Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #321   Report Post  
Cliff Huprich
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

In article , strabo
writes:


Your posts in this thread imply that those who graduate from HS
today are brighter and better educated than in 1965.

While no one here knows the academic achievements of your kid, he
is apparently not representative of the general population of
high schoolers.

The typical college graduate today knows less of the basics than
did the typical high school graduate of 1965.


You know this because of your "close" relatives?
Any of them make it? Without the guns? (For the purpose
of this exercise we should probably accept tenth grade ....)
--
Cliff
  #322   Report Post  
Ed Huntress
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

"strabo" wrote in message
news

But it's simply not true that kids are not as smart. For example, the
decline in SAT scores that have been reported off and on over the last

few
decades have been accompanied by a higher *percentage* of kids actually
taking the SAT. More kids who are down the line academically take the

test.
It used to be mostly the top kids who even took it. They don't often

mention
that.


And the high college dropout rate reflects this.


How so? What are the comparative percentages? Do you know anything you're
talking about, or are you just making it up as you go along?


"Smart" is not appropriate. There are numerous tests and
surveys with which to make comparisons. I suspect the potential
is similar. The three key reasons responsible for today's low
education scores a incompetent teachers; minority performance;
inadequate curriculum.


Tell us what you're basing these assertions on, strabo. You keep making
these sweeping claims.

The performance and graduation rates of inner city schools are
deplorable. Some schools refuse to flunk failures and instead
pass them through graduation. Most of those that do graduate are
functionally illiterate.


Is that a problem caused by the schools, or by the parents?

Ed Huntress


  #323   Report Post  
hamei
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

strabo wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 22:30:51 -0800, hamei
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

"strabo" wrote in message
...


The typical college graduate today knows less of the basics than
did the typical high school graduate of 1965.


I seriously doubt that, strabo. What's the basis of that assertion?




Something he read in the bathroom, probably. Sure sounds
like something he pulled out of his ass, at any rate.



So which is it?




I don't really know ... I wasn't in there with you. It smells
like something you pulled out of your ass, however.
  #324   Report Post  
Don Wilkins
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 03:55:37 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

,;"Gary H. Lucas" wrote in message
,;news ,;
,; "Ed Huntress" wrote in message
,; . net...
,; "strabo" wrote in message
,; ...
,; s
,;
,; Your posts in this thread imply that those who graduate from HS
,; today are brighter and better educated than in 1965.
,;
,; I don't know if they're brighter; I doubt if there's any difference. As
,; for
,; "better educated," they have a better curriculum and better specific
,; content. Compared to the history books my son is using, for example, the
,; ones we used back in '65 were the Classic Comics version.
,;
,;
,; While no one here knows the academic achievements of your kid, he
,; is apparently not representative of the general population of
,; high schoolers.
,;
,; The typical college graduate today knows less of the basics than
,; did the typical high school graduate of 1965.
,;
,; I seriously doubt that, strabo. What's the basis of that assertion?
,;
,; --
,; Ed Huntress
,; (remove "3" from email address for email reply)
,;
,;
,; I suspect that kids today seem less smart simply because as WE get older
,;our
,; accumulated knowledge that we compare to has gotten much greater.
,;
,; "Kid, I've already forgotten more that you know! That's too bad, because
,;it
,; means I've really forgotten a lot!"
,;
,; The older I get the better I used to be.
,;
,; Gary H. Lucas
,;
,;
,;
,;Haha! Yes, I wonder sometimes how we could have been so smart, and today's
,;kids so dumb, when I read things like the contents of strabo's post. g
,;
,;It's also true that the education in other countries has gotten better a lot
,;faster than ours has. That's the pinch we feel about our education system,
,;which certainly needs a lot of improvement.


But many of those education systems in "other" countries filter at
about 11 years of age. Some students go to trade schools others go to
college prep schools and it is not the student's choice of program. In
this country there will be students enrolled in public school with a
"minder" and no hope of meaningful employment because of unfortunate
circumstances when selecting from the gene pool. They tend to lower
the class average and the level of teaching.

If we had selection system similar to theirs and the students were
taught at a higher level because slow learners were elsewhere then we
would compare better. I am not advocating that type of screening just
pointing out the fact that it exists in some countries and it
frequently is those countries that are held up for comparison.

In addition as long as we have the tenure system for teachers you are
going to have too many mediocre teachers in the system. I once asked a
school board member these questions...

1. How many teachers have been told to move on during the 3 year
probationary period in the last 20 years? The answer was "none". My
response was "There isn't anyone that is that good at hiring
employees.

2. How many teachers have been fired in the last 20 years because
their teaching skill have drifted to an unacceptable level (read
burnout)? Again "none". Presumably this was because they hadn't raped
a student in front of the class. Perhaps the only legitimate reason to
fire an incompetent teacher.

Both questions brought out the same reply from a school board member
that I hold in considerable respect. My response was the same to both
answers.

,;
,;But it's simply not true that kids are not as smart. For example, the
,;decline in SAT scores that have been reported off and on over the last few
,;decades have been accompanied by a higher *percentage* of kids actually
,;taking the SAT. More kids who are down the line academically take the test.
,;It used to be mostly the top kids who even took it. They don't often mention
,;that.


Because it is not politically correct to suggest that one student may
not learn as well as another. When I was in school each grade had an
"A" & a "B" class and everyone knew what those designations meant. If
one suggested that today there would be a tar and feather party and a
trip out of town on a rail. Actually I think both groups would benefit
as both could be taught closer to their level of competence but the PC
police wouldn't allow it.

  #325   Report Post  
Lewis Hartswick
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

Gunner wrote:

Its obvious. The public schools will finally have to get off their
overstuffed dead asses and be competative with the private schools.
When they see their tax dollars dribbling away..they will indeed
institute improvements. Standardized testing will make sure everyone
is working on a level playing field. Those that cannot teach worth a
**** will be dumped in favor of those who can actually teach.
Administration costs will fall, as they remove the deadwood and
streamline. With fewer kids in the public schools, wear and tear on
the infrastructure will be reduced and for those children who tear up
the place, are "unteachable" etc..they will be finally handled the way
they should be. With the proper punishment and expulsion as needed.
Im sure there will be Boot Camp type schools that will spring up for
problem children that will accept vouchers. It will really suck to be
an asshole child who wants to disrupt things.

