Well, I see that the usual Political Scientologists are about.

The geniuses of the moment and the arguers of the nonsensical.

Grab hold of this for a bit.

There has been more than passing mention of Education.

But it always seems to devolve about the "How".

I would like to see us address the "What".

Why, in god's name did we ever teach Latin?

If you thought that was because we gloried in a dead language - mark
that as wrong.

Why did we ever bother teaching Literature?

You probably got that wrong, too.

Why would anyone teach History?

....sigh...


There are too many who treat education as a trade school and bear
little support to the concept of it being a training ground for -
humans - citizens...

You do remember when we were citizens?

Not consumers?

Not voters?

"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Were you paying attention?

It is not about "how" we educate, it is about "what".


As always, make your choices carefully - and keep your eye on the
ball.



Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

Tom is a poet.

Tom Watson wrote:
Well, I see that the usual Political Scientologists are about.

The geniuses of the moment and the arguers of the nonsensical.

Grab hold of this for a bit.

There has been more than passing mention of Education.

But it always seems to devolve about the "How".

I would like to see us address the "What".

Why, in god's name did we ever teach Latin?

To learn us better English.


If you thought that was because we gloried in a dead language - mark
that as wrong.

Why did we ever bother teaching Literature?

To learn us how other people lived and see the common denominators
among us all.


You probably got that wrong, too.

Why would anyone teach History?

To rewrite it so that it suits current political / fashion and
to promote the Big State as the solution to all ills, historical
and current.


...sigh...


There are too many who treat education as a trade school and bear
little support to the concept of it being a training ground for -
humans - citizens...

I rather respect trade schools. The produce graduates that do
useful things. A good many schools of more better learnin'
produce contempt for the values and ideals that make this
Republic work, principally because their faculties have never
had to sing for their own suppers.



You do remember when we were citizens?

We still are. The term is just being defined downward to
mean either mindless nationalism or "progressive" thinking.
All else is held in contempt by far too many



Not consumers?

The two are not mutual exclusive notwithstanding the romanticized
version of our cultural history frequently put forth. Were it
not for consumption and consumers, most of us would still be
working 16 hours a day on the farm.


Not voters?

An imperfect means to an end, better than all known alternative
means of projecting our wishes.


"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Common and polite use capitalizes "God".


Were you paying attention?

For many years. More recently ... with horror.


It is not about "how" we educate, it is about "what".

That idea lost currency the moment education became a function
of the Federal government. Today's "education" is a madrassas
for Statism, the rest is but noise.




As always, make your choices carefully - and keep your eye on the
ball.


Yes, do choose politically and socially between the Big State and the
Really, Really, Really Big State.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

"Tom Watson" wrote in message
...
Well, I see that the usual Political Scientologists are about.

The geniuses of the moment and the arguers of the nonsensical.

Grab hold of this for a bit.

There has been more than passing mention of Education.

But it always seems to devolve about the "How".

I would like to see us address the "What".

Why, in god's name did we ever teach Latin?

If you thought that was because we gloried in a dead language - mark
that as wrong.

Why did we ever bother teaching Literature?

You probably got that wrong, too.

Why would anyone teach History?

...sigh...


There are too many who treat education as a trade school and bear
little support to the concept of it being a training ground for -
humans - citizens...

You do remember when we were citizens?

Not consumers?

Not voters?

"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Were you paying attention?

It is not about "how" we educate, it is about "what".


As always, make your choices carefully - and keep your eye on the
ball.



Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

"Tom Watson" wrote in message
...
Well, I see that the usual Political Scientologists are about.

The geniuses of the moment and the arguers of the nonsensical.

Grab hold of this for a bit.

There has been more than passing mention of Education.

But it always seems to devolve about the "How".

I would like to see us address the "What".

Why, in god's name did we ever teach Latin?

If you thought that was because we gloried in a dead language - mark
that as wrong.

Why did we ever bother teaching Literature?

You probably got that wrong, too.

Why would anyone teach History?

...sigh...


There are too many who treat education as a trade school and bear
little support to the concept of it being a training ground for -
humans - citizens...

You do remember when we were citizens?

Not consumers?

Not voters?

"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Were you paying attention?

It is not about "how" we educate, it is about "what".


