: Politics and Religion Discussion : Teachers on the wrong side

mattradd 40 Reviews 970 reads

posted 14 years ago

1 / 14

Looks as though there are some remedies! (eom)

END OF MESSAGE

willywonka4u 22 Reviews 1683 reads

posted 14 years ago

2 / 14

Who hurts kids more? Unions or politicians?

Posted By: dncphil

Los Angeles Mayor Villaraigosa, a former labor leader and teachers’ union member said the teachers’ union leaders have stood as "one unwavering roadblock to reform"

Phil, do you think that maybe one of the reasons Villaraigosa said this is because he'd like to give his friends and family jobs as teachers?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Villaraigosa#Accusations_of_nepotism

Posted By: dncphil

It is parents of poor kids trying to get an education for their kids, and everyone (except Willie and the Union) think that the union mandated rules hurt kids.

Propaganda can be used to convince a large number of people of things that aren't true. And this is certainly the case here. A study by Stanford University looked at charter school performance compared to public schools and found that only 17% provided a better education than public schools. 50% provided an education that was no different in quality to public schools, and 36% provided an education that was WORSE than public schools.

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf

Phil, you should take note that on page 32 of this report, minority students on average do WORSE in compared to traditional public schools. In other words, those horrible union backed teachers are more effective and better educators than what the charters provide.

It seems the real reason for a private charter school is to give people who want to profit off of children at their expense an opportunity to make globs of money.

But this gets even more insidious. With charter schools being touted as the "great alternative", nobody is looking to see if there's a fox in the henhouse.

With kids in poorly performing school districts getting shuffled around from school to school, has led to spikes in school violence as they have been dislodged from their community, resulting to an increase in gang activity.

http://www.rethinkingschools.org/restrict.asp?path=archive/23_03/arne233.shtml

But what's worse, is that a large number of charter schools are being backed by the Gulen movement. What is the Gulen movement? Here's a wiki on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BClen_movement

In other words Phil...charter schools are increasingly being co-opted by a Muslim organization to teach Islamic values in American schools without the prior knowledge and consent of the student's parents. They are Turkish-styled Madrasahs.

But even that is better than teachers having a union, right Phil?

-- Modified on 12/10/2010 11:35:54 AM

willywonka4u 22 Reviews 685 reads

posted 14 years ago

3 / 14

Reform or Deform?

The "reform" you're touting would do nothing but wipe out the union, allow cronies to make a profit off of CHILDREN for Christ's sake, and produce shitter results. You're DAMNED right I oppose it, and the unions should too, for the benefit of the kids.

There are a lot of ways to improve the situation, some of which I have mentioned in the past.

1) I think non-profit private schools are a very good idea when it comes to teaching kids with certain disabilities, or those who learn differently, such as kids with ADHD, or kids on the autism spectrum.

2) The rote memorization model of teaching does not work very well, it bores the students, and besides that is authoritarian in structure. It needs to be reworked.

3) Schools do not teach very many job skills, much less life skills. Alegra and geometry might be far less important to teach than accounting, given everyone has to balance their own budget.

But as I've just proven, there is no black and white choice between unions and poor kids. By attacking the unions, you are in fact attacking poor children.

dncphil 16 Reviews 2905 reads

posted 14 years ago

4 / 14

Teachers on the wrong side

Well, if you think it is just Crazy Phil who thinks the unions are hurting kids, Los Angeles Mayor Villaraigosa, a former labor leader and teachers’ union member said the teachers’ union leaders have stood as "one unwavering roadblock to reform" The rest of his comments are as strong or stronger.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-mayor-speech-20101210,0,7627425.story

In the meantime, parents of poor kids in Compon, backed by the ACLU, are claiming that union rules deprived their kids of a quality education. To preempt Willie, again, this is not crazy Phil distorting the news. It is parents of poor kids trying to get an education for their kids, and everyone (except Willie and the Union) think that the union mandated rules hurt kids.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-compton-parents-20101207,0,1116485.story

(To preempt Willy again, I don't dislike teachers. Most of my frieds are teachers. I had great teaches as a kid and can still recite a few hundred verses of poetry that my fav English teacher made it fun to learn. One of my interests is history, and a lot of my pleasure reading is in that area, decades after my history teacher made it interesting. GOOD teachers have made my life. BAD teachers destroy kids. (Tenure helps bad teachers, merit pay rewards good teachers. Yes, there are excpetions, but everying in life has exceptions. )

I usually don’t like to go out on a limb with predictions, but I will say this: The union is on the opposite side of poor kids. It is a barrier to reform. It may win in the law courts – I don’t know the legality – but it cannot win this battle in the court of public opinion.

