Does this make any sense?

[JakeStarkey]

daveman, you are part of the social compact. You don't get to drop out, and your responsibilities are defined by societal expectations. You just can't be Shane riding off into the sunset.

What's stopping you from donating your own money?

Nothing, and I am sure I donate a larger % of my bucks then you do. Not sayin', just sayin' when you talk stupid. However, it is not illegal or immoral or unethical to tax for the betterment of society.

Sorry, cowboy, your days are over.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Repeal the Department of Education Reorganization act signed in 1979 by Jimmy Carter.

 

[JakeStarkey]

How about we tax parents whose kids don't do well?

I guarantdamtee you that problem be solved, homey.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Repeal the Department of Education Reorganization act signed in 1979 by Jimmy Carter.

Repeal comments like yours. Just stupid.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Repeal the Department of Education Reorganization act signed in 1979 by Jimmy Carter.

Repeal comments like yours. Just stupid.

Explain why.
Better yet, please provide data showing how much better American kids have done since the act became law.

 

[boedicca]

In 1970, the average public education funding per student was $4K in 2006 dollars. By 2005, this had increase to over $9K in 2006 dollars.

We're spending a ton of money per student - with much of it wasted on bureaucrats, federal regulatory compliance, and union distorted compensation schemes.

Many people believe that lack of funding is a problem in public education,[10] but historical trends show that American spending on public education is at an all-time high. Between 1994 and 2004, average per-pupil expenditures in American public schools have increased by 23.5 percent (adjusted for inflation). Between 1984 and 2004, real expenditures per pupil increased by 49 percent.[11] These increases follow the historical trend of ever-increasing real per-student expenditures in the nation's public schools. In fact, the per-pupil expenditures in 1970-1971 ($4,060) were less than half of per-pupil expenditures in 2005-2006 ($9,266) after adjusting for inflation.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Re...ore-on-Education-Improve-Academic-Achievement

 

[iamwhatiseem]

In 1970, the average public education funding per student was $4K in 2006 dollars. By 2005, this had increase to over $9K in 2006 dollars.

We're spending a ton of money per student - with much of it wasted on bureaucrats, federal regulatory compliance, and union distorted compensation schemes.

Many people believe that lack of funding is a problem in public education,[10] but historical trends show that American spending on public education is at an all-time high. Between 1994 and 2004, average per-pupil expenditures in American public schools have increased by 23.5 percent (adjusted for inflation). Between 1984 and 2004, real expenditures per pupil increased by 49 percent.[11] These increases follow the historical trend of ever-increasing real per-student expenditures in the nation's public schools. In fact, the per-pupil expenditures in 1970-1971 ($4,060) were less than half of per-pupil expenditures in 2005-2006 ($9,266) after adjusting for inflation.

Does Spending More on Education Improve Academic Achievement? | The Heritage Foundation

Pheh...people like Starkey will never get it boedicca.
He/She will just say the problem is $9,000 isn't enough.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Repeal the Department of Education Reorganization act signed in 1979 by Jimmy Carter.

Repeal comments like yours. Just stupid.

Explain why.
Better yet, please provide data showing how much better American kids have done since the act became law.

Here is a typically stupid far right wackaloon who (1) makes an assertion, (2) gets an assertion in reply, and (3) then demands data and such in refutation of his assertion.

No, sonny. You made the assertion. Support it with evidence. Then I have something to work with. I am so tired of typically stupid far right wackaloon behavior. Buncha morons.

 

[Flopper]

If the parents do their job, I assure you the schools will do what they are supposed to, because the parents are going to be in the middle of it: taking responsibility for themselves as parents, and ensuring the school personnel and resources 'best practices' are being done.

About all most parents can do is to encourage their kids to do well in school and see they do their home work.

If we going to be leaders in 21st century, it's go take a lot more than parents telling Johnny to do his home work. We going to have to have better trained teachers and lot more of them. Classes sizes need to be reduced. Kids are going to have spend a lot more time in classrooms and schools have to be more completive.

Dead wrong, flopper. Read Taz's comments above. He is right on. Kids as a group do not do well in school in proportion do parents who are not as involved.

