|
Post by wmdkitty on May 31, 2009 0:36:21 GMT -5
And therein lies the problem -- most homeschooling parents AREN'T willing to give a thorough education, and are ENTIRELY INCOMPETENT. They want to use a book of FAIRY TALES as a "textbook". Homeschooling SHOULD be banned, because all it does is turn out social retards (at best), and drooling christfag breeders (normally). I'm waiting for the day a homeschooled kid grows up, realizes just how fucked up his parents made him, and sues both his parents -- for his "education" -- and the state -- for not stepping in and stopping his parents from abusing him. That's right. I said it. Homeschooling is a form of child abuse. Wrong. Not all homeschooling is child abuse. Forcing a child to sit through eight hours a day of state-run school where they are bullied, harassed and beaten by other students and the teachers and principal refuse to act IS child abuse. So does that mean all children in public school are being abused? No. But some are. And that's why homeschooling is a necessity. For kids who, for whatever reason, simply cannot fit into public school. I wish I had been home-schooled. I might be able to fully function in the world if I had not been subjected to nonstop bullying from ages 11-18. So children should be punished by removing them from public schools and proper socialization, just because they don't fit in? Sorry, but that's not the solution -- the solution (duh) is to PUNISH THE FUCKING BULLIES, thereby making the school environment a safe one. You can't get much further from "fitting in" than having an obvious disability, and somehow, I managed just fine. Reporting the bullying and harassment actually WORKS.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on May 31, 2009 0:41:09 GMT -5
O NOEZ!!! Little Johnny got a B in math!!! My pweshus snowfwake might get his FEELINGS hurt!!!!! I grew up seeing my fair share of red ink, and more than my fair share of being told to sit still, pay attention, stay on task, and it didn't hurt my self esteem one goddamn bit! How old are you? I only ask because a friend of mine recently pointed out that really, we were the last generation to do kid things as kids. You know- ride our bikes everywhere in little packs with no supervision; play in the mud, eat dirt, wrestle, all that sort of shit. Hell, I even had a BB gun when I was kid (still do, actually); it was the kind where you chamber a BB and then pump it up. You could get some serious air pressure behind that thing. I remember eating holes in things with battery acid. I remember stockpiling firecrackers so I could blow shit up with my buddies whenever we had the chance (okay, to be fair, I'm pretty sure my mother would have a heart attack if she found out about that). I'm 27, and I miss those days, when kids could just be kids. In the 80's we were taught about "stranger danger" and this was reinforced with common sense, instead of this "OMG, ADULTS R BAD, RUN AWAY!!!!!" We were taught about "bad touch" without being inundated with details and story after story of pedophiles killing kids. Why the hell are parents these days overreacting to the same dangers they grew up with?
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on May 31, 2009 0:43:26 GMT -5
Nobody's pretending it's perfect. There are a lot of problems with the public school systems, mostly the over-funding of sports programs (and cheerleading, ugh), and under-funding of arts programs and general education. The kids may not be able to add 2 and 2, but GAWD FORBID they not be able to play SPORTS! This is so true. My school just received a ton of money from the state and rather than use it to buy cameras that work for the Mulimedia class or computers that aren't as old as me for the Computer Science class they chose to renovate the football field, the football field that they already renovated once last year. Now the school board has been told that they need to make cuts and do you know where they want to start? Practical and performing arts. Yes, but if we cut sports, the jocks will lose their precious self-esteem, and actually have to *perform* on an academic level! Seriously, if schools want to keep sports programs, they should hold a fucking bake sale -- put the federal and state funding towards actual LEARNING! ETA: I wish I could consolidate these three posts into one. We *really* need a "multi-quote" feature!
