Who Is Stimulus $$$ Stimulating? Teachers.

[Guest]

Most jobs "created/saved" are teachers. First time ever there are more union public-sector employees(7.9 million) then union private sector (7.4 million)

http://biggovernment.com/vderugy/2010/03/10/who-is-the-stimulus-money-stimulating-teachers/

[Guest]

Most jobs "created/saved" are teachers...

Well, there's one group of teachers who aren't being saved. The Kansas City school board voted yesterday to close 26 schools in the city, almost half the current number. Thousands of employees and teachers will be terminated.

Here's an article from Kansas City.com...

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/03/10/1804197/kc-school-district-to-close-26.html

Having reported on the alarming school board decision, the article also says that enrollment in Kansas City schools has declined to the same level that it was in 1889, 120 years ago. I guess I'm left wondering whether maybe a giant program of school closures and layoffs in Kansas City wasn't long overdue. Still, the result is going to be a spike in the unemployment rate in KC.

[Guest]

Villages Kahuna, on the Kansas City schools closings, now here's the rest of the story...note it's a 1998 article:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html

[Guest]

Villages Kahuna, on the Kansas City schools closings, now here's the rest of the story...note it's a 1998 article:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html

Thank-you for the eye-opener, BK. The whole education system needs an over-haul in my opinion. What a waste of taxpayer's money.

[Guest]

for bankruptcy? We have weathered many, many recessions without the school city budgets getting to the point they are today.
Having been in the "sick company" turn around business, I would love to see the actual to budget for the last 5 years and I would also like to see the current year budget vs last years actuals.
I would then like to see a new budget proposal using the zero base budget approach (if it was a line item last year doesn't mean it is again this year unless it can be JUSTIFIED).
Then I would like to see the cash flow for those same periods.

And I mean line item by line item, not categories.

Until such time as governments approach the money and spending like we have to do ours at home....there will continue to be this problem of out of control spending.

And when they cut where do they cut? Right where the services affect you and me and the kids first....this way the emotion hits we the people and more money can be had.

Politicians will never EVER do the above....would you like to bet how many in administration understand revenues vs expenses vs profit/loss vs balance sheets? My estimate would be less than 10% of any organization you wanna mention.

And unfortunately that is not going to change....EVER!

btk

[Guest]

The whole education system needs an over-haul in my opinion. What a waste of taxpayer's money.

I just can't decide whether it's better to just continue to ignore comments like these, or to mention what silly nonsense they are. The only waste here is the space they take up.

I'm not going to suggest that you try to say ANYTHING positive about any of our social institutions, because you don't seem to be able to do that. But since you're now bashing teachers and education, just what would you do since the "whole education system needs an over-haul"?

I'd like to hear your ideas, especially the one's that significantly improve education and don't cost anything.

[Guest]

Thank-you for the eye-opener, BK. The whole education system needs an over-haul in my opinion. What a waste of taxpayer's money.

You are correct. Start over without unions and pass only those who pass the exams.

[Guest]

I just can't decide whether it's better to just continue to ignore comments like these, or to mention what silly nonsense they are. The only waste here is the space they take up.

I'm not going to suggest that you try to say ANYTHING positive about any of our social institutions, because you don't seem to be able to do that. But since you're now bashing teachers and education, just what would you do since the "whole education system needs an over-haul"?

I'd like to hear your ideas, especially the one's that significantly improve education and don't cost anything.


1. Donna does not need me to defend her, but I do not think she was in any way bashing teachers or education as you say she was. I read that she felt the system needed an overhaul.

2, While you accuse her of never saying anything positive about any of our social institutions, I suggest that your oversight of the problems in anything touched by our federal government is alarming to say the least. You can defend big Government...that is your right....but putting your head in the sand and ignoring all the problems is naive.

I will just add that the education problems in this country, IN MY OPINION, are a direct reflection of the breakdown of the family unit. This breakdown is at the root of many of the social programs in this country and throwing money at it is not the answer. However, we have bred a generation of folks who equate everything to money.

PS....I might add that from personal experience, those choosing a teaching career which used to be filled with those who wanted to educate are now being filled in many cases (thankfully,not most) by those seeking MONEY because of the inroads of unions and the pressure applied to local school boards to settle contracts ! This is not to say we should underpay teachers....I am married to one who taught for over 30 years...but we might also look at the educational system that prepares our teachers.