This could go viral. CA is now going to get into down and dirty negotiations over the entire state budget. If public employee unions dig in their heels in a time of fiscal crisis, they will lose any moral high ground that they may have had 20 years ago.

dncphil 16 Reviews 1427 reads

posted 14 years ago

5 / 14

Re: Only you

Only you would find a way to excuse the conduct of the union that is opposing reform.

Yeah, you can look to other things, like politicians, but that is changing the subject from the here and now.

Yes, there are a thousand problems. I agree. Fix the problems.

But you have to start somewhere, and you start with partial solutions.

The union opposes any thing that might improve the situation, and only you can excuse their opposition to improving the life of poor kids.

Got a choice here, Willie. Poor kids or Unions. Take you pick.

Posted By: willywonka4u

Posted By: dncphil

Los Angeles Mayor Villaraigosa, a former labor leader and teachers’ union member said the teachers’ union leaders have stood as "one unwavering roadblock to reform"

Phil, do you think that maybe one of the reasons Villaraigosa said this is because he'd like to give his friends and family jobs as teachers?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Villaraigosa#Accusations_of_nepotism

Posted By: dncphil

It is parents of poor kids trying to get an education for their kids, and everyone (except Willie and the Union) think that the union mandated rules hurt kids.

Propaganda can be used to convince a large number of people of things that aren't true. And this is certainly the case here. A study by Stanford University looked at charter school performance compared to public schools and found that only 17% provided a better education than public schools. 50% provided an education that was no different in quality to public schools, and 36% provided an education that was WORSE than public schools.

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf

Phil, you should take note that on page 32 of this report, minority students on average do WORSE in compared to traditional public schools. In other words, those horrible union backed teachers are more effective and better educators than what the charters provide.

It seems the real reason for a private charter school is to give people who want to profit off of children at their expense an opportunity to make globs of money.

But this gets even more insidious. With charter schools being touted as the "great alternative", nobody is looking to see if there's a fox in the henhouse.

With kids in poorly performing school districts getting shuffled around from school to school, has led to spikes in school violence as they have been dislodged from their community, resulting to an increase in gang activity.

http://www.rethinkingschools.org/restrict.asp?path=archive/23_03/arne233.shtml

But what's worse, is that a large number of charter schools are being backed by the Gulen movement. What is the Gulen movement? Here's a wiki on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BClen_movement

In other words Phil...charter schools are increasingly being co-opted by a Muslim organization to teach Islamic values in American schools without the prior knowledge and consent of the student's parents. They are Turkish-styled Madrasahs.

But even that is better than teachers having a union, right Phil?

-- Modified on 12/10/2010 11:35:54 AM

dncphil 16 Reviews 2399 reads

posted 14 years ago

6 / 14

Re: I am not touting it. Don't distort

I am not touting it. You made that up. The former labor leader mayor is touting it. The parents whose kids are being deprived of their lives are touting it. The ACLU is touting it.

Also, you changed the subject to private schools for disabled. Try to focus.

Don't pretend you are doing it for the benefit of the kids. The current mayor of LA, former labor leader, is doing it for the kids.

I am not attacking poor kids. You are the one condemning them to continuing failing schools. The unions are the ones blocking reform. So much for "Hope and Change."

I love it. For 20 years I have wondered why the inner city people support an education system totally controlled by the Dem party, and don't deny it. There hasn't been a GOP on the board of ed. in LA, NY, SF, Detroit, or any other big city for decades. The shit schools are your problem, and at last the inner city resdidents are saying, "No more shit."

It isn't Crazy Phil urging this. It is inner city parents.

Stick with the public employees but don't give the "for the kids." Try saying that when the union supported Eubonics in Oakland. Yeah. That helps ghetto kids.