As always, make your choices carefully - and keep your eye on the
ball.



Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

"Stewart Schooley" wrote in message
.. .

"Tom Watson" wrote in message
...
Well, I see that the usual Political Scientologists are about.

The geniuses of the moment and the arguers of the nonsensical.

Grab hold of this for a bit.

There has been more than passing mention of Education.

But it always seems to devolve about the "How".

I would like to see us address the "What".

Why, in god's name did we ever teach Latin?

If you thought that was because we gloried in a dead language - mark
that as wrong.

Why did we ever bother teaching Literature?

You probably got that wrong, too.

Why would anyone teach History?

...sigh...


There are too many who treat education as a trade school and bear
little support to the concept of it being a training ground for -
humans - citizens...

You do remember when we were citizens?

Not consumers?

Not voters?

"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Were you paying attention?

It is not about "how" we educate, it is about "what".


As always, make your choices carefully - and keep your eye on the
ball.



Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/




Well, I'm trying out Firefox and haven't got it all figured out yet. Sorry
about the empty posts.

Maybe we should talk about 'who' and 'where' we teach. As a retired teacher
I know that if a kid doesn't want to learn, no amount of increased
educational spending will make him learn and if a kid wants to learn,
nothing can stop him.

There are too many schools in this country where 1/3 of the students show up
to be students,1/3 shows up to hang out and 1/3 doesn't show up.

It's time to separate students into different schools according to their
motivation and to give up the idea that if we spend enough money we can save
everybody.

Stewart

I'm curious Mr. Schooley, who gets to decide what level of motivation is
sufficient and at what age do you simply write off those who you deem
"unmotivated"?

As the father of a child saddled with both a learning disability and an
extremely high IQ, I'm naturally curious about your parameters.


John E.

"Stewart Schooley" wrote in message
.. .


Well, I'm trying out Firefox and haven't got it all figured out yet. Sorry
about the empty posts.

Maybe we should talk about 'who' and 'where' we teach. As a retired
teacher
I know that if a kid doesn't want to learn, no amount of increased
educational spending will make him learn and if a kid wants to learn,
nothing can stop him.

There are too many schools in this country where 1/3 of the students show
up
to be students,1/3 shows up to hang out and 1/3 doesn't show up.

It's time to separate students into different schools according to their
motivation and to give up the idea that if we spend enough money we can
save
everybody.

Stewart

"Stewart Schooley" wrote :


Maybe we should talk about 'who' and 'where' we teach. As a retired
teacher
I know that if a kid doesn't want to learn, no amount of increased
educational spending will make him learn and if a kid wants to
learn,
nothing can stop him.

If a kid doesn't want to learn, sounds like a failure of the teacher
to properly communicate and motivate to me.

If a kid gets a chance to spend a few days mucking out chicken houses
when the temps and the humidity are both about 90, hopefully the kid
will learn something like maybe they don't want to muck any more
chicken coops.

If they are also informed that without an education, they will
probably spend a lot more of their life mucking chicken houses or
other similar unpleasant tasks, they will probably get a real big
chunk of motivation along about then.

Communication and motivation are tools that work almost every time out
of the box.

Know someone who fits the above like a glove.

Today he is middle aged, full blown rocket scientist who put himself
thru both undergrad and grad school with full scholarships.

As a 14 year old kid, stole his father's car, totaled it, and damn
near killed himself in the process.

It was a defining moment in his life.

Lew

There are too many schools in this country where 1/3 of the students show
up to be students,1/3 shows up to hang out and 1/3 doesn't show up.

It's time to separate students into different schools according to their
motivation and to give up the idea that if we spend enough money we can
save everybody.

Stewart

I don't have the solution, but that has to be the biggest bunch of hooey
I've ever read.

jc

On Jan 7, 11:41 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Tom Watson wrote:

"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Common and polite use capitalizes "God".


There are several typos in that post - mutual exclusive? - yet you
chose to pick on this one, why?

On Jan 8, 1:20 am, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Stewart Schooley" wrote :



Maybe we should talk about 'who' and 'where' we teach. As a retired
teacher
I know that if a kid doesn't want to learn, no amount of increased
educational spending will make him learn and if a kid wants to
learn,
nothing can stop him.

