Parents Outrage At School Over Gay Storybook

[Bonnie]

Parents are leaving the moral, intellectual and emotional development of their children to the schools.

A tragic, tragic mistake.[/QUOTE

unfortunately this is true. I have 4 children in the school system and my wife and I take a very strong interst in our childrens education.

I would like to add that when you take a vested interest, the schools will sometimes label you as a trouble maker even when you are not over the top or are just looking out for your childs well being.

We deffinitely need to get back to the basics!!!!

this is how I feel when dealing with the schools (sometimes)

If enough parents took the interest you do the schools would have a hard time labeling anyone troublemakers.

 

[5stringJeff]

Some parents are speaking up.

Other parents are just moving their kids out of public education altogether. Like us.

 

[Hobbit]

The great problem with government schools:

First off, with so many new regulations on curriculum, standards of excellence, funding, and so many other things, 'public' is a misnomer for these schools. These schools are not owned and operated by the public, and, in fact, have little control over many things at the local level. And now, thanks the well-intentioned but extremely crappy No Child Left Behind Act, every teacher in the country has to teach for the same test or risk losing much-needed federal funds. You also have no choice as to which 'public' school you go to. The school is only 'public' if you live in a certain district and are of the age that attends that school. Everyone else must state a clear purpose and sign in as a visitor. No, these are not public schools any more than a prison is a public building. These are government schools. The government controls them, and with the dwindling educational value, it probably won't be long before the proper term is 'government indoctrination centers' a name only barely avoided at this juncture.

The number one problem with government schools is that they are run by the government. Things that are run by private citizens must to well to get paid. If somebody doesn't want to pay you, all they have to do is do without your goods/services. If somebody doesn't want to pay the government, they go to jail. As such, anything run by the government can almost universally be counted on the be inefficient and crappy at whatever they do, as they have no incentive to do better. The primary exceptions are the military and some areas of law enforcement (a guilty concience can be almost as motivating as the pocketbook). This is why most schools are more interested in saving face than teaching students. As long as they can avoid a scandal, nobody gets fired and the money keeps rolling in while maybe 50% of the students they produce are capable of reading this post. Add to this the fact that the tax money cannot even be allocated to a different school even if one of them is so bad that over 75% of the students in the district homeschool or splurge for a private school, and we can easily see that why few government schools excel at anything...they don't have to.

The number two problem with government schools is that they are controlled by the government. Let's assume for a second that you get competing, private firms to actually run the school. You still have a major problem. The government still controls the curriculum and the standards for excellence. This makes the government school an indoctrination center. If you look throughout history, the government has grown almost exponentially since every child was given the right to a tax funded education (nothing is free). Think about it. If you go to a Catholic controlled school, you will likely grow up liking the Catholic church. If you attend a military school, you will likely grow to like the military. So what happens if you go to a government school? Why do you think the latest universal solution to all problems is another government program that only looks good on paper? In a government school, you will, of course, learn of the might of the founding fathers, but that will be downplayed compared to the secular sainthood granted to Lincoln and Roosevelt, the two men responsible for more government growth than all presidents prior to FDR combined. Everyone should be taught that government is a necessary evil that is to be feared. You will NEVER learn this in a government school.

Then there's the standard of excellence. Huge, bureaucratic, government agencies are not willing to go through the trouble of actually looking at anyone's methods to see if they're doing a good job. They instead come up with a one test fits all method of examining only the final product. This barely works if the raw materials are all consistent, but this system heavily favors teachers who are given good students. Teachers in backwoods areas where education is still, at the least unfashionable, and at the most, heresy are given horrible grades not because they're bad teachers, but because their students don't try. There are people who can't grasp certain bits of math and science. Not everybody has the potential to get a college degree. However, the government only sees the cookie-cutter, college bound student who is perfectly capable of learning trigonometry with the right teacher.

The third problem with government schools is that government schools are beholden to politicians. Politicians aren't interested in doing a proper job. They're only interested in getting re-elected. To this end, they will propose a short term 'fix' to the education problem, the impact of which will only last until election day. These often involve artificial measures of improvements like smaller class size (which often simply mean the teacher prints off 15 copies of busy work instead of 30), better equipment (the students waste time in class by surfing for porn on new, high-res screens instead of the old ones that only went to 800x600), or simply more funding (which means that now the school spends $30,000 per illiterate student who can only count with his fingers as opposed to $20,000). The only way a politician will ever fix the school system is by hiring somebody competant to do it for him, which amounts to a slightly higher form of throwing money at the problem.

