Once again...Go Christie!
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
THis might be the case in some families but I for one can tell you that if your a single parent raising a child you need MORE than 1 job to make ends meet..
So mom or dad aren't worried about their social life, they are going from one job to the next to provide for their kids...
I'm sure there are parents out their only worried about going out and having fun...
But still there has to be a way to evaluate teachers.. They can't just not teach because the child is a tough learner or causes problems..
I would say 50% of the teachers don't give a crap cause they have tenure.. They KNOW they won't get fired, or have anything happen to them at all..... Complete BS... Things need to change...
James
So mom or dad aren't worried about their social life, they are going from one job to the next to provide for their kids...
I'm sure there are parents out their only worried about going out and having fun...
But still there has to be a way to evaluate teachers.. They can't just not teach because the child is a tough learner or causes problems..
I would say 50% of the teachers don't give a crap cause they have tenure.. They KNOW they won't get fired, or have anything happen to them at all..... Complete BS... Things need to change...
James
To K-Mac...
I have a question.....if mom's are out there worried about their social lives, what are the dad's doing?
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Dad is probably so far gone that the kid doesn't even know dad. There are so many deadbeat dads out there it isn't even funny.
I'm pointing the finger at mom because she is the one with custody most often. Not to say BOTH parents aren't responsible for the kids.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
There's plenty of deadbeat moms out there too. I know this because I was once a single father.
No need to single out one or the other, just call them deadbeat parents. They're equally as bad.
No need to single out one or the other, just call them deadbeat parents. They're equally as bad.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
THis might be the case in some families but I for one can tell you that if your a single parent raising a child you need MORE than 1 job to make ends meet..
So mom or dad aren't worried about their social life, they are going from one job to the next to provide for their kids...
I'm sure there are parents out their only worried about going out and having fun...
But still there has to be a way to evaluate teachers.. They can't just not teach because the child is a tough learner or causes problems..
I would say 50% of the teachers don't give a crap cause they have tenure.. They KNOW they won't get fired, or have anything happen to them at all..... Complete BS... Things need to change...
James
So mom or dad aren't worried about their social life, they are going from one job to the next to provide for their kids...
I'm sure there are parents out their only worried about going out and having fun...
But still there has to be a way to evaluate teachers.. They can't just not teach because the child is a tough learner or causes problems..
I would say 50% of the teachers don't give a crap cause they have tenure.. They KNOW they won't get fired, or have anything happen to them at all..... Complete BS... Things need to change...
James
I'm not saying it is easy but my mom raised me by herself from the point I was 11 when my dad died. She worked as an RN. Made ends meet with 1 job and was there for me. She NEVER dated and her life was all about making mine better.
I don't buy the fact that 50% of teachers suck. I'm not saying they are all great but most are hard working and care about the kids. If they wanted more money or prestige, they could get better jobs in the private sector.
I still don't think it is right holding teachers responsible for something they have no control over. That is like criticizing auto manufacturers over the number of speeding tickets their owners get.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
I'm not saying it is easy but my mom raised me by herself from the point I was 11 when my dad died. She worked as an RN. Made ends meet with 1 job and was there for me. She NEVER dated and her life was all about making mine better.
I don't buy the fact that 50% of teachers suck. I'm not saying they are all great but most are hard working and care about the kids. If they wanted more money or prestige, they could get better jobs in the private sector.
I still don't think it is right holding teachers responsible for something they have no control over. That is like criticizing auto manufacturers over the number of speeding tickets their owners get.
I don't buy the fact that 50% of teachers suck. I'm not saying they are all great but most are hard working and care about the kids. If they wanted more money or prestige, they could get better jobs in the private sector.
I still don't think it is right holding teachers responsible for something they have no control over. That is like criticizing auto manufacturers over the number of speeding tickets their owners get.