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Waldorf X on May 31, 2009 1:30:20 GMT -5
Yes, but if we cut sports, the jocks will lose their precious self-esteem, and actually have to *perform* on an academic level! Ugh, this old stereotype. While I'm not excusing the unfair focus on athletic programs (my school actually fired every math teacher, save two and replaced them with incompetent idiots (seriously, I had to practically teach myself algebra II) and started cutting electives to have enough money to hire a football coach that was payed more than the fucking principal), its actually very common for students involved in athletic programs be required to maintain at least a B average in order to continue playing. Agreed, but with No Child Left Behind (AKA, the law that lets the federal government control the schools (AKA, another conservative bad idea)) it doesn't matter what the funds are going to, schools still have to waste half the school year teaching irrelevant crap to make sure they keep their funding (I don't know a single student (that cared about their education) or faculty member at my high school that didn't think NCLB was a bad idea to begin with.) You could always do it manually.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on May 31, 2009 1:55:09 GMT -5
Yes, but if we cut sports, the jocks will lose their precious self-esteem, and actually have to *perform* on an academic level! Ugh, this old stereotype. While I'm not excusing the unfair focus on athletic programs (my school actually fired every math teacher, save two and replaced them with incompetent idiots (seriously, I had to practically teach myself algebra II) and started cutting electives to have enough money to hire a football coach that was payed more than the fucking principal), its actually very common for students involved in athletic programs be required to maintain at least a B average in order to continue playing. I'm pulling a page out of Red's playbook, I don't feel like fucking around with quote tags.
It wouldn't be a stereotype if it weren't true. (And I've seen athletes rewarded with a grade boost for good performance on the field, because we *need* teh star quarterback, let's just give him a "B" when he earned a "C".) Why not grade them honestly? We'll always need burger-flippers and janitors, you know.Agreed, but with No Child Left Behind (AKA, the law that lets the federal government control the schools (AKA, another conservative bad idea)) it doesn't matter what the funds are going to, schools still have to waste half the school year teaching irrelevant crap to make sure they keep their funding (I don't know a single student (that cared about their education) or faculty member at my high school that didn't think NCLB was a bad idea to begin with.) NOBODY BUT THE BUREAUCRATS thought it was a "good idea". And we all get to suffer for it.
You could always do it manually. But I'm lazy! (At least I admit it, amirite?) TBH, I think I need to take a break from all computer and video gaming -- my hands and wrists are hurting.
OT: I got kitteh-luvs today! ::happy tail, chirpy-purr::
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Waldorf X on May 31, 2009 2:05:04 GMT -5
I'm pulling a page out of Red's playbook, I don't feel like fucking around with quote tags. It wouldn't be a stereotype if it weren't true. (And I've seen athletes rewarded with a grade boost for good performance on the field, because we *need* teh star quarterback, let's just give him a "B" when he earned a "C".) Why not grade them honestly? We'll always need burger-flippers and janitors, you know. Unethical and unfair to everyone else. While it wouldn't surprise me in most cases (I barely managed high school with a C average until senior year when I actually didn't get my education ruined by state tests when my grades skyrocketed (except in Parenting (a required class for some odd reason (until my graduating class at least...), probably because of my schools non-working abstinence only bullshit (another thing people unanimously agreed was a bad idea)) God that class sucked) while the athletes were pulling straight As and Bs.) And yet there isn't a strong movement to get rid of it, why? And it makes me (also lazy) have to work extra hard) Use your feet! ... Oh.... Right. Sorry. Completely irrelevant, but cats are AWESOME.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on May 31, 2009 3:20:49 GMT -5
So children should be punished by removing them from public schools and proper socialization, just because they don't fit in? To the kids who are victims of bullies and such, it's not a punishment, it's FUCKING RELIEF. To the kids who would be labeled special needs for something that does not affect their intelligence, only their motor skills, it's a chance at avoiding a label that would ruin their life (I am one of those kids) For those kids who can't learn in a mass-produced fashion like some parts on an assembly line... being pulled out of public school would benefit their academic career (myself included) I refer to an earlier post where someone mentioned that they didn't socialize at school, they socialized in their neighborhood with kids from another school. You don't need school to socialize, and I wouldn't even dare call public school "proper socialization". Not to mention you go to school for one thing: TO LEARN. When schools FAIL at this, like they are doing so, they shouldn't be called schools. How about when the bullies are the people handling your grades? Teachers are as guilty as the kids, whether by allowing bullying, labeling students because of their social status or appearance. And what about when punishing the bullies doesn't