Posted By: willywonka4u

The "reform" you're touting would do nothing but wipe out the union, allow cronies to make a profit off of CHILDREN for Christ's sake, and produce shitter results. You're DAMNED right I oppose it, and the unions should too, for the benefit of the kids.

There are a lot of ways to improve the situation, some of which I have mentioned in the past.

1) I think non-profit private schools are a very good idea when it comes to teaching kids with certain disabilities, or those who learn differently, such as kids with ADHD, or kids on the autism spectrum.

2) The rote memorization model of teaching does not work very well, it bores the students, and besides that is authoritarian in structure. It needs to be reworked.

3) Schools do not teach very many job skills, much less life skills. Alegra and geometry might be far less important to teach than accounting, given everyone has to balance their own budget.

But as I've just proven, there is no black and white choice between unions and poor kids. By attacking the unions, you are in fact attacking poor children.

dncphil 16 Reviews 2578 reads

posted 14 years ago

7 / 14

Re: BTW, it's Obama, not me

By the way, Willie. These aren't ideas I am touting.
If you read the link, these are the ideas that Obama is touting nationally.

Gosh, I guess Obama is nothing but an anti-child, anti-union hack. When he comes over for drinks tonight, I will tell him you are pissed.

Posted By: willywonka4u

The "reform" you're touting would do nothing but wipe out the union, allow cronies to make a profit off of CHILDREN for Christ's sake, and produce shitter results. You're DAMNED right I oppose it, and the unions should too, for the benefit of the kids.

There are a lot of ways to improve the situation, some of which I have mentioned in the past.

1) I think non-profit private schools are a very good idea when it comes to teaching kids with certain disabilities, or those who learn differently, such as kids with ADHD, or kids on the autism spectrum.

2) The rote memorization model of teaching does not work very well, it bores the students, and besides that is authoritarian in structure. It needs to be reworked.

3) Schools do not teach very many job skills, much less life skills. Alegra and geometry might be far less important to teach than accounting, given everyone has to balance their own budget.

But as I've just proven, there is no black and white choice between unions and poor kids. By attacking the unions, you are in fact attacking poor children.

willywonka4u 22 Reviews 1499 reads

posted 14 years ago

8 / 14

No, it's you, Phil...

...and a lot of big money special interests who work very hard promoting bullshit propaganda for the sole reason to destroy every last drop of organized labor in this country, regardless of the consequences.

Posted By: dncphil

Also, you changed the subject to private schools for disabled. Try to focus.

Take your own advice. You accused me of only starting "with partial solutions." Your words Phil. I demonstrated that is not the case with an itemized list.

Posted By: dncphil

Don't pretend you are doing it for the benefit of the kids. The current mayor of LA, former labor leader, is doing it for the kids.

Yes I am. As I already PROVED, public schools benefit kids more than private schools, particularly for minority students. The mayor of LA is doing it for political expediency, and don't pretend it's anything more than that.

Posted By: dncphil

I am not attacking poor kids. You are the one condemning them to continuing failing schools. The unions are the ones blocking reform. So much for "Hope and Change."

That may not be your intension, but that is precisely what you're doing. Attacking poor children. The only hope and change you're in favor of is to pull kids out of lousy schools and put them in shittier schools.

Posted By: dncphil

I love it. For 20 years I have wondered why the inner city people support an education system totally controlled by the Dem party, and don't deny it. There hasn't been a GOP on the board of ed. in LA, NY, SF, Detroit, or any other big city for decades.

Maybe the reason why is because the GOP is opposed to the "rabble" getting any education at all. An educated populace does not suit their interests. Otherwise, no one would vote for them.

Posted By: dncphil

Stick with the public employees but don't give the "for the kids." Try saying that when the union supported Eubonics in Oakland. Yeah. That helps ghetto kids.

You're DAMNED right that helps "ghetto" kids. I don't know about you Phil, but language is a field I have always loved. At one point in my life I was damn near fluent in German, could read Latin, and had a working understanding of French, Spanish, and Tagalog.

Language is a beautiful thing. It never stops evolving, and that includes American English. Ebonics is a real language. It has grammatical rules that could even be defined mathematically, just like every other language ever spoken in the history of man.

Now, how far are you going to get with a student who doesn't speak the language of the instructor? I'd wager that teaching Ebonics would make the teachers better instructors than anything else.