Then why are all the teachers hiding behind tenure.. Why don't they stand up to their union and ask them to make conssions.. They are afraid if they give up anything they lose all their power.. Some teachers care about the kids but most don't.... If so they would stand up against the school board and not christie who is doing what he can for the taxpayer...
Oh and one more thing...
TEACHERS SHOULD NEVER BRING THEIR BUDGET INTO THE CLASSROOM... What I mean by this: My 11 year old came home one day and said her teacher was talking about lay-off because christie was cutting the school budget.. The teacher was telling the students to go home and tell your parents to vote AGAINST the budget.. Since when could a teacher be telling students thins.. That teacher and every other teacher that said something like this should be FIRED on the spot... But with their tenure they can do and say almost anything without recourse....
They are telling the kids that school programs are being cut cause of christie, and other programs are not offered cause of him.. When in fact it's the school board that is the one deciding what programs to cut.. Why not blame them instead of christie...
If the teachers DID care about the kids they would have made concession's and went against their union so that some of their co-workers could stay employed... Looks like the teachers where looking out for themselves... AGAIN
James
Last edited by JForestZ34; Mar 6, 2011 at 12:45 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
The school my kid goes to is very proud of the academic credentials of their teachers. They give out the stats freely. There aren't any teachers with Ph.D's, but there are many with Masters and a few with Bachelors. None of the teachers have failed to obtain a degree. I think it is a requirement to remain accredited. If the school loses loses its accreditation, then they can't charge as much and they lose much of the prestige of being a private school. Nobody who can afford to send their kid to a private school is going to send them to one that is not accredited over one that is. The teachers at my kid's school make 15% less on average than the public in the same city, but they care more. Just one example, my kid was having problems in a class at his current school. I e-mailed the teacher on a Saturday, to try to find out why. I wasn't expecting a response until Monday at the earliest. I received her response on Sunday. That was a big improvement over the public system where on several occasions I had to not only e-mail the teacher several times, I had to include the principle and school supervisor (an elected position) to get a response for issues concerning my kid's safety.
This whole debate about what is wrong with schools is kind of pointless. As many have pointed out family is needed for a student to excel in school. Government can not force much more than requiring a child be in school. Even if the parents are dumb as rocks, if they support the school and emphasize the value of an education it will be impressed upon the kids. Right now we have a system that requires kids to be in school until a certain age (anywhere from 15-17), even without the support of the parents. That doesn't make any sense. Without the parents' support the kids don't try and won't succeed. Requiring kids to be in school without the support of the parents also does nothing for the quality of the schools. This pursuit of quality education for all has only lessened the education for those in borderline school districts. If the system allowed those who don't want to go to not go the education will be better for those who do want to attend and learn, even if they are in a borderline or horrible school. I know it will result in a permanent underclass, but I think it will serve to reduce the number of students receiving a crappy education because of the distractions and fear of the thugs.
This whole debate about what is wrong with schools is kind of pointless. As many have pointed out family is needed for a student to excel in school. Government can not force much more than requiring a child be in school. Even if the parents are dumb as rocks, if they support the school and emphasize the value of an education it will be impressed upon the kids. Right now we have a system that requires kids to be in school until a certain age (anywhere from 15-17), even without the support of the parents. That doesn't make any sense. Without the parents' support the kids don't try and won't succeed. Requiring kids to be in school without the support of the parents also does nothing for the quality of the schools. This pursuit of quality education for all has only lessened the education for those in borderline school districts. If the system allowed those who don't want to go to not go the education will be better for those who do want to attend and learn, even if they are in a borderline or horrible school. I know it will result in a permanent underclass, but I think it will serve to reduce the number of students receiving a crappy education because of the distractions and fear of the thugs.
I agree it is counter-productive to force kids to sit in class when they don't want to be there too. I wish I had a good answer.
I do think it is unfair to just bash the the teachers and I think they are seen as the scapegoat for a bigger problem.
On the flip side, even the best parents can have bad kids. A parent can't beat the kid into behaving. It is impossible to make a 17 year old hell bent on getting into trouble to keep out of it.
