To Save the Schools, We Must Change the Social Contract

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Fine and dandy if your child is a fairly middle-of-the-road child. Most teachers do everything they can to make sure you child is learning. If you are THAT PARENT and your child is an obnoxious troublemaker, now we have a problem, don't we?

I agree. But the real problem is, the ed system labels EVERY child troublesome , along with a canned speech to drug them all into oblivion

Again, the Social Contract. Or, Rights and Responsibilities. Maybe parent have the Right to expect a good education for their child but the Responsibility to help their child be a good citizen in their classroom. Wow, imagine that.

My point is, parents have no rights once they cross the threshold into the classrooom, everything presented them is not asking , it's demanding , they have no choice(s)

You see, I see our problem in Public Education to be quite the opposite. A lot of people who SHOULD be fired can't be.

Especially the mental health loosers hiding out there, most of whom can't cut a job in the real world

~S~

Excuse me, but how many years were you a classroom teacher? If not, you are totally clueless!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

My evaluations are so good that less than 10% of teachers in my district are evaluated at my level. In a very good district one of the best in my state. I have won awards and am nationally published. I don't care if you believe me; it's true.

I mean that conservatives as a whole are bad at educational policy and coming up with solutions.

Excuse my French, but that is utter, Left wing biased Horse shit.

You are prolly neither Christian NOR Conservative. Your entire premise in this thread is a farce.
You claim to be a "Christian Conservative, and repeat that ad nausea, then go on to spill how ":really, really REALLY Bad educators Conservatives are"
You're no conservative. So typical of nasty Left wingers
I was correct at the beginning of this thread when I called you a CINO.

Italian mobsters wear a cross and go to church...after a hit.....that does not make them Christians.
And more than one flaming gay person has claimed to be "conservative".

Do you want an example of how poor educators conservative politicians are? Florida had a school accountability formula under Jeb Bush that assigned grades for schools based on numerous factors. The first year, the top schools received great scores, all "A"s. The next year, the top schools slipped to "B"s and the third to "C"s and eventually received a grade of "F". One of these schools was rated in the nation's top 15 high schools by US News and World Report, and another in the top 100. Why?

The conservative morons in the state legislature designed the formula that required a minimum of 2% growth in a key test score. So why is that a problem? Those schools were already scoring in the 90th percentiles when the system was implemented. If you go from 90% to 91%, you don't meet the requirement and get knocked down a letter. Fast forward 5 years, and the schools are scoring in the high 90th percentile, yet according to the state's morons in system, were failing schools.

A high school math student should have seen the problem with their calculations.

BTW, only incredibly lazy morons use the non-word "prolly".

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

When you "toe the line" you follow the requirements.
Pulling a fucking rope has nothing to do with the topic, dumbass!
The reason that "tow the line" has become used is idiots like you who misuse it.
Want to hear another one? I hate when when people say it will "prolly" happen. Are we suddenly just too fucking lazy to pronounce and spell all the letters in a word?

You know, considering most of your ideals align with mine, we really shouldn't be here.
You believe in the 2nd etc, and so do I.

This is small potatoes. There are REAL problems to be resolved. Save your energy for fighting the real enemies of America and not those basically on the same side.
Toe the line is the norm.....but for whatever reason I like my version better. Again my choice.
If you let your head explode over small things like this then that's on you.

If you've read my posts you well know I'm educated and quite literate, but who's "perfect"?. Last time....it's simply a choice I made. Save your energy for the truly illiterate and gross offenders. Or better yet, try being tolerant and focusing on what really matters.

And while I certainly could, I don't need to call you a "dumbass" or "idiot" every post to make my point. I'm just not that emotionally invested as you prolly are.

You just strive to prove yourself as a dumbass or diot, so I accommodate you and validate your feelings. BTW, "prolly" (sic) best to use real words when communicating.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Conservatives are really, really REALLY bad at education. Sorry, but we are. Your posts are Exhibit A.

Then why are you in that profession if you admit how horrible you are at it?

And I totally disagree. Conservatives can make THE BEST teachers. But they prolly find it difficult to be their best in the political climate in which they have to operate.

Why on Earth would you claim to be a Conservative teacher, then say Conservative teachers are "really, really REALLY bad at education"?

Specifically, what do you mean?

She did not say conservative teachers. Try reading for comprehension, please!