If a kid doesn't want to learn, sounds like a failure of the teacher
to properly communicate and motivate to me.

If a kid gets a chance to spend a few days mucking out chicken houses
when the temps and the humidity are both about 90, hopefully the kid
will learn something like maybe they don't want to muck any more
chicken coops.

If they are also informed that without an education, they will
probably spend a lot more of their life mucking chicken houses or
other similar unpleasant tasks, they will probably get a real big
chunk of motivation along about then.

Communication and motivation are tools that work almost every time out
of the box.

Know someone who fits the above like a glove.

Today he is middle aged, full blown rocket scientist who put himself
thru both undergrad and grad school with full scholarships.

As a 14 year old kid, stole his father's car, totaled it, and damn
near killed himself in the process.

It was a defining moment in his life.


And then he grew up to be Queen of England...

(or maybe not; they don't hand that job to just anyone you know)

"John E." wrote in message
...
I'm curious Mr. Schooley, who gets to decide what level of motivation is
sufficient and at what age do you simply write off those who you deem
"unmotivated"?

As the father of a child saddled with both a learning disability and an
extremely high IQ, I'm naturally curious about your parameters.


John,

Children with special needs are a different category entirely. There are all
kinds of programs for these children in schools all over the country. Most
of these programs attempt to integrate these students as much as possible
into the regular school environment and that is desirable.

Spending money on these students and on studies that allow educators to work
with health professionals to develop the best programs for these students is
money well spent.

Stewart

Jeff wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:41 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Tom Watson wrote:

"Next to god, of course, America, I"
Common and polite use capitalizes "God".


There are several typos in that post - mutual exclusive? - yet you
chose to pick on this one, why?



I was being a wise guy ... no harm intended...


BTW, on this topic, I thought this was interesting:

http://www.fredoneverything.net/DarkAge.shtml


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

"John E." wrote

As the father of a child saddled with both a learning disability and an
extremely high IQ, I'm naturally curious about your parameters.

I'm the father of one young lady with a severe learning disability and a
respectably above average IQ (and with a helluva lot of fortitude and
character), who is now a senior in college.

It would boggle most minds to observe the volumes of paperwork, hard drive
files, e-mail, letters, minutes of IEP meetings, faxes, documentation of
threats/praise/encouragement to teachers/educrats (for doing/not doing what
they were paid to do), and the constant vigilance and involvement that was
necessary during the "public school K-12" part of the above educational
experience.

IMNSH(and very experienced)O ... the "What" we need in today's crippled
public education system can be inarguably be summed up in one word ... the
only word that is the basis of ALL solutions:

"parents"

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Joe" wrote in message
. net...

There are too many schools in this country where 1/3 of the students show
up to be students,1/3 shows up to hang out and 1/3 doesn't show up.

It's time to separate students into different schools according to their
motivation and to give up the idea that if we spend enough money we can
save everybody.

Stewart

I don't have the solution, but that has to be the biggest bunch of hooey
I've ever read.

jc

jc,

I have 33 years experience in education. How about you?

I may have used a pretty broad brush for purposes of brevity, but I am right
on target in stating the major problem in education today.

Can't you see that Swingman has it right? The sad truth is that too many
parents have relegated their children into being "hewers of wood and drawers
of water" and their isn't enough money or knowledge of what to do that will
correct this.

It is sad, but never the less we can't allow those who don't want to learn
to disrupt those who do.

Stewart

"Stewart Schooley" wrote

It is sad, but never the less we can't allow those who don't want to learn
to disrupt those who do.

We've discussed this before, back in August of last year:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.w...52d83f700b3859

I still like the idea of the old "Tripartite" educational system I saw back
in the UK in the mid 60's ... read the above for details.

http://www.summitsat.co.uk/about-11-plus-exam.php


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

I noticed you sidestepped my main question, who gets to decide who's
"motivated" and who's just a lil *******?



John E.

"Stewart Schooley" wrote in message
news

"John E." wrote in message
...
I'm curious Mr. Schooley, who gets to decide what level of motivation is
sufficient and at what age do you simply write off those who you deem
"unmotivated"?

As the father of a child saddled with both a learning disability and an
extremely high IQ, I'm naturally curious about your parameters.