Government schools fail solely on the fact that they are government schools and need to be eliminated. Can you imagine applying this logic to any other necessity? Imagine how crappy your grocery store would be if you were required to either shop there or pay for groceries you don't actually buy there and pay again to shop somewhere better. At the very least, imagine how much a school would perk up if students could actually take their tax dollars with them when they left for something competant.

On a side note, what are these homofascists (calling someone a fascist is 'in' right now) going to do next? The new Barbie and Ken companion dolls Susan the lumberjack and Frank the hair stylist?

 

[5stringJeff]

On a side note, what are these homofascists (calling someone a fascist is 'in' right now) going to do next? The new Barbie and Ken companion dolls Susan the lumberjack and Frank the hair stylist?

Homofascists... great descriptor!

 

[Nienna]

Good rant, Hobbit. LONG, but good!

 

[Dr Grump]

don't show up for Parent-Teacher conferences

Interesting you should bring this up. My eldest started school six months ago. At the first parents/teacher evening my other half rocked along (I babysat the kids). Three parents from my son's class turned up. A month ago they had an evening to discuss the upcoming cirriculum - two turned up. I asked a couple of parents the next day if they knew about it. They did, but were too busy....My son got a principal's award for the end of term. His teacher said when she had to pick a student from her class to get the award it was a no brainer. Now, I reckon my son is bright (what parent doesn't!!!), but I reckon a lot of it has to do with the effort put in at home (especially by my other half) and making sure he does his homework etc.

 

[insein]

When schools got into social and ethical issues is where they went wrong. Everyone has a different social and ethical level. Schools were meant to teach kids the basics of knowledge and how to learn. When liberals got into power (60's and 70's) they began shaping the school system to dictate their moral structure. They focused more on art and music at first to gain acceptance. No offense to people that teach these subjects but these have no place in a school system. From there they went on to impose Multiculturism, the greatest threat to our existence as a nation in our time. After MC was established, they began working to reshape history. The indians, the civil war, WW2, Vietnam all were retold with a liberal spin instead of stating the facts of the matter. By now the liberal infestation into the school system is so imbedded that it would take a huge uprising or a federal mandate to change the course we're on.

School is for reading, writing, math, science and TRUE history without any biased opinion either way on the matter. All the other stuff is window dressing for a liberal teacher to shape the minds of young innocents into walking talking one-liners.

 

[dilloduck]

The great problem with government schools:

First off, with so many new regulations on curriculum, standards of excellence, funding, and so many other things, 'public' is a misnomer for these schools. These schools are not owned and operated by the public, and, in fact, have little control over many things at the local level. And now, thanks the well-intentioned but extremely crappy No Child Left Behind Act, every teacher in the country has to teach for the same test or risk losing much-needed federal funds. You also have no choice as to which 'public' school you go to. The school is only 'public' if you live in a certain district and are of the age that attends that school. Everyone else must state a clear purpose and sign in as a visitor. No, these are not public schools any more than a prison is a public building. These are government schools. The government controls them, and with the dwindling educational value, it probably won't be long before the proper term is 'government indoctrination centers' a name only barely avoided at this juncture.

The number one problem with government schools is that they are run by the government. Things that are run by private citizens must to well to get paid. If somebody doesn't want to pay you, all they have to do is do without your goods/services. If somebody doesn't want to pay the government, they go to jail. As such, anything run by the government can almost universally be counted on the be inefficient and crappy at whatever they do, as they have no incentive to do better. The primary exceptions are the military and some areas of law enforcement (a guilty concience can be almost as motivating as the pocketbook). This is why most schools are more interested in saving face than teaching students. As long as they can avoid a scandal, nobody gets fired and the money keeps rolling in while maybe 50% of the students they produce are capable of reading this post. Add to this the fact that the tax money cannot even be allocated to a different school even if one of them is so bad that over 75% of the students in the district homeschool or splurge for a private school, and we can easily see that why few government schools excel at anything...they don't have to.

The number two problem with government schools is that they are controlled by the government. Let's assume for a second that you get competing, private firms to actually run the school. You still have a major problem. The government still controls the curriculum and the standards for excellence. This makes the government school an indoctrination center. If you look throughout history, the government has grown almost exponentially since every child was given the right to a tax funded education (nothing is free). Think about it. If you go to a Catholic controlled school, you will likely grow up liking the Catholic church. If you attend a military school, you will likely grow to like the military. So what happens if you go to a government school? Why do you think the latest universal solution to all problems is another government program that only looks good on paper? In a government school, you will, of course, learn of the might of the founding fathers, but that will be downplayed compared to the secular sainthood granted to Lincoln and Roosevelt, the two men responsible for more government growth than all presidents prior to FDR combined. Everyone should be taught that government is a necessary evil that is to be feared. You will NEVER learn this in a government school.