work? Not to mention that the number one reason secular home schoolers home school their children is because they don't feel that their children are receiving a decent education at public school or private school. And it gives them a chance to bond with their kids, to get to know them, and not to be some person that goes to work, brings home some burger king, and goes back to work the next day, letting the government and television raise their kids. (Yes, this is an extreme, but it does happen) I'm a home schooled kid, by the way, and I am insulted that you think I am abused. And when it doesn't? Even when it does, just because Option A is good doesn't automatically mean Option B is bad, especially when statistics have shown that most home schooled students perform significantly better academically than most public school students. I'm not talking about the fundie home schoolers, either. As far as socializing goes... I found other avenues of socializing, namely the internet. I got involved in the Star Fox fandom, which led to the furry fandom. When I got older, about 13 or 14, I met a group of friends, one of whom would become my boyfriend today. And as myspace and facebook show... internet socializing is the future. And even the present. The world is becoming flat. EDIT: An article with some actual citations that doesn't come from a website that reminds me of the home schooling version of NARTH! URL: findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3955/is_200410/ai_n9443747/Excerpt: "Many studies have been completed during the past 20 years that examine the academic achievement of the homeeducated (Ray, 2004b). Dozens of researchers have executed these studies. Examples of these studies ranged from a multiyear study in Washington state, three nationwide studies across the United States, and a nationwide study in Canada (Ray, 1994, 1997, 2001c; Rudner, 1999; Wartes, 1991). In study after study, the homeschooled scored, on average, at the 65th to 80th percentile on standardized academic achievement tests in the United States and Canada, compared to the public school average of the 50th percentile." (next page) "Researchers, wondering if only certain families-in which the parents have a high educational attainment or family income-are able to homeschool such that their children score high on achievement tests, show that children in homeschool families with low income and in which the parents have little education are scoring, on average, above state-school averages (Ray, 2000, 2004b, ch. 4). In addition, research shows that the parents' teacher-certification has little to no relationship with their children's academic achievement, and that the degree of state control of homeschooling (i.e., regulations) has no relationship with academic achievement (Ray, 2004b)." EDIT EDIT: Man, I went to go to copy the citations and there's 4 and a half pages of citations, starting from Page 8 out of 12 pages. Nevermind copying and pasting them, look at them yourself O.o
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Jun 3, 2009 19:53:04 GMT -5
And what about gifted kids? How often are they left behind in a public school because of the "teach to the lowest common denominator" mentality? Or a private school, even. Been there, feel your pain. Should parents held to the same educational requirements as bona fide teachers? No, firstly because the teaching profession is a joke (there, I said it, downmod me). Secondly, the same effect could be achieved by standardized testing, because that is the standard to which "real" educators teach anyways, so what's the effective difference? Hell, if you wanted to be real anal about it, you could make the tests tailored to the individual child. Is your child mathematically gifted? Then she should know single-variable calculus by the time she's in the 10th grade. Conversely, if she suffers from some legitimate, diagnosed learning disability, the test-makers can cut her some slack. Hell, the GRE itself automatically adjusts the difficulty of its questions, giving you an accurate impression of the aptitude of the testee while maintaining a fairly short, fair test. Computers are wonderful things, and programmers are a pretty clever bunch. I'm sure they could come up with a way to generate tests with an almost infinite granulation with regard to difficulty in a particular subject. You make it sound as if public-school teachers do no work at all. As a future public-school teacher, and the child and grandchild of public-school teachers, I rather resent that remark. Not to mention that most decent teachers work 80-hour weeks. Sure it's not all in the classroom, but every hour they spend teaching students is duplicated by an hour at home or during their "free" periods planning lessons. PLUS all the work they do on weekends and holidays. Summer vacation? A week or two to relax with your family, then you'd better get busy making out detailed lesson plans for next year's classes. If nothing else, you revise last year's lesson plans to take into account everything you've learned from teaching them to last year's classes, and hoping it won't be too much trouble to adapt those lesson plans to suit the students you have this year. The truth is, the sheer number of bullshit forms teachers are being forced to fill out under NCLB and similar is undermining the very teacher-quality standards those laws were meant to uphold. For every do-nothing teacher weeded out by the new qualifications, two otherwise excellent teachers are scared away by the sheer quantity of paperwork involved. Small wonder teachers don't want to do any extra work--they have enough trouble handling what they've already got to deal with!