[Guest]

I just can't decide whether it's better to just continue to ignore comments like these, or to mention what silly nonsense they are. The only waste here is the space they take up.

I'm not going to suggest that you try to say ANYTHING positive about any of our social institutions, because you don't seem to be able to do that. But since you're now bashing teachers and education, just what would you do since the "whole education system needs an over-haul"?

I'd like to hear your ideas, especially the one's that significantly improve education and don't cost anything.Try this for starters: use basic economic principles of supply and demand when negotiating salaries.

[Guest]

I just can't decide whether it's better to just continue to ignore comments like these, or to mention what silly nonsense they are. The only waste here is the space they take up.

I'm not going to suggest that you try to say ANYTHING positive about any of our social institutions, because you don't seem to be able to do that. But since you're now bashing teachers and education, just what would you do since the "whole education system needs an over-haul"?

I'd like to hear your ideas, especially the one's that significantly improve education and don't cost anything.

My my, are we in the personal attack mode today Mr. ijusluvit?

First I would like to say that I have sister in laws and nieces who labor under the title of teacher. They began teaching with high ideals and within a few years were beaten down by the system.

Brief history: My involvement in politics has been almost nonexistent until the last couple of years. My circle of friends, until recently, have been non-political most of their lives, too. If you could have been at one of our social functions 30 years ago and listened to our conversations, you would probably describe us as "liberals."
When I hear my friends talk now, they sound like totally different people.(teachers included).
From what I gather, most of the problems are at the federal level. My teacher sister in law say that the Dept of Ed. is one big boondogle.
She supported the 1996 Republican platform of the abolition of the Dept of Education:

The Federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the market place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning.[2][3]

Today the budget is around 68.6 billion.
I have one question that I would like answered by anyone. Why do the parochial schools have a waiting list and why do they do a better job of educating with less money to work with? Has it got anything to do with federal laws? A terrible curriculum? Too many restrictions? Unable to discipline students etc, etc?

My sister in law says that after a few years in the system, their thoughts and motivations are more geared to themselves instead of the pupils.
They have tried throwing money at the system and it didn't work. It is said that if you keep doing the same thing over and over again and expect different results, that is a sign of mental illness.
I say the system is very sick.

[Guest]

Donna2, As a retired teaacher I couldn't agree more. Years ago "they" talked about getting rid of the Dept. Of Ed. As with all government programs it is almost impossible to do. The schools are 180 degrees different from when we went to school. For starters discipline needs to be re-established. In my day if I got in trouble at school I would be in more trouble when I got home. Now the parents are in the teacher's face if you look cross-eyed at little Johhny or Mary. Passing kids on to the next grade, even if they haven't mastered the skills required needs to stop. So many kids are gradulating and they can barely read or write. Unfortunately, I don't see any changes soon, The NEA is way to powerful.

[Guest]

The despair, frustration and the lack of hope I feel in Donna's post asking for sweeping change in the educational system makes me sit up and take notice. IMHO, that type of frustration; although justified and based on proven facts, sometimes leads to the wrong kind of change.

In her post Donna hinted at the ruination of our educational system by the ineptness of tenured teachers and the greed of unions. To criticize her, IMO, for the broad sweeping comment made out of frustration to get rid of all of the teachers and to start over is the pot calling the kettle black.

I don't think Donna deserved the comment. Donna, like me, you and tens of thousands in this country are frustrated. If our frustration is vented amongst our families, friends, coworkers and on forums like TOV and stops here it does serve a purpose. But it shouldn't stop there.

After we educate ourselves and are justifiable riled up, we have to express our opinions through our right to vote. Not just on the state and national level, but more importantly, on the local level. I can't give up on a world that my grandfather worked to build and my 90 year old father fought to give me and the lifestyle that I and my hardworking husband work to substain.

My grandfather, born in 1893, was raised on a farm in Virginia where the railroad had never even laid a track. His family, like most in that generation, were strong-willed, hardworking, and self-sufficient. He dreamed of being a school teacher. He managed to get educated and borrow a neighbor's horse to get to a railroad station to ride for days at the promise of a teaching job in the coalfield in the Common School system.

