Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by 108, Dec 4, 2013.
i knew it was in there somewhere to blame the liberals
It won't magically disappear; it will take decades just to make it less prevalent. But, at least you'd be giving the motivated folks living in ghettos a chance. In the current system, kids in the ghetto are basically permanently handcuffed into failing schools and horrendous peer groups.
And, I agree the key is the home, but how in the world can you create policies that will improve the home?
At least if we can get some kids out of failing homes and horrendous peer groups, we can hope that they'll grow up some day and establish home more conducive to education.
What I don't get is why you (and many others) are so against allowing ghetto kids to choose the schools they will attend? If you were poor, living in the ghetto, would you want your kids handcuffed to the local schools?
First of all, I think 'failing schools' is a great misnomer. Comes with the claim that the only reason schools full of students from uneducated, single-parent homes don't do as well as those full of students from educated two-parent homes is because the teachers aren't trying hard enough.
I have mixed feelings about school choice. We've got a ton of magnet programs in Jacksonville, and one thing it's done is tear up neighborhood schools. And the result is not that it sends poor ghetto kids to nice suburban schools. It's much more gives middle class kids a way to get away the poorer students.
In any event, it is hardly a magic fix-all or the one thing that's holding back American education.
these statistics should be served as motivation for all parents to instill education as a priority with their kids
unfortunately, many of these parents act like kids themselves
I don't think its the cultural demographics that is the problem in the U.S. It is one of the negative effects of multi-culturalism, especially when some of the cultures reject education as a means of improving themselves. The Finnish people have one culture. Everyone goes to school to learn. If you don't want to learn, you won't have any friends, because the other kids' parents won't let them play with you. In the U.S., if you don't want to learn, it could be because you have a bad teacher who hates you, or your future is in pro sports so you don't need to learn anything.
Multi-culturalism has positive effects as well. I think Americans get along well with people from different cultures compared to other places. Europe talks the talk, but does not walk the walk. It is hard for minorities to get a good job in Europe, no matter how qualified they are. (Part of the reason is that it is extremely difficult to fire anyone who doesn't work out.) It's much easier for a qualified minority to get a good job in the U.S.
I think that's a copout. Yes, having a good home where education is valued will increase the odds of success, but it is not necessary. A school with a good approach to discipline can overcome a lot of problems with home life. And putting borderline kids in among better achieving kids (regardless of whether they are white, yellow, or blue) puts peer pressure on them to achieve, as long as they are greatly outnumbered by the high-achieving kids and have minimal opportunities to congregate and commiserate with low-achieving kids.
My wife was a teacher in the worst elementary school in town for many years (in one of the worst parts of town), and worked with three principals, all with progressively worse policies toward student discipline. The school went from a "C" school all the way to an "F" school, and was almost closed down by the county. The neighborhood didn't change, the principals did. Maybe you think there wasn't that much difference between a "C" school and an "F" school. The year before the first of the three new principals was the last year of the previous principal, who was famous for instilling discipline in the school. The school that is now looked at as a hopeless school in a hopeless neighborhood was an "A" school in 2002.
The other thing about blaming the home is that, since even the nanny state that we are fast approaching cannot go into these homes and fix what's broken (the parenting abilities of the person raising the kids), then we can consider the situation hopeless and give up on the kids. Instead, the nanny state lavishes all kinds of financial largesse on the family, in the hopes that a few dollars will find its way towards helping the kids. We can't afford the nanny state, and there are a lot of unintended consequences of throwing money at people with poor decision-making skills.
And people wonder how we could have re-elected Obama. It's obvious.