Your problem is that you think that Ebonics for some reason isn't legitimate. Now, you tell me, why would you think that a language spoken primarily by one particular RACE would be illegitimate?

Posted By: dncphil

The shit schools are your problem, and at last the inner city resdidents are saying, "No more shit."

The shit schools are a direct result of the decline in unionization in this country. What seperates the performance levels of minority students with white students? Why do minority students do worse? Is it because minorities are dumber?

I don't think so. The reason for the difference is that white students have more resources. Their parents have larger incomes. They can pay for tutors, they can afford better books, they have better quality local libraries, they live in more stable homes that make learning more accessable,etc.

Now, how could the parents of those minority students gain more resources? They can do it by being in a UNION. Union workers make 35% more income than non-unionized workers. When you live paycheck to paycheck that makes all the difference in the world. And that is why minority students are worse off.

Getting rid of the teacher's unions won't fix that problem. It will only COMPOUND that problem.

-- Modified on 12/10/2010 11:32:51 PM

mattradd 40 Reviews 1510 reads

posted 14 years ago

9 / 14

I'd say I have to agree with most adults...

Given my experience with public and private school systems, I know even in the private schools, the parents, on average are more invested and active in their child's education. Regarding teachers, I find that given the support of the parents and school administrators, and the resources they need (I know all too many public school teachers who buy school supplies for their students), the vast majority of teacher want to do the best job in teaching their students.

dncphil 16 Reviews 1789 reads

posted 14 years ago

10 / 14

Re: The left is happy with the bad schools.

Bottom line is no one in this country really thinks the public schools are doing well. The number of public school teachers who send their kids to private schools is astronomical. The amount spent is the least important factor. DC spends far more than other cities and it is crap. LA spends a lot, and it's crap.

And you do excuses, excuses, excuses. Then you make up slurs. Viaragossa has to be doing it for politics - he can't be sincere. I have to be racist, you implication in your questions to me about Ebonics. I can't think that teaching kids in standard language may help.

Every year or so there is an article about schools that are mega-successes. The schools that go from 90% drop out rate to 85% college. They all share some things in common. There was no huge influx of money, or kids with private tutors, or better local libraries, or new kids from more stable homes OR ANY FACTOR YOU MENTION.

They are all the same students in the same demographics, and the radical changes are all things like increased discipline, dress codes, fire the bad teachers.

The article I linked a few days ago was typical. A school that does 100% reversal for the good, and not one thing you mention was changed. Then they go back to tenure and it slide into crap again. They had success. You cheered when they returned to failure. But you do it for the kids.

You find a story about any school that did a turn around, and link the site, and we will see.

But the left will reject the successes and demand more of the same. And that is for the kids.

Posted By: willywonka4u

...and a lot of big money special interests who work very hard promoting bullshit propaganda for the sole reason to destroy every last drop of organized labor in this country, regardless of the consequences.

Posted By: dncphil

Also, you changed the subject to private schools for disabled. Try to focus.

Take your own advice. You accused me of only starting "with partial solutions." Your words Phil. I demonstrated that is not the case with an itemized list.

Posted By: dncphil

Don't pretend you are doing it for the benefit of the kids. The current mayor of LA, former labor leader, is doing it for the kids.

Yes I am. As I already PROVED, public schools benefit kids more than private schools, particularly for minority students. The mayor of LA is doing it for political expediency, and don't pretend it's anything more than that.

Posted By: dncphil

I am not attacking poor kids. You are the one condemning them to continuing failing schools. The unions are the ones blocking reform. So much for "Hope and Change."

That may not be your intension, but that is precisely what you're doing. Attacking poor children. The only hope and change you're in favor of is to pull kids out of lousy schools and put them in shittier schools.

Posted By: dncphil

I love it. For 20 years I have wondered why the inner city people support an education system totally controlled by the Dem party, and don't deny it. There hasn't been a GOP on the board of ed. in LA, NY, SF, Detroit, or any other big city for decades.

Maybe the reason why is because the GOP is opposed to the "rabble" getting any education at all. An educated populace does not suit their interests. Otherwise, no one would vote for them.