Gunner


I only wish it were true. They will only pressure the legislature for
more and MORE money. Those that can't teach, most will have tenure or
some such so will be there for eternity. :-). Administration costs will
always continue to grow because an administrators sallary depends on
how many people are on the TO&E under him. With a higher percentage of
the "unteachables" in the schools the "wear and tear" will be worse.
Punishment, What is that? :-)
My wife substitutes and often in "special ed" classes. You may not
have ever come across the sorts of students in these classes. Kids in
public school that are almost "vegitables" for all the mental, physical,
and emotional ability they have. This is about half of the problem,
other half is, IMHO , the inability to dicipline the missbehavior kids.
...lew...


  #326   Report Post  
Ed Huntress
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

"Don Wilkins" wrote in message
...

big snip

Because it is not politically correct to suggest that one student may
not learn as well as another. When I was in school each grade had an
"A" & a "B" class and everyone knew what those designations meant. If
one suggested that today there would be a tar and feather party and a
trip out of town on a rail. Actually I think both groups would benefit
as both could be taught closer to their level of competence but the PC
police wouldn't allow it.


'Sorry for clipping so much interesting thought, but, in the interest of
time, just one thing you may be interested in: My son's school does have two
tracks, with A and B classes in nearly every program. In math, it's three
tracks: "Standard," "Advanced," and "Accelerated," which is Advanced at
double-time. There are no apologies made for it.

Ed Huntress


  #327   Report Post  
Larry Jaques
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:18:17 GMT, Gunner
brought forth from the murky depths:

Its obvious. The public schools will finally have to get off their
overstuffed dead asses and be competative with the private schools.
When they see their tax dollars dribbling away..they will indeed
institute improvements. Standardized testing will make sure everyone
is working on a level playing field. Those that cannot teach worth a
**** will be dumped in favor of those who can actually teach.


Beautiful thought, but do you know how much it costs to fight
the teachers' union?


Administration costs will fall, as they remove the deadwood and
streamline. With fewer kids in the public schools, wear and tear on
the infrastructure will be reduced and for those children who tear up
the place, are "unteachable" etc..they will be finally handled the way
they should be. With the proper punishment and expulsion as needed.


Hear, hear!


Im sure there will be Boot Camp type schools that will spring up for
problem children that will accept vouchers. It will really suck to be
an asshole child who wants to disrupt things.


They'd double their money selling tour tickets so parents
could watch that kind of school in action.

pop And then Gunner woke up and reality hit again.


---=====---
After all else fails, read the instructions.
---=====---
Website Design and Update http://www.diversify.com
  #328   Report Post  
Jim Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

strabo wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 04:52:44 GMT, Jim Stewart
wrote:


Gary H. Lucas wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. cv.net...


"strabo" wrote in message
m...
s


Your posts in this thread imply that those who graduate from HS
today are brighter and better educated than in 1965.

I don't know if they're brighter; I doubt if there's any difference. As

for


"better educated," they have a better curriculum and better specific
content. Compared to the history books my son is using, for example, the
ones we used back in '65 were the Classic Comics version.



While no one here knows the academic achievements of your kid, he
is apparently not representative of the general population of
high schoolers.

The typical college graduate today knows less of the basics than
did the typical high school graduate of 1965.

I seriously doubt that, strabo. What's the basis of that assertion?

--
Ed Huntress
(remove "3" from email address for email reply)



I suspect that kids today seem less smart simply because as WE get older our
accumulated knowledge that we compare to has gotten much greater.

"Kid, I've already forgotten more that you know! That's too bad, because it
means I've really forgotten a lot!"

The older I get the better I used to be.


I've had the opportunity to hire several high school kids
as materials handlers and engineering aids/interns. I've
been very impressed with their abilities. The engineering
intern has been very fast and sharp. The materials handlers
are more accurate than most of the adults we've used.



You discriminated in order to get the best available.
You didn't take a random sample.


My 17 year old daughter comes and gets me every night to
watch Jeopardy and she holds her own against her old man.
I have nothing bad to say about this generation of kids.



Either your daughter is a genius or your knowledge and
skills are lacking. You are the adult. You have the advantage
of time and experience. You're supposed to know considerably
more.


And your response questions your ability to recognize
and understand human intellegence.

My daughter has received, both from her parents and
from the public school system a very good education
of general knowledge. She consistantly beats her
dad on questions pertaining to art, Shakespere, Greek
mythology, and popular music. Things her dad either
never learned or forgot 30 years ago. Her dad dominates
in science, religion, wars and US history.

She also benefits from a quicker recall of facts than
her dad. Probably has to to with less facts to
search through.

As to my knowledge, here's the website of my company:
http://www.jkmicro.com

The J in JK is me. The K is my wife. I'm not
quite a genuis, but I've done well considering that
I'm one generation removed from poor white trash.
















  #329   Report Post  
Ed Huntress
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

"Why" wrote in message
...
"Don Wilkins" wrote in message
.. .

big snip

Because it is not politically correct to suggest that one student may
not learn as well as another. When I was in school each grade had an
"A" & a "B" class and everyone knew what those designations meant. If
one suggested that today there would be a tar and feather party and a
trip out of town on a rail. Actually I think both groups would benefit
as both could be taught closer to their level of competence but the PC
police wouldn't allow it.


'Sorry for clipping so much interesting thought, but, in the interest of
time, just one thing you may be interested in: My son's school does have

two
tracks, with A and B classes in nearly every program. In math, it's three
tracks: "Standard," "Advanced," and "Accelerated," which is Advanced at
double-time. There are no apologies made for it.

Ed Huntress


You are lucky ED, here in TX we just turn out Presidents


Many others of us are hoping to turn out the Texas President, too. Maybe the
Houston Astros will want him. g

Ed Huntress


  #330   Report Post  
Robert Sturgeon
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:24:31 -0800, Jim Stewart
wrote:

(snips)

The J in JK is me. The K is my wife. I'm not
quite a genuis,


Obviously not.

(rest snipped)

--
Robert Sturgeon,
proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy
and the evil gun culture.


  #331   Report Post  
Jim Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

Robert Sturgeon wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:24:31 -0800, Jim Stewart
wrote:

(snips)


The J in JK is me. The K is my wife. I'm not
quite a genuis,



Obviously not.


But I have known many and most of them have some
degree of dyslexia.

  #332   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cliff's Magic Bowl -10 inch OD 30 inch OD Circumference

Santa Cruz Mike wrote:

I will make it clearer.. a bowl with a 10 inch od and a 30 inch od
circumference...


Only a problem if you assume the bowl to be circular.