John,

Children with special needs are a different category entirely. There are
all
kinds of programs for these children in schools all over the country. Most
of these programs attempt to integrate these students as much as possible
into the regular school environment and that is desirable.

Spending money on these students and on studies that allow educators to
work
with health professionals to develop the best programs for these students
is
money well spent.

Stewart

On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:20:49 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:

"John E." wrote

As the father of a child saddled with both a learning disability and an
extremely high IQ, I'm naturally curious about your parameters.

I'm the father of one young lady with a severe learning disability and a
respectably above average IQ (and with a helluva lot of fortitude and
character), who is now a senior in college.

It would boggle most minds to observe the volumes of paperwork, hard drive
files, e-mail, letters, minutes of IEP meetings, faxes, documentation of
threats/praise/encouragement to teachers/educrats (for doing/not doing what
they were paid to do), and the constant vigilance and involvement that was
necessary during the "public school K-12" part of the above educational
experience.

IMNSH(and very experienced)O ... the "What" we need in today's crippled
public education system can be inarguably be summed up in one word ... the
only word that is the basis of ALL solutions:

"parents"

That covers more than just education. In a "Dear Abby" (or the
equivalent) a couple of days ago, there was an item about a woman who
had two 20-somethings living at home and who had just retired. She
told the kids she was going to start charging them $30/week rent to
help supplement her reduced income and they declined although
intending to continue living there. One said something to the effect
that he wasn't going to help her pay her mortgage.

My neighbor (who still has teenagers at home) and I (we're empty
nesters) were discussing that and we both agreed that there was a
severe lapse in parenting in those kids' lives and that the retired
woman didn't "deserve" what she got, but she's not entitled to be
surprised.

By the way, I am not at all unfamiliar with the concept that there may
be more to that story than was presented or published. But on the face
of it, there's a lesson which ties into this thread.

--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com

Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997

email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.

"LRod" wrote

By the way, I am not at all unfamiliar with the concept that there may
be more to that story than was presented or published. But on the face
of it, there's a lesson which ties into this thread.

How about, "You reap what you sow"?


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Swingman said:

,,,
IMNSH(and very experienced)O ... the "What" we need in today's crippled
public education system can be inarguably be summed up in one word ... the
only word that is the basis of ALL solutions:

"parents"

Hear, hear.

Although at this late date, and after being exposed to some genuinely
spoiled little cretins from a variety of backgrounds, I'm beginning to
appreciate the Samuel Clemen's style of raising children. Put 'em in a
barrel, nail on the lid, feed 'em through the bung hole, and decide at
age 18 whether to drive in the bung. ;-)


Greg G.

"John E." wrote in message

I noticed you sidestepped my main question, who gets to decide who's
"motivated" and who's just a lil *******?

How about "the student" ... through aptitude testing/testing, much the same
as is done currently to decide who goes to college, only at an earlier age.

England moved away from such a "Tripartite" system, that observably worked
extremely well, through an "Eleven plus exam", and now, after trotting off
down a less sucessful path, appears to be moving back in that direction.

Once again, see:

http://www.summitsat.co.uk/about-11-plus-exam.php

And once more, in a past post of mine:

"8th grade is a good 'fork in the road' ...

Those who have the desire to continue with
a classic education and go on to college can
continue on a different track without being drug
down by the shenanigans of those who have no
desire to ever go to college.

Those who want to go into a trade or technical
field don't have to sit through the crap and can
immediately get down to the business of learning
the skills that will eventually get them though life."

A much better solution for all concerned, including the country, IMO.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

John E. wrote:
I noticed you sidestepped my main question, who gets to decide who's
"motivated" and who's just a lil *******?

I'd give the prerogative to the teacher/administrator. IMO, there's no
problem in determining which is the former and which the latter, it's
the lack of being allowed to enforce discipline and whiny parents that's
the problem.

Sit down, shut up, do what you're told and we'll all get along just
fine...

--

Stewart Schooley wrote:

snip

It's time to separate students into different schools according to their
motivation and to give up the idea that if we spend enough money we can save
everybody.