To quote Diane Ravitch, author of The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education , "I have not changed my fundamental belief that all children should have a great education that includes not just basic skills, but history, literature, geography,, civics, the arts, science, foreign languages, and physical education. I have never changed my wish that all children should have well-educated teachers who love their subjects and are well prepared to teach them to their students. I have never changed my skepticism about fads, miracles, and silver bullets, which come and go with great frequency in U.S. education. I have never abandoned my respect for the men and women who teach children and do the daily work that others (including me) talk and write about."

We must go back to the days when our teachers were taught to teach our children.

[Guest]

Donna2, SallyJo etc.

You continue to make sweeping generalizations about which there are only minor elements of truth.

You and your friends and relatives who think education has turned "180 degrees" from the good old days do not speak for the educators I know or what I believe is the greater majority of those who really know schools.

My wife and I are each the eldest of seven children. Of those 14 kids and 13 spouses, Twenty, including my wife and I, spent their careers or are currently in education. Everything from teaching and administrating in rich suburbs, poor rural schools, parochial and inner city schools. Every single one of us is proud of our years working with kids and families. We discuss education all the time and often we recall how hard it is, to some degree because communities and parents don't always value education or care about what their kids are doing. But it was absolutely no worse at the start or end of our careers. We weren't stymied by the politics - local, state or national. We were limited by our own less than perfect training, stamina and the size of the challenge. We all agree there is nothing as satisfying as watching children grow and learn.

I can honestly say, that, in addition to my immediate relatives, of the hundreds of other educators I know, I cannot recall a single one who is as negative as those to whom you refer in your posts.

[Guest]

Can someone who is more articulate and conversant with this stimulus thing answer a simple question for me? According to the link provided, over 400,000 education jobs were created or saved by Obama's stimulus funding. How will it be funded next year?

Can anyone give an example of a stimulus incentive that will not require the continuous, increasing and perpetual infusion of equal or greater future tax dollars?

I would also like to know who the recipients of the education stimulus cash were and how they were selected.....or would that be connected.

[Guest]

Donna2, As a retired teaacher I couldn't agree more. Years ago "they" talked about getting rid of the Dept. Of Ed. As with all government programs it is almost impossible to do. The schools are 180 degrees different from when we went to school. For starters discipline needs to be re-established. In my day if I got in trouble at school I would be in more trouble when I got home. Now the parents are in the teacher's face if you look cross-eyed at little Johhny or Mary. Passing kids on to the next grade, even if they haven't mastered the skills required needs to stop. So many kids are gradulating and they can barely read or write. Unfortunately, I don't see any changes soon, The NEA is way to powerful.

I agree 100%. The fundamentals need to be restored. "Social promotions" instead of academic achievements need to stop. This backwards philosophy of massaging pupils ego's without any accomplishments must stop. The whole system needs a major work-over.

I can honestly say, that, in addition to my immediate relatives, of the hundreds of other educators I know, I cannot recall a single one who is as negative as those to whom you refer in your posts.
Reply With Quote
To this statement, I say baloney. There is not one industry out there that doesn't have their malcontents and you say you never heard one?
Unbelievable!!!!

[Guest]

ijusluvit....I personally have great respect and appreciation for your family's contribution to education. My wife is a retired teacher and administrator who worked in a large system. One of the things that troubled her was those little notices in her school mailbox from the teachers union advising them to vote for the democrats because they supported the teachers. Of course they were printed and copied on school paper and school time. Time taken from teaching obligations they profess are "for the kids." She also belonged to the union but never agreed with their political activism using the school communications system to lobby for candidates. Have you ever received those little union arm twisters in your school mailbox or is it just a northeast thing?

[Guest]

Donna,most private parochial schools get to pick who gets in either through an exam or by who can afford the tuition. This method tends to cull the poor and the average or under average achievers out. If any of these students do turn out to be trouble-makers they are dismissed and sent back to the public schools. I also think that parents who sends their child to a private school tend to value an education more than some parents and if the tuition is high enough the pocketbook becomes an issue also. I also think that if you look at their curriculum compared to a public school curriculum the basics are valued much more. Most private schools stress the core subjects.