--
Joe Bramblett, KD5NRH
  #333   Report Post  
John Ings
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cliff's Magic Bowl -10 inch OD 30 inch OD Circumference


The key to an alternative reading of the verse 1 Kings 7:23 is to be
found in the very ancient Hebrew tradition (see, e.g., [Britannica
1985], [Banon 1987, pp. 52, 53]) to differently write (spell) and read
some words of the Bible; the reading version is usually regarded as a
correct one (in particular, it is always correct from the point of
view of the Hebrew grammar, and this is why it could be easily either
remembered or reconstructed from the written version), whereas the
written version slightly deviates from the correct spelling. (Another
approach, involving the comparison between written forms of the same
words in 1 Kings 7:23 and Chronicles 4:2 is cited in [Posamentiern,
Gordan 1984]; see more about this version of the exegesis in 4).

1 Kings 7:23 Then he made the molten sea; it was round, ten cubits
from brim to brim, and five cubits high. A line of thirty cubits would
encircle it completely.

7:26 Its thickness was a handbreadth; its brim was made like the brim
of a cup, like the flower of a lily; it held two thousand baths.


2 Chonicles 4:2Then he made the molten sea; it was round, ten cubits
from rim to rim, and five cubits high. A line of thirty cubits would
encircle it completely.

4:5 Its thickness was a handbreadth; its rim was made like the rim of
a cup, like the flower of a lily; it held three thousand baths.


The letters of the Hebrew alphabets were traditionly used (well before
the building of the First Temple [Guitel 1975]) for numerical purposes
and, thus, have had numerical values . Using these values, one can
calculate values of words (as sums of values of letters, but also in
several other, less obvious and/or more involved ways); these methods
became later known as gematria [Michael Munk 1983, p. 163],
[Britannica 1985]. Here are the standard numerical equivalents of the
letters of the Hebrew alphabet: cm = cmti8 scaled 0

Aleph=1, Beth=2, Gimel=3, Daled=4, Hea=5, Vav=6, Zain=7, CHet=8,
Tet=9, Yod=10, Caf=20, Lammed=30, Mem=40, Noon=50, Samech=60,
Aiin=70, Pea=80, TSadik=90, Qof=100, Reish=200, Shin=300, Tav=400.


In particular, the numerical equivalent of the written version
,``QVH'', is Qof+Vav+Hea=100+6+5=111, whereas the numerical equivalent
of the reading version, ``QV'', is Qof+Vav=106.

Using these numerical equivalents, one defines as follows:

[...] (1)

Thus the Hebrew pi = 3.1415094

(1)See http://www.math.ubc.ca/people/facult...l/bpi/bpi.html
for math calculations whose formulas I can't reproduce in a newsgroup
post.



  #334   Report Post  
Koz
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

Jim,

I have to disagree about the implication about the ADA portion of
education (not facilities) sucking from the schools. Actually there is
a VERY good system in place for kids with special needs. They are
thoroughly and properly tested to determine their needs, weaknesses and
strengths (shouldn't this happen to all kids) and an individualized
education plan (IEP is developed that emphasises the specific needs
(again, shouldn't all kids be taught to their strengths and weaknesses?)

The failure of this system currently is that the public schools do the
bare minimum and just throw the kids into the classroom. The teacher
ends up without a real plan or process for educating a particular
student and because they are bored/not served they tend to fail, act
out, and generally be a drain. No real progress happens. Remember that
the VAST majority kids who need these services are just barely below
average....you can't assume that they are the bottom IQ who are thrown
in to be babysat at school.

If the IEP system were proper addressed to ALL students, things would
improve a lot in schools

Koz

jim rozen wrote:

In article , Koz says...



One rule I would impose on vouchers...If you accept them (assuming the
voucher is the same amount the public school would get), you accept them
as full payment. The goal is get people who can do it MORE efficiently
and better, not more costly and exclusive than public schools.



This would make sense to me. I think one reason why private schools
invariably are run at a lower cost than public schools is their
ability to operate outside an entire subset of regulations that
public schools are required to obey.

The ADA thing that I mentioned before, for example.

Private schools have one thing that public schools would *love*
to be able to boast about, but cannot: the ability to say
"no" to some students. One single kid can cause enormous amounts
of hassle and disruption in a classroom by misbehaving. I saw
that happen in my daugher's school for two or three years running.

Then that kid was told "don't come back, we've tried everything."
What a difference.

Public schools can't do that. That's one more reason they
cost more to run. They *have* to take everyone.

Jim

================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =





  #335   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

In article , Koz says...

I have to disagree about the implication about the ADA portion of
education (not facilities) sucking from the schools. Actually there is
a VERY good system in place for kids with special needs. They are
thoroughly and properly tested to determine their needs, weaknesses and
strengths (shouldn't this happen to all kids) and an individualized
education plan (IEP is developed that emphasises the specific needs
(again, shouldn't all kids be taught to their strengths and weaknesses?)


OK hold on there *just* a moment. Sure there is a great system
for disabled kids in place right now. *Who* pays for it??

The taxpayer.

Yep, if you calculated 'cost to educate' for each student, the
disabled kids will indeed be costing more to the taxpayer.

But hold on now and be fair, the voucher proponents compare
private schools and public schools, and say 'hey, the private
ones are *better* because they do the same job - maybe better -
and they do it for less.'

But the private schools don't have to educate disabled kids.
So the comparison is faulty at least on that note and an attempt
to fund vouchers on an 'equal slice' approach is going to leave
the expensive kids out in the cold.

I sure agree that public schools can always be improved, but
my suspicion is that vouchers a)wil shift the same problems
over in to the private sector, b) not magically produce
more teachers to staff the influx into private schools, and
c) are probabaly a attempt to end-run the first amendment
issues so that parents can sent their kids to religious
schools on the taxpayer nickel.

I would advocate fixing the problem where it is, rather than
generating new ones.

Jim
Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================



  #336   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

In article , Gunner says...

... How does a voucher plan ensure
that the left-behinds will still get a decent education?


Its obvious. The public schools will finally have to get off their
overstuffed dead asses and be competative with the private schools.
When they see their tax dollars dribbling away..they will indeed
institute improvements. Standardized testing will make sure everyone
is working on a level playing field.


Umm, not so obvious. You can have standardized testing like
Texas has, where everyone simply passes, even those who
don't *have* the skills. Or like in NY, where many kids
fail. Just *having* testing does not mean that the schools
work.

Those that cannot teach worth a
**** will be dumped in favor of those who can actually teach.


Still not obvious here. If Fitch were around, he would (did)
ask the biggie question: WHERE are you going to get those
teachers who can actually teach? All the teachers are already
employed. So how are you going to staff the extra, or larger,
private schools once vouchers permit portability?

Administration costs will fall, as they remove the deadwood and
streamline. With fewer kids in the public schools, wear and tear on
the infrastructure will be reduced and for those children who tear up
the place, are "unteachable" etc..they will be finally handled the way
they should be. With the proper punishment and expulsion as needed.