Well since we've tried, and are still trying, to spend a BUNCH of money
to keep THEM in jails and prisons, and away from US (last I heard it was
about $40,000 per year per inmate), it seems like the ROI on education
would be a great deal better than the ROI of incarceration - which,
coincidently, works like a criminal college. And some of our
"institutions"
graduates learn really, really well - and apply what they've learned.
They're not as good as the "real college educated", like the ENRON
folks, but still pretty good.

Wonder what would happen if we paid the best teachers the most money
to teach in the "worst areas" - AND provided them with the resources
they'd need. At $150,000 per year in salaries and overhead, it'd only
take four Not Bound For Prison Graduates per teacher per year to
become cost effective.

charlie b

"charlieb" wrote

Wonder what would happen if we paid the best teachers the most money
to teach in the "worst areas" - AND provided them with the resources
they'd need. At $150,000 per year in salaries and overhead, it'd only
take four Not Bound For Prison Graduates per teacher per year to
become cost effective.

Wouldn't do a damn bit of good ... throwing more money at the problem will
get you more of what you've got already. Teachers, and their salaries, are
only half the problem ... and we have about two generations of irresponsible
parents to overcome..

Better to give parents an economic choice by letting education funds follow
the kid, instead of the school.

IOW, open up education to competition and let the parents decide where to
best spend education dollars by giving them the economic choice to send
their kids to schools that have a proven ability to actually educate, public
or private.

Once that $150,000 in your plan above is free to reward those who actually
_educate_, is when you will finally see a "ROI".


.... tuppence provided, free of charge.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"charlieb" wrote in message
...
Stewart Schooley wrote:

snip

It's time to separate students into different schools according to their
motivation and to give up the idea that if we spend enough money we can
save
everybody.


Well since we've tried, and are still trying, to spend a BUNCH of money
to keep THEM in jails and prisons, and away from US (last I heard it was
about $40,000 per year per inmate), it seems like the ROI on education
would be a great deal better than the ROI of incarceration - which,
coincidently, works like a criminal college. And some of our
"institutions"
graduates learn really, really well - and apply what they've learned.
They're not as good as the "real college educated", like the ENRON
folks, but still pretty good.

Wonder what would happen if we paid the best teachers the most money
to teach in the "worst areas" - AND provided them with the resources
they'd need. At $150,000 per year in salaries and overhead, it'd only
take four Not Bound For Prison Graduates per teacher per year to
become cost effective.

charlie b

Charlie,

You present some intering twists so I'll take one last shot at this thread
by offering you the example of the East St. Louis school system.

A Federal judge forced the city to spend 3 billion dollars on new schools,
equipment, and programs.The ROI on that money was that test scores went down
and the school system was offering free daily taxi rides to suburban
students who would transfer to the city system.

Allow me to present a personal example. I started 1st grade in 1937 in
Fairmont, WV. What kind of financial shape do you think the WV schools were
in during the Great Depression?

A memory I have is that the text and library books were plastered with
Scotch tape. That early tape was not transparent, but had a milky
translucent quality that forced you to tilt the book in order to read
through the tape.So we tilted and read and learned because we knew our
parents expected us to.

Charlie, looking for new ways to spend money as you suggest is not the
answer.

Stewart

Have any of you been in a public school in the last 5 years?
Roger
"Tom Watson" wrote in message
...
Well, I see that the usual Political Scientologists are about.

The geniuses of the moment and the arguers of the nonsensical.

Grab hold of this for a bit.

There has been more than passing mention of Education.

But it always seems to devolve about the "How".

I would like to see us address the "What".

Why, in god's name did we ever teach Latin?

If you thought that was because we gloried in a dead language - mark
that as wrong.

Why did we ever bother teaching Literature?

You probably got that wrong, too.

Why would anyone teach History?

...sigh...


There are too many who treat education as a trade school and bear
little support to the concept of it being a training ground for -
humans - citizens...

You do remember when we were citizens?

Not consumers?

Not voters?

"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Were you paying attention?

It is not about "how" we educate, it is about "what".


As always, make your choices carefully - and keep your eye on the
ball.



Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

"Swingman" wrote in message

IMNSH(and very experienced)O ... the "What" we need in today's crippled
public education system can be inarguably be summed up in one word ... the
only word that is the basis of ALL solutions:

"parents"

Most parents do a fine job. They get them to school every day, then pick
them up or get them on the bus. You expect more?