Posted By: dncphil

Stick with the public employees but don't give the "for the kids." Try saying that when the union supported Eubonics in Oakland. Yeah. That helps ghetto kids.

You're DAMNED right that helps "ghetto" kids. I don't know about you Phil, but language is a field I have always loved. At one point in my life I was damn near fluent in German, could read Latin, and had a working understanding of French, Spanish, and Tagalog.

Language is a beautiful thing. It never stops evolving, and that includes American English. Ebonics is a real language. It has grammatical rules that could even be defined mathematically, just like every other language ever spoken in the history of man.

Now, how far are you going to get with a student who doesn't speak the language of the instructor? I'd wager that teaching Ebonics would make the teachers better instructors than anything else.

Your problem is that you think that Ebonics for some reason isn't legitimate. Now, you tell me, why would you think that a language spoken primarily by one particular RACE would be illegitimate?

Posted By: dncphil

The shit schools are your problem, and at last the inner city resdidents are saying, "No more shit."

The shit schools are a direct result of the decline in unionization in this country. What seperates the performance levels of minority students with white students? Why do minority students do worse? Is it because minorities are dumber?

I don't think so. The reason for the difference is that white students have more resources. Their parents have larger incomes. They can pay for tutors, they can afford better books, they have better quality local libraries, they live in more stable homes that make learning more accessable,etc.

Now, how could the parents of those minority students gain more resources? They can do it by being in a UNION. Union workers make 35% more income than non-unionized workers. When you live paycheck to paycheck that makes all the difference in the world. And that is why minority students are worse off.

Getting rid of the teacher's unions won't fix that problem. It will only COMPOUND that problem.

-- Modified on 12/10/2010 11:32:51 PM

dncphil 16 Reviews 2420 reads

posted 14 years ago

11 / 14

Re: My last word - what most people think

If most people think things like tenure are good for kids, if most people think that public employee unions are good for society as a whole, as opposed to the particular members, if most people in CA think that the prison guard's union has created conditions that have helped the problem..

If most people agree with those and similar issues, then you will win in the battle for public opinion. And my hat goes of to you.

Obviously, we will never agree. But if the likes of Villaraigosa, Willie Brown, Obama, and Jerry Brown are coming closer to my view, I think you have to ask why they are switching. In a solid Dem state like CA to blame it on political expediency is kind of shallow.

Posted By: willywonka4u

...and a lot of big money special interests who work very hard promoting bullshit propaganda for the sole reason to destroy every last drop of organized labor in this country, regardless of the consequences.

Posted By: dncphil

Also, you changed the subject to private schools for disabled. Try to focus.

Take your own advice. You accused me of only starting "with partial solutions." Your words Phil. I demonstrated that is not the case with an itemized list.

Posted By: dncphil

Don't pretend you are doing it for the benefit of the kids. The current mayor of LA, former labor leader, is doing it for the kids.

Yes I am. As I already PROVED, public schools benefit kids more than private schools, particularly for minority students. The mayor of LA is doing it for political expediency, and don't pretend it's anything more than that.

Posted By: dncphil

I am not attacking poor kids. You are the one condemning them to continuing failing schools. The unions are the ones blocking reform. So much for "Hope and Change."

That may not be your intension, but that is precisely what you're doing. Attacking poor children. The only hope and change you're in favor of is to pull kids out of lousy schools and put them in shittier schools.

Posted By: dncphil

I love it. For 20 years I have wondered why the inner city people support an education system totally controlled by the Dem party, and don't deny it. There hasn't been a GOP on the board of ed. in LA, NY, SF, Detroit, or any other big city for decades.

Maybe the reason why is because the GOP is opposed to the "rabble" getting any education at all. An educated populace does not suit their interests. Otherwise, no one would vote for them.

Posted By: dncphil

Stick with the public employees but don't give the "for the kids." Try saying that when the union supported Eubonics in Oakland. Yeah. That helps ghetto kids.

You're DAMNED right that helps "ghetto" kids. I don't know about you Phil, but language is a field I have always loved. At one point in my life I was damn near fluent in German, could read Latin, and had a working understanding of French, Spanish, and Tagalog.

Language is a beautiful thing. It never stops evolving, and that includes American English. Ebonics is a real language. It has grammatical rules that could even be defined mathematically, just like every other language ever spoken in the history of man.