I guess you weren't listening, but public schools can't expell
kids. They simply go into a more expensive version of public
school that the taxpayer still has to fund. So in your scheme,
the public schools become dumping grounds for the problem (read,
'expensive') kids with one twist - they have less money than
before to educate them.

Im sure there will be Boot Camp type schools that will spring up for
problem children that will accept vouchers. It will really suck to be
an asshole child who wants to disrupt things.


I think those already exist. They keep having news stories about
them, where the kids are incarcerated in prison, outside of the
US.

The best of these that I've ever seen is NY state's "Challenge"
program. They run the kids through what looks like a version of
basic training up at Camp Smith. What happens when something
around here actually works? Yep, you got it. State funding
for that program got cut off.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #337   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

In article , Gunner says...

Read the First Amendment again. The


Why, I know it by heart: "...no law respecting the establishment
of religion..."

The courts take that to mean you CANNOT put granite tombstones
in your courthouse, and CANNOT fund parochial schools with
taxpayer money. Get over it.

Jim's crystal ball prediction: (and I will wager on this one)
The moment vouchers are instituted anywhere in the US, there
will be a first amendment court case that goes up to supreme
court within two years.

Btw..I know several Jewish families whose children attend Catholic
schools, simply for the superior education. They simply do not join in
the religious activities, and the schools have structured themselves
to allow such as this without making the Jewish kids feel left out.


Sure, I've seen the same thing. Difference here is that the parents
are accepting that this is a catholic school and are buying into
the situation with their own private money. My take on it is that
the instant vouchers arrive, the state now has a responsibility
to see that the money is being spend wisely. So there will be
meddling in the private schools affairs.

To put it another way, if you really want to screw something
up, put the government in charge. My fear is that by funding
private schools with public money, you won't be elevating public
schools to private standards.

You're going to be dragging private schools down into the
public sector swamp.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #338   Report Post  
Malcolm Kirkpatrick
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

jim rozen wrote:...
Malcolm Kirkpatrick says:...

MK. Discussion deleted....

I think what I was getting at is the idea that the vouchers are
not going to cover the full freight at most private schools,
so the parents are going to have to handle the remainder. It
would be nice if the state simply handed over an 'equal slice'
payment (which probably *would* cover most of the tuition
in a private school, at least until the exodus from public
schools drove up the price...) but for a variety of reasons
that's probably never going to happen.

MK. Robert FitzRoy learned Greek, Latin, shiphandling, gunnery,
fencing, trigonometry, and calculus, between age 12 and 14, at which
point he went to sea (see: __Evolution's Captain__). The physicist
Joseph Henry left school at age 13, and was apprenticed. At 16 he read
a book on science and prepped for college. Ben Franklin attended
school for two years, between 10 and 12. The per-pupil budget in the
US has tripled, in inflation-adjusted terms, between 1950 and today.
Education is potentially cheap. It's --school-- that's expensive.
Giving to the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel an exclusive position in receipt
of the taxpayers' K-12 education subsidy is a formula for high costs
and low performance. Likely, school vouchers would lower the cost of
school, over the long haul.

So the question is, once a kid takes a voucher, but the
parents can no longer contribute their sha

Do You Require the Public School to Take the Kid Back?

MK. Which school voucher plan are we discussing? My ideal? My ideal is
parent performance contracting, not a voucher. In a school voucher
system, yes, public schools would still have to accept students
according to their usual criteria. I'd suggest that they be budgeted
in the same way as independent, voucher-accepting schools, monthly,
based on enrollment. The only differences between the NEA/AFT/AFSCME
cartel's schools (the "public" schools") and voucher-accepting schools
would be 1) that the taxpayers' per-pupil support of the cartel's
schools would be 100%, while the school voucher would be 0 X%
100%. 2) that he cartel's schools operate on government-owned land, 3)
That the cartel's schools get free legal help from the State.

And, how do you handle the entanglement that vouchers are going
to cause between state funding and religious schools?


MK. I don't worry much about them.


That's like saying, "I don't care about a teeny little
tornado!"

MK. Hardly. The USSC has said that so long as parents decide which
institution the child attends, there is no "establishment" violation.
I agree. The way to teach tolerance of diversity is to tolerate
diversity, seems to me.

Sure *you* don't care but that little thing like the bill
of rights *does* care! What are the private schools going to
do when the state starts demanding that catholic schools
recognize jewish holidays, or that they ban religious displays?

State money being funnelled into parochial schools is the
first step towards a huge first amendment collision.
That collision *will* happen in the courts when vouchers are
first tried. It is also one of the biggest reasons why
vouchers will be avoided for quite some time to come.

MK. The greatest barrier to school vouchers is determined lobbying by
the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel.

  #339   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

On 18 Feb 2004 14:16:34 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Koz says...

I have to disagree about the implication about the ADA portion of
education (not facilities) sucking from the schools. Actually there is
a VERY good system in place for kids with special needs. They are
thoroughly and properly tested to determine their needs, weaknesses and
strengths (shouldn't this happen to all kids) and an individualized
education plan (IEP is developed that emphasises the specific needs
(again, shouldn't all kids be taught to their strengths and weaknesses?)


OK hold on there *just* a moment. Sure there is a great system
for disabled kids in place right now. *Who* pays for it??

The taxpayer.

Yep, if you calculated 'cost to educate' for each student, the
disabled kids will indeed be costing more to the taxpayer.

But hold on now and be fair, the voucher proponents compare
private schools and public schools, and say 'hey, the private
ones are *better* because they do the same job - maybe better -
and they do it for less.'

But the private schools don't have to educate disabled kids.
So the comparison is faulty at least on that note and an attempt
to fund vouchers on an 'equal slice' approach is going to leave
the expensive kids out in the cold.


No..because there will be programs for those kids, as there is now.
Vouchers will not be mandatory, but simply another option for parents.


I sure agree that public schools can always be improved,


Now there is a candidate for understatement of the year.
but
my suspicion is that vouchers a)wil shift the same problems
over in to the private sector, b) not magically produce
more teachers to staff the influx into private schools, and
c) are probabaly a attempt to end-run the first amendment
issues so that parents can sent their kids to religious
schools on the taxpayer nickel.

What is the goal of a private religious school? To make preachers? Or
to educate children to meet standard criteria in an religous
environment? Seems to me that the religious component means nothing as
long as the child can meet the standardized testing requirements.
In fact, I could care less if the kid gets a bit of Druidism or
Buddhism or whatever with his education, as long as he can pass all
the required standardized tests. What difference does it make? Kids
today are getting an overdose of secular humanism with their public
school education, and I dont see you bitching.