[Guest]

The despair, frustration and the lack of hope I feel in Donna's post asking for sweeping change in the educational system makes me sit up and take notice. IMHO, that type of frustration; although justified and based on proven facts, sometimes leads to the wrong kind of change.

In her post Donna hinted at the ruination of our educational system by the ineptness of tenured teachers and the greed of unions. To criticize her, IMO, for the broad sweeping comment made out of frustration to get rid of all of the teachers and to start over is the pot calling the kettle black.

I don't think Donna deserved the comment. Donna, like me, you and tens of thousands in this country are frustrated. If our frustration is vented amongst our families, friends, coworkers and on forums like TOV and stops here it does serve a purpose. But it shouldn't stop there.

After we educate ourselves and are justifiable riled up, we have to express our opinions through our right to vote. Not just on the state and national level, but more importantly, on the local level. I can't give up on a world that my grandfather worked to build and my 90 year old father fought to give me and the lifestyle that I and my hardworking husband work to substain.

My grandfather, born in 1893, was raised on a farm in Virginia where the railroad had never even laid a track. His family, like most in that generation, were strong-willed, hardworking, and self-sufficient. He dreamed of being a school teacher. He managed to get educated and borrow a neighbor's horse to get to a railroad station to ride for days at the promise of a teaching job in the coalfield in the Common School system.

To quote Diane Ravitch, author of The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education , "I have not changed my fundamental belief that all children should have a great education that includes not just basic skills, but history, literature, geography,, civics, the arts, science, foreign languages, and physical education. I have never changed my wish that all children should have well-educated teachers who love their subjects and are well prepared to teach them to their students. I have never changed my skepticism about fads, miracles, and silver bullets, which come and go with great frequency in U.S. education. I have never abandoned my respect for the men and women who teach children and do the daily work that others (including me) talk and write about."

We must go back to the days when our teachers were taught to teach our children.

PS Sally Jo, God bless you for being a school teacher. No offense intended, I'm just saying this outta frustration, but please learn to use spell check. We all make mistakes, but saying you are a former teacher and not spelling "teacher" or "graduation" correctly...??

Excellent post BK. I can see that you gave it much thought and you articulated it very well.
I respect people in any trade or profession who admits the faults and wants to improve them and not turn a blind eye.

[Guest]

Donna,most private parochial schools get to pick who gets in either through an exam or by who can afford the tuition. This method tends to cull the poor and the average or under average achievers out. If any of these students do turn out to be trouble-makers they are dismissed and sent back to the public schools. I also think that parents who sends their child to a private school tend to value an education more than some parents and if the tuition is high enough the pocketbook becomes an issue also. I also think that if you look at their curriculum compared to a public school curriculum the basics are valued much more. Most private schools stress the core subjects.

I think we have reached common ground, waynet. I personally know parents of average students who are going into debt and are living in sub par conditions in order to give their children a decent education. In any event, if they don't attend college after high school, they will still be miles ahead of the average government (public) school graduate.

[Guest]

" Can someone who is more articulate and conversant with this stimulus thing answer a simple question for me? According to the link provided, over 400,000 education jobs were created or saved by Obama's stimulus funding. How will it be funded next year?

Can anyone give an example of a stimulus incentive that will not require the continuous, increasing and perpetual infusion of equal or greater future tax dollars?

I would also like to know who the recipients of the education stimulus cash were and how they were selected.....or would that be connected. "

I'm not articulate and don't have a lot of knowledge with the stimulus, but I'll give your questions a try for the sake of discussion.

Unless another stimulus is passed, there won't be any more of the money that created or saved those jobs. Unless the money is in the local budget, the jobs will be cut. This money was, IMHO, a blown up life preserver with a leak and no life boat in sight. States and local governments will have to tighten their belts.

According to an excellent article in the NY Times, "About $65 billion of the $100 billion in education stimulus money went to states in three pots: $39.5 billion as part of a stabilization fund intended to bolster the finances of state public education systems, $13 billion for the federal program for poor students known as Title I, and $12.2 billion for students with disabilities. Congress directed the rest of the $100 billion to smaller initiatives, including $4.3 billion to a school improvement grant program the Obama administration calls Race to the Top."

Localities had to apply for the money through the state. I think distribution on the state level is based on a complex formula which includes, among other things, a ratio which consists of a daily count of students at each particular school.