Now, how far are you going to get with a student who doesn't speak the language of the instructor? I'd wager that teaching Ebonics would make the teachers better instructors than anything else.

Your problem is that you think that Ebonics for some reason isn't legitimate. Now, you tell me, why would you think that a language spoken primarily by one particular RACE would be illegitimate?

Posted By: dncphil

The shit schools are your problem, and at last the inner city resdidents are saying, "No more shit."

The shit schools are a direct result of the decline in unionization in this country. What seperates the performance levels of minority students with white students? Why do minority students do worse? Is it because minorities are dumber?

I don't think so. The reason for the difference is that white students have more resources. Their parents have larger incomes. They can pay for tutors, they can afford better books, they have better quality local libraries, they live in more stable homes that make learning more accessable,etc.

Now, how could the parents of those minority students gain more resources? They can do it by being in a UNION. Union workers make 35% more income than non-unionized workers. When you live paycheck to paycheck that makes all the difference in the world. And that is why minority students are worse off.

Getting rid of the teacher's unions won't fix that problem. It will only COMPOUND that problem.

-- Modified on 12/10/2010 11:32:51 PM

willywonka4u 22 Reviews 856 reads

posted 14 years ago

12 / 14

Now your bias is really showing Phil.

Posted By: dncphil

Bottom line is no one in this country really thinks the public schools are doing well.

How content are people with anything in this country?

Posted By: dncphil

The number of public school teachers who send their kids to private schools is astronomical.

Want to back this up with some actual data Phil? I have serious doubts that people who make 45k a year can afford to send their kids to private schools.

Posted By: dncphil

The amount spent is the least important factor. DC spends far more than other cities and it is crap. LA spends a lot, and it's crap.

Apparently, you misunderstood. While class size and basic school resources are important, the far more important factor in the success of education is the financial resources of the PARENTS.

Posted By: dncphil

And you do excuses, excuses, excuses. Then you make up slurs. Viaragossa has to be doing it for politics - he can't be sincere.

I'll tell you what Phil. You show me one sincere politician in the entire country, and I'll show you a very pretty bridge in San Francisco that I can sell you for cheap.

Posted By: dncphil

I have to be racist, you implication in your questions to me about Ebonics. I can't think that teaching kids in standard language may help.

And you just proved that you're a racist again by suggesting that Ebonics isn't a "standard language". I didn't say that teaching these kids German, French, Spanish, Latin, or what have you wouldn't help them. But you're saying that teaching Ebonics WON'T help them. You are wrong.

Posted By: dncphil

Every year or so there is an article about schools that are mega-successes. The schools that go from 90% drop out rate to 85% college. They all share some things in common...They are all the same students in the same demographics, and the radical changes are all things like increased discipline, dress codes, fire the bad teachers.

Back this up with some real data. Otherwise it does nothing but show your bias. Quite frankly, I'd argue that increased discipline and dress codes do nothing for the quality of the education, but rather does nothing but makes children more servile. Quite frankly, it's this kind of attitude that I'd wager is causing most of the problem in schools to begin with. Submission to authority does not make you smarter. In fact, it does nothing but make you more gullible.

George Carlin once did a joke that I rather liked: "Concerning school uniforms, it's not even a new idea. I first saw it in old newsreels fro the 1930's, but it was hard to understand, because the narration was in German."

Posted By: dncphil

The article I linked a few days ago was typical. A school that does 100% reversal for the good, and not one thing you mention was changed. Then they go back to tenure and it slide into crap again. They had success. You cheered when they returned to failure. But you do it for the kids.

Yes, because an LA Times article, written by a journalist who may have an axe to grind, then brought to us through the Phil-Filter has more weight than a study done on the subject by Stanford University.

Posted By: dncphil

If most people think things like tenure are good for kids, if most people think that public employee unions are good for society as a whole, as opposed to the particular members, if most people in CA think that the prison guard's union has created conditions that have helped the problem..

If most people agree with those and similar issues, then you will win in the battle for public opinion. And my hat goes of to you.

Obviously, we will never agree. But if the likes of Villaraigosa, Willie Brown, Obama, and Jerry Brown are coming closer to my view, I think you have to ask why they are switching. In a solid Dem state like CA to blame it on political expediency is kind of shallow.