Then there's the standard of excellence. Huge, bureaucratic, government agencies are not willing to go through the trouble of actually looking at anyone's methods to see if they're doing a good job. They instead come up with a one test fits all method of examining only the final product. This barely works if the raw materials are all consistent, but this system heavily favors teachers who are given good students. Teachers in backwoods areas where education is still, at the least unfashionable, and at the most, heresy are given horrible grades not because they're bad teachers, but because their students don't try. There are people who can't grasp certain bits of math and science. Not everybody has the potential to get a college degree. However, the government only sees the cookie-cutter, college bound student who is perfectly capable of learning trigonometry with the right teacher.

The third problem with government schools is that government schools are beholden to politicians. Politicians aren't interested in doing a proper job. They're only interested in getting re-elected. To this end, they will propose a short term 'fix' to the education problem, the impact of which will only last until election day. These often involve artificial measures of improvements like smaller class size (which often simply mean the teacher prints off 15 copies of busy work instead of 30), better equipment (the students waste time in class by surfing for porn on new, high-res screens instead of the old ones that only went to 800x600), or simply more funding (which means that now the school spends $30,000 per illiterate student who can only count with his fingers as opposed to $20,000). The only way a politician will ever fix the school system is by hiring somebody competant to do it for him, which amounts to a slightly higher form of throwing money at the problem.

Government schools fail solely on the fact that they are government schools and need to be eliminated. Can you imagine applying this logic to any other necessity? Imagine how crappy your grocery store would be if you were required to either shop there or pay for groceries you don't actually buy there and pay again to shop somewhere better. At the very least, imagine how much a school would perk up if students could actually take their tax dollars with them when they left for something competant.

On a side note, what are these homofascists (calling someone a fascist is 'in' right now) going to do next? The new Barbie and Ken companion dolls Susan the lumberjack and Frank the hair stylist?

Good post----what would be really cool too is if they taught kids something that could help them get a job instead of being a tolerant sponge.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

The new Barbie and Ken companion dolls Susan the lumberjack and Frank the hair stylist?

nah, they wouldn't sell. they are having a hard time selling as it is because of the new Bratz dolls that they have to compete with.

AS far as the other points, you are correct with the funding issue. Here in MN, they are ALWAYS bitching that we don't spend enough on education when currently .49c of every $1 tax dollar here is spent on education. How much of it is actually spent on the kids THEMSELVES, not the greedy teacher's union or the ever growing budget for more and more useless administrators? Many people here are now waking up and seeing that we spend all this money, especially on inner city schools, and yet the kids performance really hasn't changed.

You can throw all the money at the school you want, but unless the kids themselves are held accountable, and parents (both of them) are involved and make education an important presence, nothing will be achieved except higher taxes and the liberal's increased bitching about minority areas not up to par.

If the kid doesn't want to learn or refuses, then no amount of money thrown at the problem will help. It doesn't matter what you are or where you came from. You can be a success if you work at it. Yes, coming from a higher income family provides a faster rate of success because that resource is there. But The liberals keep telling the lower-income people that they cannot seem to learn or work without the help of the higher-income residents.

Funny, my mom and step-dad can barely afford their house right now (and they are selling it to downsize) but my sister is graduating this year, and she's still able to go to college to be a paralegal. How? She worked hard, got 2 partial scholarships, and the rest is on student loans. She has worked for the past 2 years at the Anoka County courthouse for the county attorney through an internship in high school. she worked hard there and her supervisor gave her a real nice recommendation letter for school. Once she gets her degree, she will be hired on full time and work for the county attorney. All on her own. I tell her all the time that I am very proud of her and will give her a special gift when she graduates...though I haven't decided on what that is or will be yet.

 

[Nuc]

They've taken art, music and physical education out of the schools but they have time and energy to do social engineering. They should get rid of DARE, gay propaganda, religion, and anything else which does not objectively promote mental or physical development. Leave the rest to parents, churches, whatever, not the schools.

 

[Dr Grump]

and TRUE history

for example?

 

[GotZoom]

Funny, my mom and step-dad can barely afford their house right now (and they are selling it to downsize) but my sister is graduating this year, and she's still able to go to college to be a paralegal. How? She worked hard, got 2 partial scholarships, and the rest is on student loans. She has worked for the past 2 years at the Anoka County courthouse for the county attorney through an internship in high school. she worked hard there and her supervisor gave her a real nice recommendation letter for school. Once she gets her degree, she will be hired on full time and work for the county attorney. All on her own. I tell her all the time that I am very proud of her and will give her a special gift when she graduates...though I haven't decided on what that is or will be yet.

