that is true some children are born into inferior cultures who don't believe in book learning, or it could possibly be a genetic abnormality in these children which makes them too lazy to want to read. these people are destined for a life as net recipients, and since they are at no fault for their bad genetics or family culture, wealth should be redistributed from the rich to the poor so they can live humanely in society with a living wage instead of a minimum wage.
The measurement is the success rate based on standardized test results combined with accountability of the school system for the results.
That is what happens in the US via the social safety net programs. However well constructed these programs are corrupting in the sense that they provide incentives for not working and potentially causing net harm to people. This is recognized by private charities but ignored by public welfare programs.
Not success at creating opportunities. If you say your goal is opening doors, measure how many doors were opened. Not how many people chose to walk through them.
You have told me what you believe the objective was: increasing opportunities. You have told me what the program measured: passing students. You have told me what was incentivized: passing students. It doesn't matter how clearly you believe the commitment was expressed by the moronic slogan "no child left behind." The program measured and incentivized execution by looking at something other than what you believe it wanted to achieve. The fundamental problem, one which this program made worse not better, is that students believe they will either receive a degree, be given an education, or be taught knowledge rather be challenged to use the direction and support provided in expanding their own minds. So they believe being in a "bad" school means they should give up, and being in a "good" one means their job is done. The expectation of students and of this nation is that knowledge and skill is a commodity that can be handed to them, should we sufficiently incentivize educators to deliver it. When you are talking about anything beyond root memorization. It cannot. A teacher is not a mechanic, he is a coach. Are there problems with our education system? Yes. Should we hold educators accountable for creating educational opportunities, clearly presenting knowledge, building meaningful assessments, advancing curriculum with current technologies, consistently providing useful direction—yes. "No child left behind" does not measure or incentivize that. It looks at how many students got passed. You want educators to lead horses to water. You are measuring how much the water level drops. You are incentivizing educators by that measure. And your horses are dropping dead.
a good education is a handout, it is not something you should have to work for. we see this among the rich children who have the least motivation to succeed, but are very knowledgeable because a good education is handed to them on a silver platter. you leave poor children behind on your minimum wage plantation when you expect them to work hard, instead of giving them a good education the easy way.
A good education is very very hard work and takes lots and lots of time. Poor kids are too lazy to do the work and hours so remain poor. Its as simple as that. Rich kids have parents with a strong work ethic so they are train their kids from birth to accept the disciple a good education requires. - - - Updated - - - rich kids go to Harvard and other Ivy League schools precisely because they are the most motivated to succeed. How do you get everything so backwards?
Some poor kids (Ben Carson for example) are able to overcome their inherently bad schools and succeed. Others cannot. That is why it is so important to assign school vouchers to every child in the US so that they can attend the school of their choice. They must be given the opportunity of attending a good school with good teachers to succeed. But it is up to them to do the work. This IMO is the most important human right with respect to the future of our country.
a education in not handed to anyone; it is something you work very very hard for decades to gain. In Japan the say, four pass five fail. It means the lazy students who get 5 hours of sleep fail and the hard working ones who get by on 4 pass. Do you understand these basics?
You can disagree but regarding the bell curve, there will forever be people located on all areas of the curve...which means we will always have people functioning in the lower economic rungs of society. These same people have always had the option to 'put forth some effort both on the job and after-hours via education'. What are they waiting for? Education has always been a prime factor in one's career earnings. Nothing has changed. Even in under-performing public school systems, if a kid is focused, stays out of trouble, avoids gangs and drugs and alcohol and crime, and studies to obtain decent grades, this allows them to move along into college studies. Those who do not take this path, who fail the public school system, who are not qualified to attend college, are going to struggle...
IMO the public school system has a long way to go, but, this effort will be a moot point if the student does not also put forth the effort to obtain a high school degree. This is an extremely complex issue which for about 30-40% of public school kids, has NEVER been resolved! But all kids have a choice in how they conduct themselves. The best school system and best teachers cannot teach kids who are preoccupied with everything but an education. Yes there are many societal reasons why many kids struggle but there are also many kids who stay on a good path and will eventually be able to attend college...
They are not waiting, they are mostly lazy and liberal. In welfare riven America half the population is told they are in the lower class, cant get out, and are held there by the upper class. This gives them the perfect excuse to be lazy, collect, and vote for liberals.