I'll tell ya what, Phil. Give me the same financial resources as the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, all the talk radio on the AM dail, and a major cable network, and you can keep your hat. Until then, go read that Walter Lippmann book I recommended to you.

-- Modified on 12/11/2010 11:22:42 PM

Related Link: The Manufacture of Consent

dncphil 16 Reviews 919 reads

posted 14 years ago

13 / 14

Re: Can't resist. Too cute

Of course, you have no bias.

Yeah, I have a bias. So does everyone. Nothing wrong with being open about it. BUt you lead off your reply with "Phil has a bias." Again, I will go to the court of public opinion. Is there anyone here who thinks Willie doesn't?

The question is why? I am a sole practioner with no labor costs. I lick my own stamps and type my own labels. Maybe my bias is that I see some of the things unions have done. Maybe I have an honest concern about kids and just honestly think that they are being hurt. Maybe that is where my bias comes from. Is it possible good people can honestly disagree with you?

THere are some things in life you can say in discussions without "backing them up with data." I have read a hundred stories of soldiers being killed in Iraq. If I mentioned that it debate, I don't think it requires being backed up with data. I know that many people enjoy sports more than ballet. And guess what. I have no data.

Everyone has an acculated set of knowledge that he or she can rely on at times. Yes. I have read many articles about schools that are successful, and everytime I think, "That sould like the last article." Then I use my compiles memory to come to a conclusion. That is what people do.

Are yuo denying that the papers frequently run stories on successful schools. If you admit the have those stories, take a look at them. If you are concerned, see for yourself what the common thread is in good schools.

The financial success of parent also is not determinative to success. This is empiracally proven by all the schools who have managed to become good schools. With the identical parents they go from failure to success.

In the "turn around schools" nothing changes except the school. But again, you don't care what made those schools good. In accomplishing educational success they hurt the union. Must be bad.

Finally, you again have to make stuff up. You say the article was written by someone who may have an axe to grind. Yeah, that is the weakest argument in the world, It is a strictly ad hominem attack against someone you don't know, and you can't back up your implied attack.

You don't even know who he is, and you attack his motives. Just like you did with the mayor of L.A. You have no basis for your accusation except to say all politicians are bad, so he must be bad now.

You want the financial recoursed of Cato and Company. Fine. I will trade. You can have that, but I want the resources of Hollywood, major news papers, Soros' money, 90% of the universities, the 100s of millions of dollars that unions pump into politics, the equal amount that defense attorney pump in.

Poor, poor, poor baby. No one supports the left. Hey, Obama couldn't even spend all the money he got.

Posted By: willywonka4u

Posted By: dncphil

Bottom line is no one in this country really thinks the public schools are doing well.

How content are people with anything in this country?

Posted By: dncphil

The number of public school teachers who send their kids to private schools is astronomical.

Want to back this up with some actual data Phil? I have serious doubts that people who make 45k a year can afford to send their kids to private schools.

Posted By: dncphil

The amount spent is the least important factor. DC spends far more than other cities and it is crap. LA spends a lot, and it's crap.

Apparently, you misunderstood. While class size and basic school resources are important, the far more important factor in the success of education is the financial resources of the PARENTS.

Posted By: dncphil

And you do excuses, excuses, excuses. Then you make up slurs. Viaragossa has to be doing it for politics - he can't be sincere.

I'll tell you what Phil. You show me one sincere politician in the entire country, and I'll show you a very pretty bridge in San Francisco that I can sell you for cheap.

Posted By: dncphil

I have to be racist, you implication in your questions to me about Ebonics. I can't think that teaching kids in standard language may help.

And you just proved that you're a racist again by suggesting that Ebonics isn't a "standard language". I didn't say that teaching these kids German, French, Spanish, Latin, or what have you wouldn't help them. But you're saying that teaching Ebonics WON'T help them. You are wrong.

Posted By: dncphil

Every year or so there is an article about schools that are mega-successes. The schools that go from 90% drop out rate to 85% college. They all share some things in common...They are all the same students in the same demographics, and the radical changes are all things like increased discipline, dress codes, fire the bad teachers.