|
|
|
Post by rookie on Jun 6, 2009 16:46:47 GMT -5
Sorry, but that's not the solution -- the solution (duh) is to PUNISH THE FUCKING BULLIES, thereby making the school environment a safe one. ] It's been a while since you've dealt with kids, hasn't it? Punishing the bully usually angers the bully. Yes, he may serve a suspension or have to stay after school. But little Timmy or Sally who brought it up to whatever adult will receive that bully's special attention for a while to come. It might not be on school grounds anymore, but more than likely, it'll happen. Here we have another fact of life that kids need to figure out how to deal with. Because guess what. There are bullys in the "real world" too. They might not punch you in the face for your lunch money, but they are there nonetheless. And one day a person is going to have to deal with it. Personally, I'd rather my children figure out how when they are young and the consequences of trial and error are, if not as severe, than less a staggering blow as it would be if they were adults. I'm sorry but the whole bully thing pisses me off. To avoid conflict is[/] a good thing to learn, but standing up for one's self is better. And yes, I was bullied as a child.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Jun 6, 2009 17:28:48 GMT -5
Sorry, but that's not the solution -- the solution (duh) is to PUNISH THE FUCKING BULLIES, thereby making the school environment a safe one. ] It's been a while since you've dealt with kids, hasn't it? Punishing the bully usually angers the bully. Yes, he may serve a suspension or have to stay after school. But little Timmy or Sally who brought it up to whatever adult will receive that bully's special attention for a while to come. It might not be on school grounds anymore, but more than likely, it'll happen. Here we have another fact of life that kids need to figure out how to deal with. Because guess what. There are bullys in the "real world" too. They might not punch you in the face for your lunch money, but they are there nonetheless. And one day a person is going to have to deal with it. Personally, I'd rather my children figure out how when they are young and the consequences of trial and error are, if not as severe, than less a staggering blow as it would be if they were adults. I'm sorry but the whole bully thing pisses me off. To avoid conflict is a good thing to learn, but standing up for one's self is better. And yes, I was bullied as a child. What about the kids who can't figure it out? What about the kids who literally can't do anything about it? What about the kids who are uncontrollably different, and are therefore target number one from day number one? What about the feeling that the adults that are supposed to be there to protect them are turning a blind eye to the situation? They're expected to figure it out themselves? No wonder the suicide rate is so high among middle and high schoolers. EDIT: I'd like to add that there are many situations where standing up to the bully actually results in the victim being punished by the school system. Remember those ads way back when that encouraged kids to try to talk things out with bullies who are trying to beat them up? Yeah. Like that would do crap.
|
|
|
Post by renaissanceblonde on Jun 6, 2009 22:21:03 GMT -5
Fuck bullies. Fuck them with rusty chainsaws set to warp speed.
I went through public school at my mum's insistence because she knew I would have to deal with things like bullies anyway due to my 'differences', so I might as well learn to socialise. I did have the benefit of a mother who'd move Heaven and Earth to get those mongrels punished though.
Homeschooling... It depends. For me, I don't think it would've worked. But we need to crack down on the bullies... or at least give more funding to academics than fucking sports programmes!
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jun 7, 2009 0:33:02 GMT -5
Rookie -- So you're saying that the solution is to punish the victim by removing him from the situation. All that does is enable the bully.
I maintain that the bully should be the one removed. In fact, the bully ought to be sent to Juvie, and the parents ought to be arrested for child abuse!
First, because they *taught* their kid to be a bully. Kids don't just wake up one day and decide, "Hey, I'm gonna pick on the kid with glasses today, and maybe I'll beat on the [gay/disabled/adopted/different] kid and steal his lunch money!" They have to be *taught* to behave that way, that might makes right.
Secondly, because they are legally responsible for their child's actions (until the age of 18), they are thus abusing the bully's victims by proxy.
Third, and this goes back to point one, since they obviously taught their kid to be a bully, it's highly likely that they are, in turn, abusing the bully.
The teachers/administrators that ignore it, or worse, punish the victim, also ought to be charged as accessories to child abuse.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Jun 7, 2009 3:30:07 GMT -5
Rookie -- So you're saying that the solution is to punish the victim by removing him from the situation. All that does is enable the bully. Actually, I got the impression that he said that the adults should do nothing but stand back and let the kid fend for himself.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jun 7, 2009 3:54:50 GMT -5
Rookie -- So you're saying that the solution is to punish the victim by removing him from the situation. All that does is enable the bully. Actually, I got the impression that he said that the adults should do nothing but stand back and let the kid fend for himself. Well, he said that, too, and that's not right, either. All that teaches the kid is that the people who are supposed to protect him aren't gonna do shit.
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Jun 7, 2009 6:34:45 GMT -5
After reading the OP, I think I can sum up the whole thing in one phrase
*tries out his best redneck/southern accent* "Stupid is as stupid does" ya'll
|
|