What I also found amazing was the attitude of many parents. We had various
programs such as class mothers, Home & School Assoc, a bus committee, etc
and all were open and requested as many parents as could to join in. The
same handful of parents participated but all the ones that did not accused
the participants of trying to run the school.

Edwin Pawlowski said:

"Swingman" wrote in message

IMNSH(and very experienced)O ... the "What" we need in today's crippled
public education system can be inarguably be summed up in one word ... the
only word that is the basis of ALL solutions:

"parents"

Most parents do a fine job. They get them to school every day, then pick
them up or get them on the bus. You expect more?

You're kidding, right? I'd start with basic respect for others and
discipline. And then perhaps an appreciation for learning,
non-disruption of classes by hooligans. Had these problems to a lesser
degree even when I was in primary school. Many times, a trip (or the
threat of it) into the hall with the vice-principle and his paddle
cured many ills - at least on the surface.

What I also found amazing was the attitude of many parents. We had various
programs such as class mothers, Home & School Assoc, a bus committee, etc
and all were open and requested as many parents as could to join in. The
same handful of parents participated but all the ones that did not accused
the participants of trying to run the school.

Most assuredly varies by demographics. And I'm not talking racial
factors. I've heard from local teachers about bitching parents who
complain about the treatment of their "special little Billy". If he's
so damned special he can't behave in school, send him elsewhere. (Sub
"she/her" where appropriate.) Not to mention law suits, guns, drugs,
bullies, alcoholic parents, etc. It can be a nerve wracking job.
Slow I could deal with, malicious deserves to get it's ass kicked.

And then there are the time-outers. Kids pitching a fit in public,
screaming vile things at the top of their lungs, while the parent(s)
stand there watching and essentially talking to themselves. Not an
unusual occurrence in modern Yuppyland. Further south they get their
butts yanked. Guess where the most suicide/murder shootings take
place? Then there are the lawyers and politicians kids... Gag.


Greg G.

"Roger Woehl" wrote in message
. ..
Have any of you been in a public school in the last 5 years?
Roger

Yes, and in Biology class I had to teach a bit of Greek and Latin to help
them understand and internalize the vocabulary.

In History I had to remind them that there were more white people involved
in the underground railroad than black, that the preponderance of invention
was accomplished by males, and that assimilation not separation was how
immigrants became Americans.

I answered the question of "what use" in literature by pointing out that the
themes are universal, and tell us a lot about ourselves as human creatures
even when its Hercules or a couple of kids in Verona who are really the
descendants of many others in tales where the parents don't understand the
love of two who should by culture hate one another.

I have to do this because it's not in the books nor the curriculum. I can
still remember my first encounter with the "whole language" advocates who
were going to by God teach Johhny to read using this new method, and weren't
interested at all in finding out how McGuffey readers, phonics or Dick and
Jane, became the basics for generations of readers. Most of the wholes are
out now, but our reading texts still carry some of their stamp when females
are not portrayed as mothers and nurturers, but professionals, each minority
of color is represented as often as the majority, and Joe and Mary are now a
letter longer at Jose and Maria.

What are we teaching?

"charlieb" wrote in message
...
Wonder what would happen if we paid the best teachers the most money
to teach in the "worst areas" - AND provided them with the resources
they'd need. At $150,000 per year in salaries and overhead, it'd only
take four Not Bound For Prison Graduates per teacher per year to
become cost effective.

Cast a glance around at the rest of the world and you'll discover that it's
not the price of education, but how education is valued that counts.

The parent in the box with the colorful face is the one that counts most,
and it's not even a parent any more as when Wally and the Beeve were growing
up, but a peer, where kids are already smarter than elders as preteens. Add
that to the hormonal mess called adolescence and it really can get tough.

Please use OT in your topic line as "* Education - 7 new" could be a
post about Wood Working Education given this is a list devoted (I
thought) to that topic.

You hooked me into this and I should have simply "walked away," but I
thought to reply because my list of "
Today's most active topics:" appears t ist three OTs with only one so
labeled. Come on fellas, let's focus.