 

[progressive hunter]

My evaluations are so good that less than 10% of teachers in my district are evaluated at my level. In a very good district one of the best in my state. I have won awards and am nationally published. I don't care if you believe me; it's true.

I mean that conservatives as a whole are bad at educational policy and coming up with solutions.

Excuse my French, but that is utter, Left wing biased Horse shit.

You are prolly neither Christian NOR Conservative. Your entire premise in this thread is a farce.
You claim to be a "Christian Conservative, and repeat that ad nausea, then go on to spill how ":really, really REALLY Bad educators Conservatives are"
You're no conservative. So typical of nasty Left wingers
I was correct at the beginning of this thread when I called you a CINO.

Italian mobsters wear a cross and go to church...after a hit.....that does not make them Christians.
And more than one flaming gay person has claimed to be "conservative".

Do you want an example of how poor educators conservative politicians are? Florida had a school accountability formula under Jeb Bush that assigned grades for schools based on numerous factors. The first year, the top schools received great scores, all "A"s. The next year, the top schools slipped to "B"s and the third to "C"s and eventually received a grade of "F". One of these schools was rated in the nation's top 15 high schools by US News and World Report, and another in the top 100. Why?

The conservative morons in the state legislature designed the formula that required a minimum of 2% growth in a key test score. So why is that a problem? Those schools were already scoring in the 90th percentiles when the system was implemented. If you go from 90% to 91%, you don't meet the requirement and get knocked down a letter. Fast forward 5 years, and the schools are scoring in the high 90th percentile, yet according to the state's morons in system, were failing schools.

A high school math student should have seen the problem with their calculations.

BTW, only incredibly lazy morons use the non-word "prolly".

sorry but jeb bush is not a conservative, hes a progressive,,,

 

[SweetSue92]

My evaluations are so good that less than 10% of teachers in my district are evaluated at my level. In a very good district one of the best in my state. I have won awards and am nationally published. I don't care if you believe me; it's true.

I mean that conservatives as a whole are bad at educational policy and coming up with solutions.

Excuse my French, but that is utter, Left wing biased Horse shit.

You are prolly neither Christian NOR Conservative. Your entire premise in this thread is a farce.
You claim to be a "Christian Conservative, and repeat that ad nausea, then go on to spill how ":really, really REALLY Bad educators Conservatives are"
You're no conservative. So typical of nasty Left wingers
I was correct at the beginning of this thread when I called you a CINO.

Italian mobsters wear a cross and go to church...after a hit.....that does not make them Christians.
And more than one flaming gay person has claimed to be "conservative".

If you're going to drag me for reading comprehension problems and then quote me maybe try to get my quotes right just as a bare minimum. I did not say "what bad educators Conservatives are" I said Conservatives are "really bad at education" and clarified what I meant. If you cannot comprehend the difference, honestly, you have the reading comprehension problem, not me.

And being willing to call out serious issues on your side of the aisle, trust me, is a huge asset, not a disservice. I am a Conservative. I do not worship Conservatism and therefore, DO NOT owe it my blind unwavering fealty and devotion.

 

[SweetSue92]

what did you mean by collective rights???

"Collective rights" is the power to gang up on people and make them do what you want.

No.

Collective Rights is right to, say, a safe and supportive classroom. When your behavior makes the classroom no longer safe, your right to be there is lost.

We do this as a society all the time. The Collective says if your idea of happiness is to go around raping people, the Collective says we're taking your liberty away.

This is not new, people.

How is that different than what I said?

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

BTW, only incredibly lazy morons use the non-word "prolly".

(says the genius who'll shoot people who basically are on the same side, over grammar,...brilliant)
That requires a noteworty IQ all things considered.

Ok, whatever you say.
You're prolly right.

 

[SweetSue92]

My evaluations are so good that less than 10% of teachers in my district are evaluated at my level. In a very good district one of the best in my state. I have won awards and am nationally published. I don't care if you believe me; it's true.

I mean that conservatives as a whole are bad at educational policy and coming up with solutions.

Excuse my French, but that is utter, Left wing biased Horse shit.

You are prolly neither Christian NOR Conservative. Your entire premise in this thread is a farce.
You claim to be a "Christian Conservative, and repeat that ad nausea, then go on to spill how ":really, really REALLY Bad educators Conservatives are"
You're no conservative. So typical of nasty Left wingers
I was correct at the beginning of this thread when I called you a CINO.