Back in the day, a family's reputation was everything and parents would do anything to protect it. Parents could punish their kids without fear of law enforcement intervening. Schools could punish without worrying about lawyers. Parents and teachers worked together for the best of the student.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Danksville, near Budsburg USA
Let's make sure we continue to allow our US corporations to pay no tax, let's continue the 'Bush Tax Cuts' for people of means, and let's make sure to let Wall Street and the Bankers to continue their greedy ways while we wait for another economic collapse.
Instead, let's take away from the people who are educating our children for the future of the US and make the less fortunate pay for the corporation tax breaks.
It's the American Dream, right?
Instead, let's take away from the people who are educating our children for the future of the US and make the less fortunate pay for the corporation tax breaks.
It's the American Dream, right?
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,581
Likes: 6
From: Corona, Crazyfornia
Let's make sure we continue to allow our US corporations to pay no tax, let's continue the 'Bush Tax Cuts' for people of means, and let's make sure to let Wall Street and the Bankers to continue their greedy ways while we wait for another economic collapse.
Instead, let's take away from the people who are educating our children for the future of the US and make the less fortunate pay for the corporation tax breaks.
It's the American Dream, right?
Instead, let's take away from the people who are educating our children for the future of the US and make the less fortunate pay for the corporation tax breaks.
It's the American Dream, right?
What part of CUT THE BLOAT don't you get? When teachers get raises just because of the degrees they have instead of what they can actually do....that is a bloated system.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: Blue Ridge Mountains, GA
Let's make sure we continue to allow our US corporations to pay no tax, let's continue the 'Bush Tax Cuts' for people of means, and let's make sure to let Wall Street and the Bankers to continue their greedy ways while we wait for another economic collapse.
Instead, let's take away from the people who are educating our children for the future of the US and make the less fortunate pay for the corporation tax breaks.
It's the American Dream, right?
Instead, let's take away from the people who are educating our children for the future of the US and make the less fortunate pay for the corporation tax breaks.
It's the American Dream, right?
The government (Federal Reserve) caused the economic crash with easy money. They created the moral hazard.
Teachers should be held to the highest standards. From what I've seen in Wi., that isn't being done.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
A degree is an investment and assuming it gives you more tools, doesn't it deserve to be awarded?
In the private sector, don't you pay a licensed, bonded plumber more than some handyman you find? Don't you pay the guy at the stealership more than a shade tree mechanic that just happens to be good with his hands?
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,165
Likes: 3
From: Cabot, AR
I think that all of the gangs and crime stem from the failure of the family. I can't believe I am defending a Republican but forget was it Romney or who got chastised for criticizing the actress who is having a child with her finance. It would be better if she was already married.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
It was actually Mike Huckabee who was grossly mis-quoted and slammed by the left leaning media. When he was Governor of Arkansas he did a lot of work to help the single parents in this state. He is very aware of the social and economic problems that single parents face and that is what he was addressing. Of course the MSM seen a chance to do what they do best and twist the truth to help their political friends.
The reality is that while I don't say malign them like happened in the 1950's and 60's, I certainly don't think we should be bragging or congratulating people for having kids out of wedlock or people having 12 kids with 11 partners.
Not only does it show irresponsibility but it is a big reason for the breakdown of our society and a lot of the reason that gangs and crime are so common.
Certainly there are times when a parent dies (especially during war) and I am not counting these people but the majority of households are single parent households. Some of it is to take advantage of welfare and stuff that needs to be discouraged.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,165
Likes: 3
From: Cabot, AR
Thanks Wookie...I'm not up on my right wing hate mongers as much as I should be!
The reality is that while I don't say malign them like happened in the 1950's and 60's, I certainly don't think we should be bragging or congratulating people for having kids out of wedlock or people having 12 kids with 11 partners.
Not only does it show irresponsibility but it is a big reason for the breakdown of our society and a lot of the reason that gangs and crime are so common.