Sounds like some parents (including "step") did a good job.

 

[Bonnie]

Interesting you should bring this up. My eldest started school six months ago. At the first parents/teacher evening my other half rocked along (I babysat the kids). Three parents from my son's class turned up. A month ago they had an evening to discuss the upcoming cirriculum - two turned up. I asked a couple of parents the next day if they knew about it. They did, but were too busy....My son got a principal's award for the end of term. His teacher said when she had to pick a student from her class to get the award it was a no brainer. Now, I reckon my son is bright (what parent doesn't!!!), but I reckon a lot of it has to do with the effort put in at home (especially by my other half) and making sure he does his homework etc.

It makes all the difference in the world!

 

[Nienna]

When schools got into social and ethical issues is where they went wrong. Everyone has a different social and ethical level. Schools were meant to teach kids the basics of knowledge and how to learn. When liberals got into power (60's and 70's) they began shaping the school system to dictate their moral structure. They focused more on art and music at first to gain acceptance. No offense to people that teach these subjects but these have no place in a school system. From there they went on to impose Multiculturism, the greatest threat to our existence as a nation in our time. After MC was established, they began working to reshape history. The indians, the civil war, WW2, Vietnam all were retold with a liberal spin instead of stating the facts of the matter. By now the liberal infestation into the school system is so imbedded that it would take a huge uprising or a federal mandate to change the course we're on.

School is for reading, writing, math, science and TRUE history without any biased opinion either way on the matter. All the other stuff is window dressing for a liberal teacher to shape the minds of young innocents into walking talking one-liners.

I agree, and disagree. I agree that the 60s & 70s saw an influx of social engineers (whose ideas sprung from the Rousseau-ean romantic notion that "children are basically good, and we must not stifle their natural goodness with rules"). But I disagree that schools are not for teaching morals. Any time an adult works with children, he will be demonstrating morality. Children naturally look to the adult in charge for an example of how to act. However, schools USED to confine this to ideas like "respect," "responsiblity," "hard work," and "obedience." These ideas are way out of style these days. The self-esteem pirates stole the education ship. Now we have kids who have no idea how to think critically, logically, and unselfishly, and who have superinflated egos. They leave school, not with an education and the skills and work ethic which would enable them to succeed, but with a sense of entitlement.

An adult in the position of an instructor will inherently demonstrate some sort of morality. But we need to leave out all the therapeutic, feel-good stuff, and teach children how to actually survive--- dare we hope, even SUCCEED--- in the real world.

 

[Bonnie]

I agree, and disagree. I agree that the 60s & 70s saw an influx of social engineers (whose ideas sprung from the Rousseau-ean romantic notion that "children are basically good, and we must not stifle their natural goodness with rules"). But I disagree that schools are not for teaching morals. Any time an adult works with children, he will be demonstrating morality. Children naturally look to the adult in charge for an example of how to act. However, schools USED to confine this to ideas like "respect," "responsiblity," "hard work," and "obedience." These ideas are way out of style these days. The self-esteem pirates stole the education ship. Now we have kids who have no idea how to think critically, logically, and unselfishly, and who have superinflated egos. They leave school, not with an education and the skills and work ethic which would enable them to succeed, but with a sense of entitlement.

An adult in the position of an instructor will inherently demonstrate some sort of morality. But we need to leave out all the therapeutic, feel-good stuff, and teach children how to actually survive--- dare we hope, even SUCCEED--- in the real world.

You rock MOM seriously greatly worded

 

[Nienna]

You rock MOM seriously greatly worded

Thanks, Bonnie!

 

[jillian]

Now we have kids who have no idea how to think critically, logically, and unselfishly, and who have superinflated egos. They leave school, not with an education and the skills and work ethic which would enable them to succeed, but with a sense of entitlement.

I'm just wondering, on what facts do you base that observation?

 

[GotZoom]

I'm just wondering, on what facts do you base that observation?

I think you answered your own question.

I have the impression she bases these facts ON observation.

 

[jillian]

I think you answered your own question.

I have the impression she bases these facts ON observation.

In other words, it's unsubstantiated opinion?

Thanks.

though even opinion should have some basis in observable fact, no?

 

[GotZoom]

In other words, it's unsubstantiated opinion?

Thanks.

I wouldn't call it that.

If I observe something, it's not opinion.