Agreed but to see the kids and parents who did not win the school choice lottery in NYC in the move "Waiting for Superman" is a national disgrace. The other part of school choice is school discipline and school focus. There can be schools dedicated to these problem kids who do disruptive harm to others trying to learn but who may be helped with a little more directed help.
Another problem in our society today is the requirement for 'political correctness' in which IMO in so many areas where we need to take a hard stand, and require people to put forth more effort, we shy from this. Long ago when we had failure we got back up and tried harder. Today failure is an emotional hardship and we design our systems to avoid failure while ignoring the root issues. But, no matter who is to blame, something must be done to rid society of the growing population of people who are miserably failing. Calling people lazy and liberal solves nothing. This is not rocket science; school administrators and teachers and government know precisely why so many kids are struggling. Why are the collective we so inept at creating a better situation?
We might find out this issue is far too complex to solve. We have adults running society who seem incapable of solving complex issues. We're truly not that bright and we can see this year after year as this and other issues fail to be resolved and/or improved. The solution probably requires better school facilities, better teachers, better parents, and better students...good luck!!
It can never be completely solved as you point out. But we can come up with an improvement to the current educational system through competition resulting from a school voucher system. Solutions like that inevitable treat underachievers and trouble makers differently from those who want to learn and put in the effort. The political correctness that you also pointed out controls the D thinking in that they propose to treat every student the same. The R policy thinking serves to reward those who do the work which excludes those who do not. We as a nation IMO have to focus more on the achievers than the non achievers. If a teacher is forced to spend all her time on troublemakers in the class then the students who want to learn but need extra help will be denied that help. A voucher system could provide even the trouble makers some greater chance of success.
you seem totally confused and liberal. Capitalism is resolving huge huge issues for example, the self- driving car, space ships that land on boats, cloud computing, computer cell phones, 3d printing, 4k TV's etc etc. If libturds allowed a capitalist educational system you'd see the same kind of progress. Do you understand?
It would increase the number of teens in the work force. Businesses would be more likely to hire them if they get a wage break. Personally though I think all the fear mongering about min wage increase is overblown. The businesses that can't afford it are in a downward spiral anyway. Thats the real thing that people don't want to accept about the economy, businesses that are struggling are not really fit to continue. Wage increases at the bottom tend to increase revenue circulation for the main street economy and benefit local business.
It used to be that way for minors. They were limited to only certain type jobs, do dangerous work. But the government used to think developing a work ethic was a good thing, that it would good for teenagers to earn their money rather just expect it for free and many had to work to help out the family. Now the opinion of the government is that no one should work until at least 22 or so and a college degree and only the government is to help a family financially. Teens and young adults should only go to school and play video games.
goofy of course.Historically a family was the basic economic unit and perhaps if they all worked together they could support themselves. If anybody in any job can support themselves in your libcommie world then the incentive to do better would be destroyed and we'd have a soviet standard of living. Do you understand?
A voucher system, or any system in which people choose to go to school outside of their local area, creates more problems than it solves. The education system must find a way to provide equitable education to 'every' student. Creating competition is not needed in a system which provides equitable education. If School A is inferior to School B this is not a voucher problem; it is a public education design and administration problem. Treating every student the same will never work. There must be a high level of student accountability; if they do great they have more options and if they do poorly their options are diminished...or perhaps withdrawn. If you know about the Peter Principle this will explain IMO why the collective we are incapable of doing better...
There is no reason that the alternative schools reside outside the immediate area but if they do that's not a problem. The problem is to deny low income kids in particular the opportunity to get a quality education. Waiting for Superman shows the demand for these alternate schools. And the city of New Orleans also shows what can be done with charter schools. In fact with a voucher system start up schools would offer the educational options that low income parents would want for their kids. The public school system controlled by the teachers unions have failed to produce equal opportunities for our low income students. Competition is the key as in any market to produce the best products at the lowest prices. And there is evidence that the presence of successful charters schools in an area also results in improvements in the public school system. The beauty of the charter school system is that they can be constructed to treat students with specific focus and needs. And charter schools do have a greater propensity to enforce student accountability and expel students who are trouble makers.
The problem is that would be a form of discrimination. When making or changing laws it has to be the same for everyone. We can't say person A gets this and person B getssomething different. But I like that you are thinking outside the box and trying to find solutions, that's what we need in this world