Certainly there are times when a parent dies (especially during war) and I am not counting these people but the majority of households are single parent households. Some of it is to take advantage of welfare and stuff that needs to be discouraged.
The reality is that while I don't say malign them like happened in the 1950's and 60's, I certainly don't think we should be bragging or congratulating people for having kids out of wedlock or people having 12 kids with 11 partners.
Not only does it show irresponsibility but it is a big reason for the breakdown of our society and a lot of the reason that gangs and crime are so common.
Certainly there are times when a parent dies (especially during war) and I am not counting these people but the majority of households are single parent households. Some of it is to take advantage of welfare and stuff that needs to be discouraged.
On social issues, I wouldn't consider him much of a right wing hatemonger. Actually many of the far right people here considered him a sellout for his social policies. He was a lot like a Democrat in this area except most of his plans were based on common sense and actually worked.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,581
Likes: 6
From: Corona, Crazyfornia
A degree is an investment and assuming it gives you more tools, doesn't it deserve to be awarded?
In the private sector, don't you pay a licensed, bonded plumber more than some handyman you find? Don't you pay the guy at the stealership more than a shade tree mechanic that just happens to be good with his hands?
In the private sector, don't you pay a licensed, bonded plumber more than some handyman you find? Don't you pay the guy at the stealership more than a shade tree mechanic that just happens to be good with his hands?
By your reasoning you should pay the plumber or mechanic with the most tools more, simply because they have more invested. However if they have no clue how to use those additional tools, what good is their investment? How are they entitled to more money?
On the same line just because some body has a masters degree but can't/won't produce good results, why are they automaticaly entitled to more money? To give some one higher pay solely on the basis of having multiple degrees is eliteism at it's best, especialy when those degrees have no connection to the subject being taught.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
Yup, yer right, a degree is an investment. But just because someone makes an investment why are others obligated to pay them for that investment?
By your reasoning you should pay the plumber or mechanic with the most tools more, simply because they have more invested. However if they have no clue how to use those additional tools, what good is their investment? How are they entitled to more money?
On the same line just because some body has a masters degree but can't/won't produce good results, why are they automaticaly entitled to more money? To give some one higher pay solely on the basis of having multiple degrees is eliteism at it's best, especialy when those degrees have no connection to the subject being taught.
By your reasoning you should pay the plumber or mechanic with the most tools more, simply because they have more invested. However if they have no clue how to use those additional tools, what good is their investment? How are they entitled to more money?
On the same line just because some body has a masters degree but can't/won't produce good results, why are they automaticaly entitled to more money? To give some one higher pay solely on the basis of having multiple degrees is eliteism at it's best, especialy when those degrees have no connection to the subject being taught.
I am not totally disagreeing with you on the fact that the degree doesn't always equate to a better skill set. Certainly if you are teaching English and your masters is in underwater basket weaving then no you shouldn't get a higher rate of pay just because of an unrelated masters degree. However, if you have a masters or Ph D in English and can do more with it to help the school then it should equate to more pay. Also schools do use the fact their staff have higher degrees as a "selling point" so it obviously has value.
Using the analogy of the mechanic or plumber with more tools, we do often pay those with more tools and education at a higher rate. For example, when the Ford trucks were breaking spark plugs initially, I assume the Ford dealers were the first to have tools to extract them versus removing the heads. Thus they were paid more to do a plug job than some guy at the local shop even if it went off without a problem. They also were probably taught how to prevent breaking them quicker than the local guy.
That said, the Ford dealer also usually charges more to do a brake job than a local guy. There isn't anything that separates their work, in fact the local guy can probably use better parts so why pay more?
It works both ways.
If you've ever been in a hospital, you notice the CNAs are the most likely to be helping you and doing things for you. The nurses who come around less frequently get paid more. The doctor who comes around even less, gets paid a lot more. Some things don't always make sense.