I'll have to think about an example of a stimulus incentive that will not require continuous, increasing and perperutal infusion of equal or greater future tax dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/education/08educ.html?scp=10&sq=&st=nyt

[Guest]

" Can someone who is more articulate and conversant with this stimulus thing answer a simple question for me? According to the link provided, over 400,000 education jobs were created or saved by Obama's stimulus funding. How will it be funded next year?

Can anyone give an example of a stimulus incentive that will not require the continuous, increasing and perpetual infusion of equal or greater future tax dollars?

I would also like to know who the recipients of the education stimulus cash were and how they were selected.....or would that be connected. "

I'm not articulate and don't have a lot of knowledge with the stimulus, but I'll give your questions a try for the sake of discussion.

Unless another stimulus is passed, there won't be any more of the money that created or saved those jobs. Unless the money is in the local budget, the jobs will be cut. This money was, IMHO, a blown up life preserver with a leak and no life boat in sight. States and local governments will have to tighten their belts.

According to an excellent article in the NY Times, "About $65 billion of the $100 billion in education stimulus money went to states in three pots: $39.5 billion as part of a stabilization fund intended to bolster the finances of state public education systems, $13 billion for the federal program for poor students known as Title I, and $12.2 billion for students with disabilities. Congress directed the rest of the $100 billion to smaller initiatives, including $4.3 billion to a school improvement grant program the Obama administration calls Race to the Top."

Localities had to apply for the money through the state. I think distribution on the state level is based on a complex formula which includes, among other things, a ratio which consists of a daily count of students at each particular school.

I'll have to think about an example of a stimulus incentive that will not require continuous, increasing and perperutal infusion of equal or greater future tax dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/education/08educ.html?scp=10&sq=&st=nyt

Good job BK....

Question...

Did not a few governors question accepting funds due to the condition attached to continue in the future ? Does this not make us even more dependent on federal government ?

[Guest]

I love to read. I hope you do too and my links to articles isn't annoying. The Wall Street Journal has a story that answers each of the questions about stipulations in the 2009 Stimulus Package. And yes, some states like Texas and Indiana turned down parts of the money.

How can it not make you dependent on the federal government? Combined deficits for the states for the 2010-2011 fiscal years is expected to total more than $260 billion. BILLION

According to the article, "stimulus dollars came with strings attached that are now causing enormous budget headaches. Many environmental grants have matching requirements, so to get a federal dollar, states and cities had to spend a dollar even when they were facing huge deficits. The new construction projects built with federal funds also have federal Davis-Bacon wage requirements that raise state building costs to pay inflated union salaries.

"Worst of all, at the behest of the public employee unions, Congress imposed "maintenance of effort" spending requirements on states. These federal laws prohibit state legislatures from cutting spending on 15 programs, from road building to welfare, if the state took even a dollar of stimulus cash for these purposes.

"One provision prohibits states from cutting Medicaid benefits or eligibility below levels in effect on July 1, 2008. That date, not coincidentally, was the peak of the last economic cycle when states were awash in revenue. State spending soared at a nearly 8% annual rate from 2004-2008, far faster than inflation and population growth, and liberals want to keep funding at that level."

To me it's sorta like taking a payday loan. You know the kind where they charge you astronomical fees and interest against a loan based on your upcoming paycheck. If you can't pay it back, the payday loan people will keep extending the loan and interest until you spiral into such a mess you may never recover.

I say, try every thing possible to survive and wait until you get your paycheck.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704152804574628633460370644.html

[Guest]

I love to read. I hope you do too and my links to articles isn't annoying. The Wall Street Journal has a story that answers each of the questions about stipulations in the 2009 Stimulus Package. And yes, some states like Texas and Indiana turned down parts of the money.

How can it not make you dependent on the federal government? Combined deficits for the states for the 2010-2011 fiscal years is expected to total more than $260 billion. BILLION

According to the article, "stimulus dollars came with strings attached that are now causing enormous budget headaches. Many environmental grants have matching requirements, so to get a federal dollar, states and cities had to spend a dollar even when they were facing huge deficits. The new construction projects built with federal funds also have federal Davis-Bacon wage requirements that raise state building costs to pay inflated union salaries.

