for children is best (more like 7 years old than 5), which I wholeheartedly support and worked extremely well with our children. They minimize disruptive transitions in schools, keeping childen in the same buildings and often with the same teachers for longer periods of time. Teaching is a highly valued profession in Finland and standards are high for teachers.

Demographically, Finland is obviously very different from the USA, but we could definitely learn something from them.

And we need to get rid of this stupid, agrarian calendar school year we have.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8601207.stm

[formergothardite]

Have to post and run, but this is about his God's Daughter interview and he comes and talks to them in the comment section.

http://formerconservative.wordpress.com ... revisited/

[Dinorah]

Do they even know what Marxism really is? Have they ever bothered to get some information about it?

The hatred of public schools also baffles me because they make it sound like some newfangled invention, whereas some form of public instruction done by teachers rather than parents has been around a long, long time, since antiquity.

[Beb]

Public schools are a lie? But.......but ..... I teach in one. And....and.....and.....it's real, and I saw another one down the road a ways. I was driving home when I passed right by an elementary school (isn't that a public school?). THEN, on my way to the supermarket, I drove by the public school administrative offices.

Say what ya want about them, but they aren't a lie; they do exist. :shock:

[formergothardite]

Have to post and run, but this is about his God's Daughter interview and he comes and talks to them in the comment section.

http://formerconservative.wordpress.com ... revisited/

Some amusing lines from this blog in reply to the crazy answers on Miss Raquel's blog:

14) What do you think the man’s role is in the home – compared to the woman’s? Men are equally yoked with women in completely unequal ways.

what? “equally yoked in completely unequal ways†– me no understand weird fundy language.

Men can’t have children, women can’t fight to protect herself with the efficacy of man, as only a man can, if he is faithful unto death.

Fight to protect herself? Are we living in the old west now? …or do you just have to live in really crappy neighborhoods because you all think education is evil?

[Mama Mia]

I'm going to agree with PraiseSaiten -- I also live in California and the reason I am against almost any increased Federal influence in virtually any area is because I'm selfish and spoiled and scared to death that all the scary States will take away from our State and local laws.

In a state with 40 million people, with mostly progressive leadership, it would seem like a big step backward to have to go along with whatever Oklahoma or West Dakota wants to teach. And, the influence at the Senate level is so disproportionately skewed towards the small states that I don't think it would come out well.

[ems]

Yet another fool rewriting history to better suit their nutty agenda. Apparently, the Constitution is not taught in fundie school.

Yeah, unless those rights include education, health care, jobs or money...

[dawn9476]

What is it with fundies and public schooling?

They know that the more a person is educated, the less likely they are to be a Republican and religious.

[ems]

I think one of the things we could do is create a national school system. Have a national curriculum (which would make the tests a better assessment), national uniform, etc. Just witnessing the confusion on the Chatter grading thread makes me think that things are too local. Americans cannot even tell a European what school a certain grade would be in. I think things usually go more smoothly where there is a system. I read a book about the Japanese school system, and they are totally organized, which is why they are getting a better product with less money. They also have (imo) a superior teacher training system, but the uniformity of schools definitely contributes to that.

Now that the fundies would really call Marxist!

(Don't get me wrong; I think the idea has some merit, but if "government schools," which REALLY vary based on the county/district they are located in, are some sort of national indoctrination plot, then I can't imagine how the crazies would react to this.)

You mentioning Japanese schools reminds me of a film we watched in my Child Development and Culture class back in undergrad. It contrasted preschools in Japan, China, and the U.S. The school in the U.S. was in Hawaii, and I remember my friend pointing out that it might not have been the best example of a mainstream American preschool. But I thought, from what I remember (was several years ago), that the Japanese preschools had a lot of strengths. The Chinese ones were a bit creepy in their super-regimentation.

[dawn9476]

What is it with fundies and public schooling?

And on the subject of Charter Schools, to have more of them is just not going to be enough for conservatives. Once they get more up and running, they will start chipping away at what kind of curriculum a charter school can have.

Another problem with charter schools is you also have a lot of them that are just private schools in disguise. The Washington Post did an article a few weeks ago about these charter schools in California, that were suppose to be diverse schools who take disadvantage kids. It turned out that they were not really that diverse and you had more rich white kids going to the schools.

Rich kids going to school on the tax payers dime is why vouchers for all kids is also a bad idea.

[ems]

I would have a problem with a national curriculum if it was managed as poorly as the current "no child left behind" . I think the problem with too much standardization is that teachers are left solely teaching to the test, without any room for following children's interests, local events, inclusion or art etc..

Equal funding nationally would be great, the current system is far too inequitable.

This.

[Wolfie]

They require advanced training for teachers, pay them well, and treat them with respect.

CA and some other states require graduate work for teachers, but their salaries aren't all that different from states that don't. Especially when cost of living is taken into account. (It really varies across the US) Not to mention the beatings that teachers have gotten in the media- and historically even, while teachers were somewhat respected, they were still second class citizens that were expected to live to strict social standards on lower salaries.