Back this up with some real data. Otherwise it does nothing but show your bias. Quite frankly, I'd argue that increased discipline and dress codes do nothing for the quality of the education, but rather does nothing but makes children more servile. Quite frankly, it's this kind of attitude that I'd wager is causing most of the problem in schools to begin with. Submission to authority does not make you smarter. In fact, it does nothing but make you more gullible.

George Carlin once did a joke that I rather liked: "Concerning school uniforms, it's not even a new idea. I first saw it in old newsreels fro the 1930's, but it was hard to understand, because the narration was in German."

Posted By: dncphil

The article I linked a few days ago was typical. A school that does 100% reversal for the good, and not one thing you mention was changed. Then they go back to tenure and it slide into crap again. They had success. You cheered when they returned to failure. But you do it for the kids.

Yes, because an LA Times article, written by a journalist who may have an axe to grind, then brought to us through the Phil-Filter has more weight than a study done on the subject by Stanford University.

Posted By: dncphil

If most people think things like tenure are good for kids, if most people think that public employee unions are good for society as a whole, as opposed to the particular members, if most people in CA think that the prison guard's union has created conditions that have helped the problem..

If most people agree with those and similar issues, then you will win in the battle for public opinion. And my hat goes of to you.

Obviously, we will never agree. But if the likes of Villaraigosa, Willie Brown, Obama, and Jerry Brown are coming closer to my view, I think you have to ask why they are switching. In a solid Dem state like CA to blame it on political expediency is kind of shallow.

I'll tell ya what, Phil. Give me the same financial resources as the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, all the talk radio on the AM dail, and a major cable network, and you can keep your hat. Until then, go read that Walter Lippmann book I recommended to you.

-- Modified on 12/11/2010 11:22:42 PM

willywonka4u 22 Reviews 1498 reads

posted 14 years ago

14 / 14

Cute is better than stupid.

Posted By: dncphil

Of course, you have no bias.

No, I don't have a bias. I have a point of view. There is a difference.

Phil, there are these mysterious things called FACTS. Once you understand these facts, you can draw a conclusion from them and develop a point of view.

Or...you can look at facts, be upset that your point of view does not sit well with these facts, and decide to ignore those facts.

I refer you again to that study from Stanford University.

Posted By: dncphil

I have read a hundred stories of soldiers being killed in Iraq. If I mentioned that it debate, I don't think it requires being backed up with data. I know that many people enjoy sports more than ballet. And guess what. I have no data.

No, typically, you don't need any data if you wish to regurgitate conventional pieties. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's true.

Posted By: dncphil

I have read many articles about schools that are successful, and everytime I think, "That sould like the last article." Then I use my compiles memory to come to a conclusion. That is what people do.

And your memory is often faulty. Do a wiki search of Heuristics.

Posted By: dncphil

The financial success of parent also is not determinative to success. This is empiracally proven by all the schools who have managed to become good schools. With the identical parents they go from failure to success.

You have yet to prove any successes. Certainly not enough to establish a trend where any real data can be compiled from. Find me one school in America that is horribly failing whose students come from rich families.

Posted By: dncphil

Finally, you again have to make stuff up. You say the article was written by someone who may have an axe to grind. Yeah, that is the weakest argument in the world, It is a strictly ad hominem attack against someone you don't know, and you can't back up your implied attack.

Are you saying that journalists more often than not do not have an axe to grind? That they don't have their own bias? Again, what makes this one journalist, filtered through an editor, and then filtered through the Phil-Filter, more of an authority on schools than the Stanford University study I cited? And why do you refuse to answer this question?

Posted By: dncphil

You want the financial recoursed of Cato and Company. Fine. I will trade. You can have that, but I want the resources of Hollywood, major news papers, Soros' money, 90% of the universities, the 100s of millions of dollars that unions pump into politics, the equal amount that defense attorney pump in.

Ah, that old conservative adage that newspapers have a liberal bias. You know, that old saying that even Pat Buchanan admits that the right made up and has no basis in reality. Your side already has the newspapers, Scaife's money, the money of the Koch brothers, and BILLIONS of corporate dollars. In other words, that's a better deal for the left than Obama's tax deal was for the right. If you're gullible enough to take me up on that one, I got a bridge I can sell ya for real cheap.