I would advocate fixing the problem where it is, rather than
generating new ones.

Jim


Sometimes Jim..it takes threat to job and career to get people to get
off the pot. This is called in this case, Competition. And its a good
t hing.

Seems that 30+ yrs of bitching about the situation, tossing increasing
amounts of money at it, has only made it worse, so its time to try
something else.

Gunner


================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =


"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas
  #340   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

On 18 Feb 2004 14:35:46 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

... How does a voucher plan ensure
that the left-behinds will still get a decent education?


Its obvious. The public schools will finally have to get off their
overstuffed dead asses and be competative with the private schools.
When they see their tax dollars dribbling away..they will indeed
institute improvements. Standardized testing will make sure everyone
is working on a level playing field.


Umm, not so obvious. You can have standardized testing like
Texas has, where everyone simply passes, even those who
don't *have* the skills. Or like in NY, where many kids
fail. Just *having* testing does not mean that the schools
work.

Nationwide standardized testing. Not just per state.


Those that cannot teach worth a
**** will be dumped in favor of those who can actually teach.


Still not obvious here. If Fitch were around, he would (did)
ask the biggie question: WHERE are you going to get those
teachers who can actually teach? All the teachers are already
employed. So how are you going to staff the extra, or larger,
private schools once vouchers permit portability?

good question. What are you doing next week? What can YOU teach?

Seems that a teaching credential doenst guarentee that a teacher even
knows their subject.

Administration costs will fall, as they remove the deadwood and
streamline. With fewer kids in the public schools, wear and tear on
the infrastructure will be reduced and for those children who tear up
the place, are "unteachable" etc..they will be finally handled the way
they should be. With the proper punishment and expulsion as needed.


I guess you weren't listening, but public schools can't expell
kids. They simply go into a more expensive version of public
school that the taxpayer still has to fund. So in your scheme,
the public schools become dumping grounds for the problem (read,
'expensive') kids with one twist - they have less money than
before to educate them.

Not less money..as they will still get the lions share, and those that
do voucher out, use none of the money allocated for plant, etc etc.
Not everyone will voucher out. And after being forced to
streamline..they will have MORE money to use, but more efficently.
Hint..the public schools are already dumping grounds for such kids,
who are generally simply passed along until they get a diploma they
cant even read.

Im sure there will be Boot Camp type schools that will spring up for
problem children that will accept vouchers. It will really suck to be
an asshole child who wants to disrupt things.


I think those already exist. They keep having news stories about
them, where the kids are incarcerated in prison, outside of the
US.

The best of these that I've ever seen is NY state's "Challenge"
program. They run the kids through what looks like a version of
basic training up at Camp Smith. What happens when something
around here actually works? Yep, you got it. State funding
for that program got cut off.

And mores the pity. Want to give us a clue as to who was behind that
program being shut down?

I think we both know.

Jim


Gunner




================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =


"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas


  #341   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

On 18 Feb 2004 14:42:48 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Read the First Amendment again. The


Why, I know it by heart: "...no law respecting the establishment
of religion..."

then why did you leave out the rest of that statement....
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

The courts take that to mean you CANNOT put granite tombstones
in your courthouse, and CANNOT fund parochial schools with
taxpayer money. Get over it.


The courts (some) find that homosexual marriage is legal) Does it mean
its correct? Ill bet you I can find a sympathetic judge to say that
owning your own nuke is legal. Wanna take a shot at it?


Jim's crystal ball prediction: (and I will wager on this one)
The moment vouchers are instituted anywhere in the US, there
will be a first amendment court case that goes up to supreme
court within two years.

Vouchers have been in use for at least 5 yrs already in many places in
the US. Cincinnati Ohio IRRC is one of them. The courts found it
legal. Why not do the google search? Or do you want me to handle it?
G

Btw..I know several Jewish families whose children attend Catholic
schools, simply for the superior education. They simply do not join in
the religious activities, and the schools have structured themselves
to allow such as this without making the Jewish kids feel left out.


Sure, I've seen the same thing. Difference here is that the parents
are accepting that this is a catholic school and are buying into
the situation with their own private money. My take on it is that
the instant vouchers arrive, the state now has a responsibility
to see that the money is being spend wisely. So there will be
meddling in the private schools affairs.


Oh..so putting long strings on it will make sure its spent wisely?
Odd..its already in control of much of it..and we both know its not
being spent wisely..

To put it another way, if you really want to screw something
up, put the government in charge. My fear is that by funding
private schools with public money, you won't be elevating public
schools to private standards.


Thats what Standardized Testing (national standards) will insure.
Btw..do you know how much money that the Salvation army gets to the
end user? Check it out..then compare it to welfare....chuckle...

You're going to be dragging private schools down into the
public sector swamp.

Jim


Not if the pinheads dont try to micromanage the private schools, and
the standard testing is kept high.

Gunner

"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas
  #342   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

In article , Gunner says...

The courts (some) find that homosexual marriage is legal


Supreme court. Anyway the marriage thing is not the
topic so nice try though!

Not if the pinheads dont try to micromanage the private schools, and
the standard testing is kept high.


Let me get this straight: you think the state is going to
just *give* money to private schools, no strings attached,
and not apply some kind of (excessive) administrative
oversight to go along with the funds?

Are you still putting cookies out for santa every Xmas
Eve too? :^)

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #343   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

In article , Gunner says...

Nationwide standardized testing. Not just per state.


W H A T ??????

Hold the phone, somebody just kidnapped gunner
and is impersonating him on usenet! I can't
believe the one and only *true* gunner would advocate
a change from state and local control, to big
government federal control, on an issue like this.

Education has *always* been handled mostly on a local
level, and to some degree on a statewide level. To
suggest that the federal government should step in
and set standards for education, to set up and supervise
testing, and to attempt to punish those who don't
perform, is possibly one of the most *liberal* ideas
that have floated by on this ng in quite some time.

I'm sure you want to rephrase what you thinking of,
because that came as a bit of a shocker.

......

And mores the pity. Want to give us a clue as to who was behind that
program being shut down?

I think we both know.


My understanding is that NY is in a major budget
crunch. They're cutting everything. But I'll
ask my buddy in the know, and report back.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #344   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

In article , Gunner says...

I sure agree that public schools can always be improved,


Now there is a candidate for understatement of the year.


:^)

What is the goal of a private religious school? To make preachers? Or
to educate children to meet standard criteria in an religous
environment? Seems to me that the religious component means nothing as
long as the child can meet the standardized testing requirements.
In fact, I could care less if the kid gets a bit of Druidism or
Buddhism or whatever with his education, as long as he can pass all
the required standardized tests. What difference does it make? Kids
today are getting an overdose of secular humanism with their public
school education, and I dont see you bitching.