Italian mobsters wear a cross and go to church...after a hit.....that does not make them Christians.
And more than one flaming gay person has claimed to be "conservative".

Do you want an example of how poor educators conservative politicians are? Florida had a school accountability formula under Jeb Bush that assigned grades for schools based on numerous factors. The first year, the top schools received great scores, all "A"s. The next year, the top schools slipped to "B"s and the third to "C"s and eventually received a grade of "F". One of these schools was rated in the nation's top 15 high schools by US News and World Report, and another in the top 100. Why?

The conservative morons in the state legislature designed the formula that required a minimum of 2% growth in a key test score. So why is that a problem? Those schools were already scoring in the 90th percentiles when the system was implemented. If you go from 90% to 91%, you don't meet the requirement and get knocked down a letter. Fast forward 5 years, and the schools are scoring in the high 90th percentile, yet according to the state's morons in system, were failing schools.

A high school math student should have seen the problem with their calculations.

BTW, only incredibly lazy morons use the non-word "prolly".

Conservative educational policy often sees children as widgets. When the widgets don't widget as factory specified, the schools, and teachers, must pay.

In many way liberals are no better, and in many ways a lot worse. But conservatives surely do not make a great showing.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

If you're going to drag me for reading comprehension problems and then quote me maybe try to get my quotes right just as a bare minimum. I did not say "what bad educators Conservatives are" I said Conservatives are "really bad at education" and clarified what I meant. If you cannot comprehend the difference, honestly, you have the reading comprehension problem, not me.

And being willing to call out serious issues on your side of the aisle, trust me, is a huge asset, not a disservice. I am a Conservative. I do not worship Conservatism and therefore, DO NOT owe it my blind unwavering fealty and devotion.

okee dokey.
whatever you say.

This thread has dead ended so I'm prolly done.
You'll need to tow the line from here.
Have fun.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

She did not say conservative teachers. Try reading for comprehension, please!

Yeah she did. But thanks for playing.
You closet Libs are nutz.

 

[progressive hunter]

what did you mean by collective rights???

"Collective rights" is the power to gang up on people and make them do what you want.

No.

Collective Rights is right to, say, a safe and supportive classroom. When your behavior makes the classroom no longer safe, your right to be there is lost.

We do this as a society all the time. The Collective says if your idea of happiness is to go around raping people, the Collective says we're taking your liberty away.

This is not new, people.

How is that different than what I said?

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

what youre talking about is mob rule based on communism,,,,

you never said what happens if the collective says to leave the bad kids in class??

 

[dblack]

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

That was deliberate. Democracy advocates like to pretend that their solution isn't about force, but of course it is.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

A right is a freedom, not a grant of power. What you refer to as "collective rights" is simply the power of the majority to bully the minority. Some of you seem to think that going through the process of taking a vote legitimizes that bullying, but it doesn't.

 

[SweetSue92]

She did not say conservative teachers. Try reading for comprehension, please!

Yeah she did. But thanks for playing.
You closet Libs are nutz.

No, I didn't.

Reading comprehension fail. Again.

 

[Unkotare]

BTW, only incredibly lazy morons use the non-word "prolly".

(says the genius who'll shoot people who basically are on the same side, over grammar,...brilliant)
That requires a noteworty IQ all things considered.

Ok, whatever you say.
You're prolly right.

I wish the tow of you could get along.

 

[SweetSue92]

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

That was deliberate. Democracy advocates like to pretend that their solution isn't about force, but of course it is.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

A right is a freedom, not a grant of power. What you refer to as "collective rights" is simply the power of the majority to bully the minority. Some of you seem to think that going through the process of taking a vote legitimizes that bullying, but it doesn't.

Newsflash for you: if you don't agree to live by a vote in a community than you devolve to gang warfare. So yes: society has a code we all agree--either overtly or not--to live by. Else the code is survival of the fittest and then anarchy.

You want survival of the fittest? Bully for you. Leave us out of it.

 

[progressive hunter]

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

That was deliberate. Democracy advocates like to pretend that their solution isn't about force, but of course it is.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

A right is a freedom, not a grant of power. What you refer to as "collective rights" is simply the power of the majority to bully the minority. Some of you seem to think that going through the process of taking a vote legitimizes that bullying, but it doesn't.