Of course, some of the reasons for Finland's good performance are outside the classroom. They have a more egalitarian society in general, and a better social safety net, so poorer kids don't tend to show up at school lacking medical care or safe housing or enough to eat, like they do in the U.S.

This- how can we expect a child to learn when their home life is in turmoil?

[Wolfie]

I work for the teachers union, there is no opposition from the unions regarding the concept of a national curriculum. The devil is in the details. In my state, unionized teachers have been working to develop the core learning standards and the related curriculum. The union has been one of the lead groups along with the parent's groups and School Board's Association in opposing the dumbing down of state regent's exams and the elimination of elective classes.

Several of the main impediments to a national curriculum are state politicians and State school boards in states like Texas and Kansas who hold very conservative ideas about curriculum and local control. Look at the recent battles over the whitewashing of history books. How could the federal government impose a decent national curriculum when we have people in power who find Jefferson's and Madison's views on the separation of church and state so objectionable that they want to remove them from textbooks?

This- And some individual subject area teacher's organizations (like MENC) have written national standards that teachers can use as a guideline.

My worry is if it left out subjects like, music, history, science, art and PE that currently are not tested in elementary schools in most states so they're ignored for teaching what is on the test- like reading and math...

[Wolfie]

Austin, I respect your opinion, and that is certainly educational (especially since charter schools have "come of age" since I got my BA in Ed), but not all charter schools are like that. I went to college in a town where there were several charter schools that were not run by big corps like yours. As a matter of fact, several of my old college professors had a hand in designing the school and its curriculum, and most of the professors kids went there. So, much like public schools, you can't generalize all charters based on what you have experienced in your community.

I've taught in one good charter school and met a lot of people who have worked in bad charter schools. There is so little regulation in charter and private schools that the bad schools tend to outweigh the good.

[Wolfie]

For starters, distribute the resources more equitably. The current system in the U.S. promotes inequity. The kids who have all the advantages at home go to the best-funded schools. The kids whose families have struggle to give them enough food, clothing, nurturing-time and safe places to play go to schools that are struggling too.

Again, a CA thing here- the state gathers the money and distributes it to the schools on a per student basis.

The schools tend to be struggling here because of either district mismanagement, or lack of parent involvement. When a student does not have a stable home life, it's nearly impossible for them to learn. It's just a basic need, that has to be met before MOST children can move onto the next one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_h ... y_of_needs

[Beb]

To divert in mode somewhat:

I taught my younger daughter to read, formally within two weeks when she was four. Of course, the ground was prepared for years with a thorough whole-language atmosphere from her earliest months.

But school is more than learning reading, writing, and sums. You learn to interact with different people who have different ideals and different values and define yourself for yourself. You learn that some teachers are fair and some are tyrants, some students are bullies and some are friends, you navigate social mores. You learn to get up at a certain time and that you are responsible for getting work in on time and being on time for class. You learn to work together and to work on your own. These things are threatening to the home-schooling fundies.

My nephew has been "home schooled" his entire life. He is a complete mess at 21, sitting in his mother's house playing video games. He's never had to be anywhere on time, he's never had a job, he's never had to deal with criticism, and he's timidly aggressive because he is afraid of everything.

My two daughters went to public schools and are strong, resilient young college women who can interact with a lot of different people comfortably and effectively and have the tools to defend their morals and beliefs when faced with others who don't share those morals and beliefs. I would never consider only homeschooling my children, and I don't think it's the best way to raise kids in the US.

[Wolfie]

Austin, you are right about the money aspect. It is a real shame that what could have been a good idea became bastardized by greed.

Ps- does anyone know why Texas chooses the content of curriculums sold in the U.S.?

Basically there are two choices- CA and TX. Those two states buy the most books in the US, so the textbook companies cater to them. (But I think that other than the west coast, most go with the Texas versions)

[Mommy22alyns]

To divert in mode somewhat:

I taught my younger daughter to read, formally within two weeks when she was four. Of course, the ground was prepared for years with a thorough whole-language atmosphere from her earliest months.

But school is more than learning reading, writing, and sums. You learn to interact with different people who have different ideals and different values and define yourself for yourself. You learn that some teachers are fair and some are tyrants, some students are bullies and some are friends, you navigate social mores. You learn to get up at a certain time and that you are responsible for getting work in on time and being on time for class. You learn to work together and to work on your own. These things are threatening to the home-schooling fundies.

My nephew has been "home schooled" his entire life. He is a complete mess at 21, sitting in his mother's house playing video games. He's never had to be anywhere on time, he's never had a job, he's never had to deal with criticism, and he's timidly aggressive because he is afraid of everything.

My two daughters went to public schools and are strong, resilient young college women who can interact with a lot of different people comfortably and effectively and have the tools to defend their morals and beliefs when faced with others who don't share those morals and beliefs. I would never consider only homeschooling my children, and I don't think it's the best way to raise kids in the US.

Your nephew's experience is not the experience of EVERY homeschooler out there. Your daughters' experience is not the experience of every public school kid out there.