I would advocate fixing the problem where it is, rather than
generating new ones.

Jim


Sometimes Jim..it takes threat to job and career to get people to get
off the pot. This is called in this case, Competition. And its a good
thing.


Gunner I can't figure out why this issue escapes you! Competition
*is* a good thing, you are 100% correct. Funny thing is, that
competition you are hungering for is *already* present! The
private sector does indeed draw kids away from public schools
right now, and folks are 100% free to avail themselves of this
choice.

Now if you could explain to me why this competition has not
already boosted public school performance, I would be interested
to hear about it. I thought the free market always finds its
own true level.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #345   Report Post  
jim rozen
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

In article , Malcolm
Kirkpatrick says...

MK. Robert FitzRoy learned Greek, Latin, shiphandling, gunnery,
fencing, trigonometry, and calculus, between age 12 and 14, at which
point he went to sea (see: __Evolution's Captain__). The physicist
Joseph Henry left school at age 13, and was apprenticed. At 16 he read
a book on science and prepped for college. Ben Franklin attended
school for two years, between 10 and 12.


Right, and Charles Lindbergh was tossed out of my
alma mater on his ear. Those are some great stories but
times have changed, and there was no public education
as we know it now, in any of those examples you mentioned.
Were Robert, Joseph, or Ben educated with public funds,
or did they pay their own way?

So the question is, once a kid takes a voucher, but the
parents can no longer contribute their sha

Do You Require the Public School to Take the Kid Back?

MK. Which school voucher plan are we discussing? My ideal? My ideal is
parent performance contracting, not a voucher. In a school voucher
system, yes, public schools would still have to accept students
according to their usual criteria. I'd suggest that they be budgeted
in the same way as independent, voucher-accepting schools, monthly,
based on enrollment. The only differences between the NEA/AFT/AFSCME
cartel's schools (the "public" schools") and voucher-accepting schools
would be 1) that the taxpayers' per-pupil support of the cartel's
schools would be 100%, while the school voucher would be 0 X%
100%.


Umm, hold it. 100% of *what*? For condition (1) above,
public taxes pay for all of of the kids who want to go
to public schools, just like now? And at the same time,
the public taxes pay some fixed percentage of vouchers for
kids who want to go to a private school, or home school?

Who decides what the total is? Do the taxpayers get to say
what the total budget of the public school should be, or do
they deduct some amount for the X that's going to the private
schools? Unless there is some means to strangle off the
public schools, they will demand the same level of support
as before, and the entire she-bang will wind up costing
*more*.

MK. The greatest barrier to school vouchers is determined lobbying by
the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel.


I guess this discussion is finally coming together in my mind.
The voucher folks have a story to tell. That story, simply put,
is:

1) Public education in the US doesn't work well. It costs too
much and does a poor job of teaching skills.

2) We've found a proven way to solve these problems that exist
by giving state money to private schools.

My trouble here is that I really have not seen much evidence
that (1) above is true. And (2) seems to be quite a stretch.

In (1) one invariably sees teacher's unions, stupid teachers,
stupid school boards, stupid kids, stupid parents blamed.
And one *never* sees the voucher advocates admitting that
there really is competition to public schools out there,
right now - and it has not had the effect that they
desire. How can the be sure that more competition will
do it?

And I really am all ears to find cases of (2) where it's
been shown that kids do get a better education for less
money. That would be a great thing. In the meantime I'm
holding my breath.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================



  #346   Report Post  
hamei
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

Robert Sturgeon wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:24:31 -0800, Jim Stewart
wrote:

(snips)


The J in JK is me. The K is my wife. I'm not
quite a genuis,



Obviously not.



but then he's obviously not a drooling mongoloid, either.
Unlike some people ....


--
Robert Sturgeon,
proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy
and the evil gun culture.



I rest my case ....
  #347   Report Post  
Jim Stewart
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

jim rozen wrote:
In article , Gunner says...


Nationwide standardized testing. Not just per state.



W H A T ??????

Hold the phone, somebody just kidnapped gunner
and is impersonating him on usenet! I can't
believe the one and only *true* gunner would advocate
a change from state and local control, to big
government federal control, on an issue like this.


My mouth fell open when I read that too...
  #348   Report Post  
Santa Cruz Mike
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cliff's Magic Bowl -10 inch OD 30 inch OD Circumference

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 07:00:05 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Santa Cruz Mike" wrote in message
.. .

Cliff's Homework for this year: Cliff's bowl has a 10 unit/inch
outside diameter and a 30 unit/inch outer circumference and a 5
unit/inch depth. The diameters have a .005 inch tolerance. And no
Virginia PI does not equal 3.00000. So how does Cliff make this bowl?


Hmm. Does this have something to do with curved space and the velocity of
light? If so, then making the bowl is something you have to do while
traveling very fast...

Ed Huntress



that is way beyond me... but an interesting thought..
  #350   Report Post  
Santa Cruz Mike
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cliff's Magic Bowl -10 inch OD 30 inch OD Circumference

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:26:12 -0800, John Ings
wrote:


The key to an alternative reading of the verse 1 Kings 7:23 is to be
found in the very ancient Hebrew tradition (see, e.g., [Britannica
1985], [Banon 1987, pp. 52, 53]) to differently write (spell) and read
some words of the Bible; the reading version is usually regarded as a
correct one (in particular, it is always correct from the point of
view of the Hebrew grammar, and this is why it could be easily either
remembered or reconstructed from the written version), whereas the
written version slightly deviates from the correct spelling. (Another
approach, involving the comparison between written forms of the same
words in 1 Kings 7:23 and Chronicles 4:2 is cited in [Posamentiern,
Gordan 1984]; see more about this version of the exegesis in 4).

1 Kings 7:23 Then he made the molten sea; it was round, ten cubits
from brim to brim, and five cubits high. A line of thirty cubits would
encircle it completely.

7:26 Its thickness was a handbreadth; its brim was made like the brim
of a cup, like the flower of a lily; it held two thousand baths.


2 Chonicles 4:2Then he made the molten sea; it was round, ten cubits
from rim to rim, and five cubits high. A line of thirty cubits would
encircle it completely.

4:5 Its thickness was a handbreadth; its rim was made like the rim of
a cup, like the flower of a lily; it held three thousand baths.