"Worst of all, at the behest of the public employee unions, Congress imposed "maintenance of effort" spending requirements on states. These federal laws prohibit state legislatures from cutting spending on 15 programs, from road building to welfare, if the state took even a dollar of stimulus cash for these purposes.

"One provision prohibits states from cutting Medicaid benefits or eligibility below levels in effect on July 1, 2008. That date, not coincidentally, was the peak of the last economic cycle when states were awash in revenue. State spending soared at a nearly 8% annual rate from 2004-2008, far faster than inflation and population growth, and liberals want to keep funding at that level."

To me it's sorta like taking a payday loan. You know the kind where they charge you astronomical fees and interest against a loan based on your upcoming paycheck. If you can't pay it back, the payday loan people will keep extending the loan and interest until you spiral into such a mess you may never recover.

I say, try every thing possible to survive and wait until you get your paycheck.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704152804574628633460370644.html


Just wanted to respond to you to say that your links certainly dont bother me at all, fact is I LOVE them, as I am also a voracious reader....not a great poster but also post quite a few links.

I also like to read BOTH sides....some of the news sites (I like realclearpolitics) will give you opinion pieces from both sides of the aisle and I enjoy reading both. I also KNOW when I read some others it is skewed but that is ok as long as I know it !

Keep the informative links coming.

[Guest]

BK....your posts are always well thought out and the links interesting, relevant and anything but annoying. Count me with those that appreciate the time you put into "spreading knowledge". Keep them coming.

[Guest]

Bucco & Cabo,

Since respect and recognition of good posts is now in order, I'll pass along a pat on the back to you two, with a comment:

Bucco, Don't assume that because I object to the 'education sucks' position I don't think there are problems with politics, funding etc. It's just that I have personally seen amazingly good things done in schools of all kinds. I have seen standards rise (do you know what percentage of students graduated from high school in 1950 vs 2000?) I have seen many kids and families survive incredible poverty and other disadvantages then prosper because of their schooling and some educators who took a personal interest in them. Schools are fundamentally good and society needs to continue strong support to make them even better. Forgive me, but that includes financial support.

Cabo, Never in forty years did I see a political flyer in a school mailbox. Nor did I see a political endorsement of any kind in a school related document. In our diverse metropolitan area of in New York State, it would have been a public scandal if anyone was caught using school supplies for political purposes. Even the evil groups (teachers unions) were scrupulous about not showing any political preferences except by direct mail to members or in meetings outside of the school environment.

[Guest]

Cabo,I must agree with ijusluvit. I taught school for 35 years in CT. and never found anything in my mailbox telling me who to vote for. Did the Education association endorse a candidate? Of course. Did anyone put a political statement in my mailbox telling me who to vote for.....never. There are lots of things wrong with our educational system but political intmidation is not one of them.

[Guest]

Cabo,I must agree with ijusluvit. I taught school for 35 years in CT. and never found anything in my mailbox telling me who to vote for. Did the Education association endorse a candidate? Of course. Did anyone put a political statement in my mailbox telling me who to vote for.....never. There are lots of things wrong with our educational system but political intmidation is not one of them.

Sorry to hear from a Teacher that Political intimidation is not the problem.
How did did you miss that it is all about unions and politics.

[Guest]

I really dont care what the post is about. I will repeat,I was never intimidated to vote for anyone ,ever whether it be my local union or the national union.

[Guest]

Sorry to hear from a Teacher that Political intimidation is not the problem.
How did did you miss that it is all about unions and politics.


And I am sorry to say that as wild generalizations go, this is a All-Time Whopper. There is no basis of truth in your statement.

[Guest]

And I am sorry to say that as wild generalizations go, this is a All-Time Whopper. There is no basis of truth in your statement.

That should be "this is an All-Time Whopper." Just kidding. Having a little fun this morning.
One thing stands out in one of your posts. You give the statistic that there are more high school graduates in the year 2000, as compared to 1950. That seems like a very hollow statistic standing on it's own merit with nothing more to add to it.
What is more important is the quality of education that the diploma represents, not how many diploma's are given out on any particular year or generation.
I once read that the high school graduate of yesteryear was the equivalence of a second year in college today. Many educators complain that a large percentage high school graduates of today need remedial classes to catch up to college standards and they are shocked at what the high school graduates don't know.