Today's most active topics:

* Joining two boards - 16 new
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.w...f38310d7?hl=en
* OT: Huckabee, Ughh - 16 new
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.w...f09f44d6?hl=en
* Education - 7 new
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.w...906e152d?hl=en
* Woodworking Show at the Big "E" this weekend? - 7 new
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.w...1c69c4c3?hl=en
* Here we go again - 6 new
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.w...cc6dd3f6?hl=en

George wrote:

"Roger Woehl" wrote in message
. ..
Have any of you been in a public school in the last 5 years?
Roger

Yes, and in Biology class I had to teach a bit of Greek and Latin to
help them understand and internalize the vocabulary.

In History I had to remind them that there were more white people
involved in the underground railroad than black, that the preponderance
of invention was accomplished by males, and that assimilation not
separation was how immigrants became Americans.

I answered the question of "what use" in literature by pointing out that
the themes are universal, and tell us a lot about ourselves as human
creatures even when its Hercules or a couple of kids in Verona who are
really the descendants of many others in tales where the parents don't
understand the love of two who should by culture hate one another.

I have to do this because it's not in the books nor the curriculum. I
can still remember my first encounter with the "whole language"
advocates who were going to by God teach Johhny to read using this new
method, and weren't interested at all in finding out how McGuffey
readers, phonics or Dick and Jane, became the basics for generations of
readers. Most of the wholes are out now, but our reading texts still
carry some of their stamp when females are not portrayed as mothers and
nurturers, but professionals, each minority of color is represented as
often as the majority, and Joe and Mary are now a letter longer at Jose
and Maria.

What are we teaching?

You are a better man than I. A bit over a decade I got I had the
great joy of teaching graduate school for a bit. Now grad school
is a place you go "on purpose". Mommy and Daddy are not making you
go, and it takes actual effort and money to get there and survive.

Imagine my horror in discovering that a good many people had poor
writing, spelling, and thinking skills. Even the most elementary
math skills (this was a computer science course) were a stretch
for some of these students - all of whom had undergrad degrees
or the equivalent thereof. And this was at a fairly well-regarded
big city university, BTW, not Swampwater College. Even more
disheartening was the fact that it was almost universally
true that my foreign-born students worked way harder than their
U.S.-born colleagues - not just to overcome the language barrier,
but for the sheer desire to *learn*.

For decades, we've been accommodating the tender sensibilities of
the *students* in K-12, we've failed to hold parents accountable
for their end of the education process, and we've let the NEA
mafia hijack the process to serve their political ends. We now
reap what we've sown. The only fix is to go back to local/private
schools and make the connection much more clear between those
who pay for education, those who conduct education, and the
results they produce.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

"Stewart Schooley" wrote in message
.. .

"Joe" wrote in message
. net...

There are too many schools in this country where 1/3 of the students
show up to be students,1/3 shows up to hang out and 1/3 doesn't show up.

It's time to separate students into different schools according to their
motivation and to give up the idea that if we spend enough money we can
save everybody.

Stewart

I don't have the solution, but that has to be the biggest bunch of hooey
I've ever read.

jc

jc,

I have 33 years experience in education. How about you?

I don't need 33 years to have an opinion.


I may have used a pretty broad brush for purposes of brevity,

Damn straight.

but I am right
on target in stating the major problem in education today.

Attendance? Maybe.


I would find it difficult to measure 'motivation'. Opens the doors to way
too much confilct (lawsuits when you segregate based on subjective
measure?), which Iguess could be mitigated with lots of time and money which
would be better poured into educators than more bureacracy, which is what
the conflict mitigation would be.


It is sad, but never the less we can't allow those who don't want to learn
to disrupt those who do.

Agreed.


Stewart

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message

For decades, we've been accommodating the tender sensibilities of
the *students* in K-12, we've failed to hold parents accountable
for their end of the education process, and we've let the NEA
mafia hijack the process to serve their political ends. We now
reap what we've sown. The only fix is to go back to local/private
schools and make the connection much more clear between those
who pay for education, those who conduct education, and the
results they produce.

I thought the solution was more money. All we ever hear is how we don't
spend enough on education and how we need new buildings and new computers.

Education sure went to hell when the draft dodgers became teachers to avoid
Viet Nam, later became administrators, and the politically correct factions
came in. We really have to get back to basics and demand an education and
don't push kids ahead that have not learned in the grade they were in.

