T-Party CA. CON. wants to CAN public schools

[daveman]

The Cons are systematically destroying America, one illogical move after another, so it is no surprise to find an unAmerican T-Party slut attempting to destroy public education. This goes along with republican plans to turn America over to illegals and cheap uneducated slaves to do their bidding in non-government interference Corporations to maximize profits.

And as usual, they have to keep the master plan secret and out of the public eye to succeed, as this piece of T-Party Shit is doing.

If you're a product of public education, I'd say Harmer has a point.

Coming from a village imbecile who just fell off the pumpkin wagon, I would say you landed on your head.

Of course you would. I certainly wouldn't expect any rational self-examination from you.

 

[bodecea]

The Cons are systematically destroying America, one illogical move after another, so it is no surprise to find an unAmerican T-Party slut attempting to destroy public education. This goes along with republican plans to turn America over to illegals and cheap uneducated slaves to do their bidding in non-government interference Corporations to maximize profits.

And as usual, they have to keep the master plan secret and out of the public eye to succeed, as this piece of T-Party Shit is doing.

==========
In California, GOP congressional candidate David Harmer wants to eliminate public education. But you won't hear him touting his extreme views on the campaign trail.

Harmer argues that "government should exit the business of running and funding schools." He contends that would allow for "quantum leaps in educational quality and opportunity" and notes that he's simply pushing for a return to "the way things worked through the first century of American nationhood." Here's how he describes the wondrous world of early American education:

[L]iteracy levels among all classes, at least outside the South, matched or exceeded those prevailing now, and... public discourse and even tabloid content was pitched at what today would be considered a college-level audience. Schooling then was typically funded by parents or other family members responsible for the student, who paid modest tuition. If they couldn't afford it, trade guilds, benevolent associations, fraternal organizations, churches and charities helped. In this quintessentially American approach, free people acting in a free market found a variety of ways to pay for a variety of schools serving a variety of students, all without central command or control.

Yet historians say the early American education system was nothing like that. Back then, even high school was a luxury. "The high school at that point is a kind of elite form of education pretty much limited to the inner cities," says John Rury, an education historian at the University of Kansas. The rest of the system was far from comprehensive. What early schools taught, Rury says, were "very basic literacy and computational skills." Many schools only met four or five months a year, and their quality varied widely. "To get to a higher level of cognitive performance, you needed to have more teachers and longer school years, and that drove costs up," he explains. That led to modern taxpayer-supported schools. "Look around the world," says Rury. "Do we have an example of a modern, well-developed school system that operates on the model this person is advocating? We don't."

Tea Party Frontrunner: Abolish Public Schools | Mother Jones

Sure...let's go with the Mexico model.

 

[bodecea]

why is American education now 14th in the world?

I'll tell you why. Ronald Reagan put together a Commission on Education in 1983. It produced a report called "A Nation At Risk".

A Nation at Risk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The report was a load of ideologically driven nonsense of course, comparing standardized test scores of a nation that attempts to educate everyone (us) to countries who don't let their underachievers progress past primary school. That aside, mostly in response to that report, a national standards movement was initiated. That is, schools started to change their curriculums in response to the perception that "the schools are broken".

Another major blow to education came with the No Child Left Behind Act. This initiative of GW Bush required that all states adopt specific standards and tests. Now the kids, along with trying to learn by new, fucked up curriculum like Chicago math and Whole language, had to spend valuable instructional time taking useless tests that were usually used for little more than bashing unions.

Meanwhile, since nobody was able to meet the unreasonable standards, more and more of the nation's children were and are being labled "disabled". In some states, as many as 1 in 5 kids in high school are told they are disabled. This helps the districts you see cause you can give the disabled kids help on the all important standardized tests. This is only one way that the test scores are corrupted.

So, what did we get for all this "reform". Well, we got kids that are confused by overly abstract curriculum in the lower grades being taught by discouraged teachers who are reflexively bashed by administration and politicians. We have tests that the kids don't take seriously that have the scores manipulated so as to not let the school lose invaluable funding. And we have between 13 and 20% of the kids being called disabled because we, the adults, fucked the system up completely.

Good fucking job Republicans.

I don't know where you are at, but here in CA, the disabled and special ed kids have to take the Standardized tests for their AGE level (not ability level) too. And they are counted with the whole. Smart schools make sure they farm out their special ed program. Smart schools make sure their lower level kids are unofficially encouraged to abe absent during testing.

 

[California Girl]

Abolishing the Department of Public Education (figure the acronym) = Wanting to destroy America.

Which political bent is seeking to dumb down the populace, again?

*Emphasis mine*

I think that's a bipartisan effort. As far as I can see, both parties prefer dumb idiots who focus on lying about the other 'side'. This suits their purpose.... which is to rob us all blind while we're not paying attention.

 

[The T]

Abolishing the Department of Public Education (figure the acronym) = Wanting to destroy America.

Which political bent is seeking to dumb down the populace, again?

*Emphasis mine*

I think that's a bipartisan effort. As far as I can see, both parties prefer dumb idiots who focus on lying about the other 'side'. This suits their purpose.... which is to rob us all blind while we're not paying attention.

In other words? They're control freaks. Education should always be a local/State issue. As it exists now? DOE is nothing but an arm of the Imperial FED that makes the State/local entities beg for money that rightfully belongs to them in the first place.

Oh...and what to say of the Teacher's Unions? It's all the same...Control...as the populace is dumbed down.

 

[Liberty]

Abolishing the Department of Public Education (figure the acronym) = Wanting to destroy America.

Which political bent is seeking to dumb down the populace, again?

*Emphasis mine*

I think that's a bipartisan effort. As far as I can see, both parties prefer dumb idiots who focus on lying about the other 'side'. This suits their purpose.... which is to rob us all blind while we're not paying attention.

bingo...

it isn't the democrats that made our kids idiots.
it isn't the republicans that made our kids idiots.

It's the government as a whole and the morons who run it that made our kids idiots.
Also, there are a lot of bad teachers now thanks to tenure and unions.