Now, this is a generalization and your miles may vary, but I have personally talked to 20 and 30 year olds and I am amazed at what they do not know. When did they stop teaching the basics?
Now before you get your panties tied in a knot, I, in no way, am blaming the teachers as much as I am questioning the people who construct the curriculum.
Do any teachers here agree or are they so deeply entrenched in the system that they do not see the trees from the forest?

[Guest]

Do any teachers here agree or are they so deeply entrenched in the system that they do not see the trees from the forest?

That should be "they can't see the forest for the trees" Just kidding too!

I referred to the diploma difference over fifty years because it is a quick indicator of what the real "forest" is. Simply stated, in recent decades our nation has provided significantly higher educational opportunities to a much larger percentage of our diverse population than we did in the "old days". Don't condemn education just because you've met some high school grads who can't name 25 US states. Just think for a minute about the number of 18-year old kids there were in 1930, never having got past 4th grade, and never having even heard of perhaps more than 5 states.

Your question above is the same as "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
I know lots of talented, persistent, patient teachers who were able to keep their eyes on the forest, and educate hundreds of kids well, despite the distractions and roadblocks that are around education, but every large collective human endeavor as well.

[Guest]

That should be "they can't see the forest for the trees" Just kidding too!

I referred to the diploma difference over fifty years because it is a quick indicator of what the real "forest" is. Simply stated, in recent decades our nation has provided significantly higher educational opportunities to a much larger percentage of our diverse population than we did in the "old days". Don't condemn education just because you've met some high school grads who can't name 25 US states. Just think for a minute about the number of 18-year old kids there were in 1930, never having got past 4th grade, and never having even heard of perhaps more than 5 states.

Your question above is the same as "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
I know lots of talented, persistent, patient teachers who were able to keep their eyes on the forest, and educate hundreds of kids well, despite the distractions and roadblocks that are around education, but every large collective human endeavor as well.

Again, you avoid important questions by referencing things that go back 80 years. I'll try to ask it in a simple sentence. Do you think the quality of education has gone downhill in the last 30 years?
You are fond of analogies.
How about if we pay people on car manufacturing assembly lines more money today because they are producing more vehicles then they did 80 years ago.
I know of lots of talented, persistent, patient assembly workers who were able to keep their eyes on the forest, and manufacture hundreds of cars well, despite the distractions and roadblocks that are around manufacturing, but every large human endeavor as well.

I guess you can make anything sound noble, huh?

[Guest]

Do you think the quality of education has gone downhill in the last 30 years?


No. (just another noble, accurate answer)

[Guest]

No. (just another noble, accurate answer)

Thank-you, but statistics prove you wrong.

[Guest]

Why all of a sudden (??) are the schools and cities heading for bankruptcy? We have weathered many, many recessions without the school city budgets getting to the point they are today....Until such time as governments approach the money and spending like we have to do ours at home....there will continue to be this problem of out of control spending...

The budgetary problems of all levels of government, from school districts to states, have occurred pretty rapidly, for the most part as the result of the worldwide financial crisis. But unlike the federal government, the lower levels of government are precluded by federal law from incurring debt to fund operaring deficits. Most commonly, adopting deficit-producing budgets is prohibited by state constitutions. They can sell bonds to finance certain revenue-producing capital projects, like airports, toll roads, schools, etc., but selling bonds to finance operaring deficits is not permitted, except at the federal level.

Local and state governments are generally prohibited from running deficits. If they borrow, it is supposed to be for capital projects such as building roads or schools. They can do some Enron-style accounting to make it look like they are borrowing to build a new library and then skim money off to pay operating costs, but a city or state cannot simply say “We’re going to spend more than we’re taking in.”

So the impending bankruptcy of many of the governmental entities smaller than the federal government is simply evidence of their efforts to cut spending not being deep or fast enough to keep up with declining tax revenues. Or alternatively, that the elected officials of those governments have permitted expenditures to exceed revenues, and now have no means to meet their obligations. That's the reason for the massive and dramatic budgetary cuts so widely reported on in places like California and Michigan. Some states still have a serious problem, but their political leadrrs have failed to address them--Illinois is a good example.