I just hope I did not hurt anyone's self esteem with my post. That would be
bad for them.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
For decades, we've been accommodating the tender sensibilities of
the *students* in K-12, we've failed to hold parents accountable
for their end of the education process, and we've let the NEA
mafia hijack the process to serve their political ends. We now
reap what we've sown. The only fix is to go back to local/private
schools and make the connection much more clear between those
who pay for education, those who conduct education, and the
results they produce.

I thought the solution was more money. All we ever hear is how we don't
spend enough on education and how we need new buildings and new computers.

Education sure went to hell when the draft dodgers became teachers to avoid
Viet Nam, later became administrators, and the politically correct factions
came in. We really have to get back to basics and demand an education and
don't push kids ahead that have not learned in the grade they were in.

I just hope I did not hurt anyone's self esteem with my post. That would be
bad for them.



You may have also failed to properly norm for socio-economic
variations, gender bias, the oppressive white males, and
the general lack of transgressive inclusivity, nor have you
demonstrated sufficient multicultural sensitivity. I, for one,
am shocked, just shocked by this display ...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:34:14 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:


Now grad school
is a place you go "on purpose". Mommy and Daddy are not making you
go, and it takes actual effort and money to get there and survive.



Except if you are getting an advanced degree in Education.



which is about the how





not the what







Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

Tim Daneliuk wrote:

George wrote:

"Roger Woehl" wrote in message
. ..
Have any of you been in a public school in the last 5 years?
Roger

Yes, and in Biology class I had to teach a bit of Greek and Latin to
help them understand and internalize the vocabulary.

.... snip

What are we teaching?

You are a better man than I. A bit over a decade I got I had the
great joy of teaching graduate school for a bit. Now grad school
is a place you go "on purpose". Mommy and Daddy are not making you
go, and it takes actual effort and money to get there and survive.

Imagine my horror in discovering that a good many people had poor
writing, spelling, and thinking skills.

In my various positions as a technical lead, I have had the pleasure of
utilizing the "skills" of some of these graduates (bachelors through PhD).
The lack of writing skills is appalling; some of these people are
exceptionally technically gifted but are seemingly unable to string
together more than 5 words in succession nor put together a coherent
presentation or report to either document what they have done or get buy-in
to what they want to do.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Greetings,
For all responders to this topic, in which generation would you place
yourself? Traditionalist (born pre1945), Boomer, GenX, Millennial (GenY)

Roger

"Tom Watson" wrote in message
...
Well, I see that the usual Political Scientologists are about.

The geniuses of the moment and the arguers of the nonsensical.

Grab hold of this for a bit.

There has been more than passing mention of Education.

But it always seems to devolve about the "How".

I would like to see us address the "What".

Why, in god's name did we ever teach Latin?

If you thought that was because we gloried in a dead language - mark
that as wrong.

Why did we ever bother teaching Literature?

You probably got that wrong, too.

Why would anyone teach History?

...sigh...


There are too many who treat education as a trade school and bear
little support to the concept of it being a training ground for -
humans - citizens...

You do remember when we were citizens?

Not consumers?

Not voters?

"Next to god, of course, America, I"

Were you paying attention?

It is not about "how" we educate, it is about "what".


As always, make your choices carefully - and keep your eye on the
ball.



Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

"Roger Woehl" wrote in message
. ..
Greetings,
For all responders to this topic, in which generation would you place
yourself? Traditionalist (born pre1945), Boomer, GenX, Millennial (GenY)


A more appropriate question would be "when did you stop learning?" Think
you'd find the end of the alphabet quit before the "traditionalist."

What's the last book you read? Even better question. Mine is _ A History
of Medicine_ by Lois Magner.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
news

You may have also failed to properly norm for socio-economic
variations, gender bias, the oppressive white males, and
the general lack of transgressive inclusivity, nor have you
demonstrated sufficient multicultural sensitivity. I, for one,
am shocked, just shocked by this display ...


Buzz buzz. Gotta have those buzz words. Lots of folks out there care not a
bit for education as a pursuit or children as individuals, but they know
those buzzwords.

They learn them while getting their "advanced degrees in teaching" rather
than in subject.