The letters of the Hebrew alphabets were traditionly used (well before
the building of the First Temple [Guitel 1975]) for numerical purposes
and, thus, have had numerical values . Using these values, one can
calculate values of words (as sums of values of letters, but also in
several other, less obvious and/or more involved ways); these methods
became later known as gematria [Michael Munk 1983, p. 163],
[Britannica 1985]. Here are the standard numerical equivalents of the
letters of the Hebrew alphabet: cm = cmti8 scaled 0

Aleph=1, Beth=2, Gimel=3, Daled=4, Hea=5, Vav=6, Zain=7, CHet=8,
Tet=9, Yod=10, Caf=20, Lammed=30, Mem=40, Noon=50, Samech=60,
Aiin=70, Pea=80, TSadik=90, Qof=100, Reish=200, Shin=300, Tav=400.


In particular, the numerical equivalent of the written version
,``QVH'', is Qof+Vav+Hea=100+6+5=111, whereas the numerical equivalent
of the reading version, ``QV'', is Qof+Vav=106.

Using these numerical equivalents, one defines as follows:

[...] (1)

Thus the Hebrew pi = 3.1415094

(1)See http://www.math.ubc.ca/people/facult...l/bpi/bpi.html
for math calculations whose formulas I can't reproduce in a newsgroup
post.




Ok.. nice try.. but irrelevant.. the dimensions are the same as I
have posted in the past.. the History of the Jews doesn't matter
except for Cliffy's little swipes at the Jews and the claims Cliffy
makes that the Jews taught that PI = 3.000... which of course they did
not.. hmm..

Later,
Mike

Cliff's Homework for this year: Cliff's bowl has a 10 unit/inch
outside diameter and a 30 unit/inch outer circumference and a 5
unit/inch depth. The diameters have a .005 inch tolerance. And no
Virginia PI does not equal 3.00000. So how does Cliff make this bowl?


  #351   Report Post  
BottleBob
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cliff's Magic Bowl -10 inch OD 30 inch OD Circumference



Santa Cruz Mike wrote:


The bowl is round... nothing tricky or deceptive.

Bob.. should I send you the model for verification.... can't let Cliff
see it though?



Mike:

If you wish. Parasolid would be best, but iges will probably do.

--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  #352   Report Post  
Santa Cruz Mike
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cliff's Magic Bowl -10 inch OD 30 inch OD Circumference

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 03:28:37 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:



Santa Cruz Mike wrote:


The bowl is round... nothing tricky or deceptive.

Bob.. should I send you the model for verification.... can't let Cliff
see it though?



Mike:

If you wish. Parasolid would be best, but iges will probably do.

--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob



Parasolid txt or binary?

I'll send you a model and a .pdf print with dimensions.

Mike

Cliff's Homework for this year: Cliff's bowl has a 10 unit/inch
outside diameter and a 30 unit/inch outer circumference and a 5
unit/inch depth. The diameters have a .005 inch tolerance. And no
Virginia PI does not equal 3.00000. So how does Cliff make this bowl?
  #353   Report Post  
Ed Huntress
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

"Koz" wrote in message
...
Jim,

I have to disagree about the implication about the ADA portion of education
(not facilities) sucking from the schools. Actually there is a VERY good
system in place for kids with special needs. They are thoroughly and
properly tested to determine their needs, weaknesses and strengths
(shouldn't this happen to all kids) and an individualized education plan
(IEP is developed that emphasises the specific needs (again, shouldn't all
kids be taught to their strengths and weaknesses?)

The failure of this system currently is that the public schools do the bare
minimum and just throw the kids into the classroom. The teacher ends up
without a real plan or process for educating a particular student and
because they are bored/not served they tend to fail, act out, and generally
be a drain. No real progress happens. Remember that the VAST majority kids
who need these services are just barely below average....you can't assume
that they are the bottom IQ who are thrown in to be babysat at school.

If the IEP system were proper addressed to ALL students, things would
improve a lot in schools.

============================

Teaching those kids is what my wife does for a living, and the quality of
the systems vary widely. In my wife's case, the testing and program planning
for each kid is an extensive enterprise, involving several meetings of
professionals for each kid.

Of course, this is a good system in my town. Parents move here from quite a
wide area just to get the benefits of our handicapped program.

Ed Huntress

Koz


  #354   Report Post  
Ed Huntress
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Malcolm
Kirkpatrick says...

MK. Robert FitzRoy learned Greek, Latin, shiphandling, gunnery,
fencing, trigonometry, and calculus, between age 12 and 14...


Oh, boy, now we're over the center-field fence, looking for the ball in the
tall weeds. g

You know, I'd put a lot more credence in the ideas we're hearing in this
discussion if it wasn't for the fact that most of these people are products
of the public education system...

Ed Huntress


  #355   Report Post  
Dan Caster
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

Vouchers would not ensure those left behind would still get a decent
education. But it would ensure that those who wanted a decent
education would have a chance to get one. Now they don't have enough
money to go any where except public school.

And you shouldn't need more teachers. You have the same amount of
kids. So assuming public schools shrunk in size, the new teachers
would mostly go to private schools.

And if done as I think it should be done, the public schools would
have more money per kid. Say currently public schools get 10,000 per
kid and 1000 kids, so 10,000,000 for public schools. Say 300 kids
take the vouchers, which I said should be about 40% of the cost. So
that is 4000 dollars times 300 kids, or 1,200,000 dollars. Subtracted
from the 10,000,000 leaves 8,800,000 for 700 kids or over 12,500 per
kid. Twenty five percent more per kid although less money overall.
Same costs to the tax payer.

Dan


jim rozen wrote in message ...
In article , Gunner says...

... How does a voucher plan ensure
that the left-behinds will still get a decent education?



Still not obvious here. If Fitch were around, he would (did)
ask the biggie question: WHERE are you going to get those
teachers who can actually teach? All the teachers are already
employed. So how are you going to staff the extra, or larger,
private schools once vouchers permit portability?

Administration costs will fall, as they remove the deadwood and
streamline. With fewer kids in the public schools, wear and tear on
the infrastructure will be reduced and for those children who tear up
the place, are "unteachable" etc..they will be finally handled the way
they should be. With the proper punishment and expulsion as needed.


I guess you weren't listening, but public schools can't expell
kids. They simply go into a more expensive version of public
school that the taxpayer still has to fund. So in your scheme,
the public schools become dumping grounds for the problem (read,
'expensive') kids with one twist - they have less money than
before to educate them.

Im sure there will be Boot Camp type schools that will spring up for
problem children that will accept vouchers. It will really suck to be
an asshole child who wants to disrupt things.


I think those already exist. They keep having news stories about
them, where the kids are incarcerated in prison, outside of the
US.