Of course kids do better when they are actively supported by their parents. In an ideal world, parents will take interest in their kids school work, attend school board meetings and PTA meetings, and volunteer at schools. But we don't live in an ideal world. It's a lot easier to improve the schools than improve the parents.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I disagree respectfully. Look at our schools, the immense amount of monies poured into them, and the state and federal education agencies turn the issue into political empires and job security justification. Parents have to make time if they are going to accept the responsibility for being parents. I am not being harsh, I am being realistic.

 

[Flopper]

About all most parents can do is to encourage their kids to do well in school and see they do their home work.

No, what parents need to be doing is taking time to go to school board meetings and get more involved with their children's education to make sure the schools are actually teaching them something other than useless crap.

We going to have to have better trained teachers and lot more of them. Classes sizes need to be reduced.

There is no correlation between smaller class sizes and better education.

Kids are going to have spend a lot more time in classrooms and schools have to be more completive.

Because 30 to 35 hours a week isn't enough already? What we need to do is change the whole educational structure and move away from this foundation of a liberal arts education that pushes everyone towards college. Finland consistently gets ranked the highest in education almost every year and kids don't go to school there until age 7 and have hardly any homework at all.

The last thing we need to do is subject children to spending more time in a useless learning environment.

I disagree with your statement that there is no correlation between class size and better education, particular in elementary education. There have been many studies showing smaller class sizes improved student performance. As class sizes grow, teachers spend more time maintaining discipline and less time teaching. Teaching a class of more than 30 third graders is not really teaching. It's child care. Learning disabilities go undiagnosed. Kids that need extra help don't get it. The class runs at the speed of the average student. Slow learners are lost in shuffle. The bright kids are bored.

 

[JakeStarkey]

In 1970, the average public education funding per student was $4K in 2006 dollars. By 2005, this had increase to over $9K in 2006 dollars.

We're spending a ton of money per student - with much of it wasted on bureaucrats, federal regulatory compliance, and union distorted compensation schemes.

Many people believe that lack of funding is a problem in public education,[10] but historical trends show that American spending on public education is at an all-time high. Between 1994 and 2004, average per-pupil expenditures in American public schools have increased by 23.5 percent (adjusted for inflation). Between 1984 and 2004, real expenditures per pupil increased by 49 percent.[11] These increases follow the historical trend of ever-increasing real per-student expenditures in the nation's public schools. In fact, the per-pupil expenditures in 1970-1971 ($4,060) were less than half of per-pupil expenditures in 2005-2006 ($9,266) after adjusting for inflation.

Does Spending More on Education Improve Academic Achievement? | The Heritage Foundation

Pheh...people like Starkey will never get it boedicca.
He/She will just say the problem is $9,000 isn't enough.

You have just proved yourself someone who does not read, whatyouseemisyourlost. Go back and read what I wrote, moron. I said exactly the opposite. Yeah, youseemlost.

 

[Flopper]

In 1970, the average public education funding per student was $4K in 2006 dollars. By 2005, this had increase to over $9K in 2006 dollars.

We're spending a ton of money per student - with much of it wasted on bureaucrats, federal regulatory compliance, and union distorted compensation schemes.

Many people believe that lack of funding is a problem in public education,[10] but historical trends show that American spending on public education is at an all-time high. Between 1994 and 2004, average per-pupil expenditures in American public schools have increased by 23.5 percent (adjusted for inflation). Between 1984 and 2004, real expenditures per pupil increased by 49 percent.[11] These increases follow the historical trend of ever-increasing real per-student expenditures in the nation's public schools. In fact, the per-pupil expenditures in 1970-1971 ($4,060) were less than half of per-pupil expenditures in 2005-2006 ($9,266) after adjusting for inflation.

Does Spending More on Education Improve Academic Achievement? | The Heritage Foundation

Of course cost have risen sharply since 1970. We have expanded the job of public education far beyond educating the kids in the mainstream. Here are just a few of the expensive programs we put on back of public education.

Special Education for Disabled Students
Head Start
Programs for Gifted Students
Expansion of Advanced Placement Programs
After School Programs
Mandated Testing
Student Diagnostic Testing
Student/Parent Counseling
Chapter One Schools
Free and Reduced Lunch Programs
Bilingual Education Programs
Expanded vocational education

These are just a few of the programs that come to mind. There are hundreds of programs that have been mandated by federal, state, and local government. I suspect that much of the cost increases are due to the additional jobs we expect our schools to do.