Newsflash for you: if you don't agree to live by a vote in a community than you devolve to gang warfare. So yes: society has a code we all agree--either overtly or not--to live by. Else the code is survival of the fittest and then anarchy.

You want survival of the fittest? Bully for you. Leave us out of it.

what you are talking about is a democracy,,,and as we always see from history is those lead to communism,,,

but since youre a communist that would make sense,,,

America is a republic,,,,,

you must be public school educated,,,

 

[dblack]

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

That was deliberate. Democracy advocates like to pretend that their solution isn't about force, but of course it is.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

A right is a freedom, not a grant of power. What you refer to as "collective rights" is simply the power of the majority to bully the minority. Some of you seem to think that going through the process of taking a vote legitimizes that bullying, but it doesn't.

Newsflash for you: if you don't agree to live by a vote in a community than you devolve to gang warfare. So yes: society has a code we all agree--either overtly or not--to live by. Else the code is survival of the fittest and then anarchy.

You want survival of the fittest? Bully for you. Leave us out of it.

The concept of "collective rights" isn't referring to rights at all. It's referring to the idea that the majority can dictate to the minority in the general case. That's an abuse of government. The point of government isn't to command society - it's to protect our freedom.

 

[SweetSue92]

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

That was deliberate. Democracy advocates like to pretend that their solution isn't about force, but of course it is.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

A right is a freedom, not a grant of power. What you refer to as "collective rights" is simply the power of the majority to bully the minority. Some of you seem to think that going through the process of taking a vote legitimizes that bullying, but it doesn't.

Newsflash for you: if you don't agree to live by a vote in a community than you devolve to gang warfare. So yes: society has a code we all agree--either overtly or not--to live by. Else the code is survival of the fittest and then anarchy.

You want survival of the fittest? Bully for you. Leave us out of it.

The concept of "collective rights" isn't referring to rights at all. It's referring to the idea that the majority can dictate to the minority in the general case. That's an abuse of government. The point of government isn't to command society - it's to protect our freedom.

No. Society sets up government to protect rights. So when I say collective rights, I mean the rights of the collective--the group. In school, the major rights are a safe place to learn. When an individual threatens those rights on the regular, then yes--the "majority" dictates that things have to change or steps will be taken. It would be interesting to find out how--or why--you would want this to change. Are you here saying that the right of one child to continually be disruptive outweighs the rights of all the other children to stay in their classroom with their teacher and learn? Or what?

Last, in most human group situations you are going to have a majority-rules situation. The difference is: does the majority rule by persuasion and election (such as in our representative republic) or by brute force (such as by gang warfare)? That is no small distinction and it's grossly unfair for you to equate the two.

 

[dblack]

What word did you use to show the majority of people?

Gang. To "gang up". So not so much an organized civilization of people "making you do what they want" but a rogue group of tyrants.

That was deliberate. Democracy advocates like to pretend that their solution isn't about force, but of course it is.

Right, so then, not a society built on Rights and Responsibilities then. So, different from what we're talking about here.

A right is a freedom, not a grant of power. What you refer to as "collective rights" is simply the power of the majority to bully the minority. Some of you seem to think that going through the process of taking a vote legitimizes that bullying, but it doesn't.

Newsflash for you: if you don't agree to live by a vote in a community than you devolve to gang warfare. So yes: society has a code we all agree--either overtly or not--to live by. Else the code is survival of the fittest and then anarchy.

You want survival of the fittest? Bully for you. Leave us out of it.

The concept of "collective rights" isn't referring to rights at all. It's referring to the idea that the majority can dictate to the minority in the general case. That's an abuse of government. The point of government isn't to command society - it's to protect our freedom.

No. Society sets up government to protect rights. So when I say collective rights, I mean the rights of the collective--the group. In school, the major rights are a safe place to learn. When an individual threatens those rights on the regular, then yes--the "majority" dictates that things have to change or steps will be taken. It would be interesting to find out how--or why--you would want this to change. Are you here saying that the right of one child to continually be disruptive outweighs the rights of all the other children to stay in their classroom with their teacher and learn? Or what?

Ok, so maybe I just not clear on how you're using the term "collective right". Let me ask you this: what rights does a collective have that an individual does not?

In your example of a disruptive child (or anyone really), it's the individual rights of each child that are being violated. Where does the collective come into play? What makes a right "collective"?