The best of these that I've ever seen is NY state's "Challenge"
program. They run the kids through what looks like a version of
basic training up at Camp Smith. What happens when something
around here actually works? Yep, you got it. State funding
for that program got cut off.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================



  #356   Report Post  
Dan Caster
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

Vouchers would not ensure those left behind would still get a decent
education. But it would ensure that those who wanted a decent
education would have a chance to get one. Now they don't have enough
money to go any where except public school.

And you shouldn't need more teachers. You have the same amount of
kids. So assuming public schools shrunk in size, the new teachers
would mostly go to private schools.

And if done as I think it should be done, the public schools would
have more money per kid. Say currently public schools get 10,000 per
kid and 1000 kids, so 10,000,000 for public schools. Say 300 kids
take the vouchers, which I said should be about 40% of the cost. So
that is 4000 dollars times 300 kids, or 1,200,000 dollars. Subtracted
from the 10,000,000 leaves 8,800,000 for 700 kids or over 12,500 per
kid. Twenty five percent more per kid although less money overall.
Same costs to the tax payer.

Dan


jim rozen wrote in message ...
In article , Gunner says...

... How does a voucher plan ensure
that the left-behinds will still get a decent education?



Still not obvious here. If Fitch were around, he would (did)
ask the biggie question: WHERE are you going to get those
teachers who can actually teach? All the teachers are already
employed. So how are you going to staff the extra, or larger,
private schools once vouchers permit portability?

Administration costs will fall, as they remove the deadwood and
streamline. With fewer kids in the public schools, wear and tear on
the infrastructure will be reduced and for those children who tear up
the place, are "unteachable" etc..they will be finally handled the way
they should be. With the proper punishment and expulsion as needed.


I guess you weren't listening, but public schools can't expell
kids. They simply go into a more expensive version of public
school that the taxpayer still has to fund. So in your scheme,
the public schools become dumping grounds for the problem (read,
'expensive') kids with one twist - they have less money than
before to educate them.

Im sure there will be Boot Camp type schools that will spring up for
problem children that will accept vouchers. It will really suck to be
an asshole child who wants to disrupt things.


I think those already exist. They keep having news stories about
them, where the kids are incarcerated in prison, outside of the
US.

The best of these that I've ever seen is NY state's "Challenge"
program. They run the kids through what looks like a version of
basic training up at Camp Smith. What happens when something
around here actually works? Yep, you got it. State funding
for that program got cut off.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

  #357   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

On 18 Feb 2004 18:14:59 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

I sure agree that public schools can always be improved,


Now there is a candidate for understatement of the year.


:^)

What is the goal of a private religious school? To make preachers? Or
to educate children to meet standard criteria in an religous
environment? Seems to me that the religious component means nothing as
long as the child can meet the standardized testing requirements.
In fact, I could care less if the kid gets a bit of Druidism or
Buddhism or whatever with his education, as long as he can pass all
the required standardized tests. What difference does it make? Kids
today are getting an overdose of secular humanism with their public
school education, and I dont see you bitching.

I would advocate fixing the problem where it is, rather than
generating new ones.

Jim


Sometimes Jim..it takes threat to job and career to get people to get
off the pot. This is called in this case, Competition. And its a good
thing.


Gunner I can't figure out why this issue escapes you! Competition
*is* a good thing, you are 100% correct. Funny thing is, that
competition you are hungering for is *already* present! The
private sector does indeed draw kids away from public schools
right now, and folks are 100% free to avail themselves of this
choice.


Wrong. The average parents educational dollars are locked into paying
for public school. If they were well off enough to pay for private
school, they would STILL be paying their normal share for public
school in addition.

Now if you could explain to me why this competition has not
already boosted public school performance, I would be interested
to hear about it. I thought the free market always finds its
own true level.

Jim


See above. There is NO free market when ones educational dollars are
locked into payments to public schools.

Ever hear of the Company Store?

Gunner

"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas
  #358   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

On 18 Feb 2004 18:06:42 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Nationwide standardized testing. Not just per state.


W H A T ??????

Hold the phone, somebody just kidnapped gunner
and is impersonating him on usenet! I can't
believe the one and only *true* gunner would advocate
a change from state and local control, to big
government federal control, on an issue like this.


Psst..no big government control. Government mandated Standards. The
state and local systems must meet those standards (as they do now) to
be accredited. Someone has to set a national standard that each state
and local government must meet. Including teacher quality standards.

Education has *always* been handled mostly on a local
level, and to some degree on a statewide level. To
suggest that the federal government should step in
and set standards for education, to set up and supervise
testing, and to attempt to punish those who don't
perform, is possibly one of the most *liberal* ideas
that have floated by on this ng in quite some time.


Think of it as UL Labs. No sticker, no creditation. No creditation,
no local money to the school. Simple. Lots of national standards for
things, such as the fire codes. ( in addition to local ones, which
generally follow the national ones..though not always)
Think of it as crash test standards...lol

Hell..it could be any independant organization, But the Department of
Education is already set up. Shrug. They already mandate various
quality standards

http://www.ed.gov

Its evident that state and local agencies are unable or unwilling to
set reasonable standards.

I'm sure you want to rephrase what you thinking of,
because that came as a bit of a shocker.

Nope..see my rational above.

Gunner
.....

And mores the pity. Want to give us a clue as to who was behind that
program being shut down?

I think we both know.


My understanding is that NY is in a major budget
crunch. They're cutting everything. But I'll
ask my buddy in the know, and report back.

Jim

================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =


"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas
  #359   Report Post  
Gunner
 
Posts: n/a
Default the Home Schooled was Clark is correct

On 18 Feb 2004 17:59:33 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

The courts (some) find that homosexual marriage is legal


Supreme court. Anyway the marriage thing is not the
topic so nice try though!


Ah..no Supreme court of Mass. A cherry picked liberal court. There are
49 others. Nice attempt at spin though.

Gunner


Not if the pinheads dont try to micromanage the private schools, and
the standard testing is kept high.


Let me get this straight: you think the state is going to
just *give* money to private schools, no strings attached,
and not apply some kind of (excessive) administrative
oversight to go along with the funds?

As long as they meet the national standards. Yep.

Are you still putting cookies out for santa every Xmas
Eve too? :^)

Jim


I usually leave a couple small bottles of JW and a good cigar.

Gunner



================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =


"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas
  #360   Report Post  
Cliff Huprich
 
Posts: n/a
Default Clark is correct

In article , strabo
writes:

I seriously doubt that, strabo. What's the basis of that

assertion?


Something he read in the bathroom, probably. Sure sounds
like something he pulled out of his ass, at any rate.


So which is it?


Which does it taste like?
--
Cliff
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Clearance between router cutter and guide bush ? Rob Graham UK diy 0 March 29th 04 07:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"