Insanity, thy name is public education

The DOE didn't exist until the late 1970s. Are you saying Catholic schools didn't exist until then? That's wrong. Ireland has Catholic school too. Get it?

Catholic schools have existed for many years before as an extension of churches. Maybe he's referring to an organized "system" to better promote it.
 
He was referencing Mona's comment as a response to the DOE which was only formed 48 years ago. I was taking a wild guess, because I actually have no idea.
In the original article, it referenced the agency that was elevated to become the DOE.
 
In the original article, it referenced the agency that was elevated to become the DOE.
C'mon jack!

Joe Biden Shock GIF by GIPHY News
 
And I can't think of a more toxic interest group that is more thoroughly deserving of the kick in the nuts it's going to get. I dealt with these MoFos when I worked at the Capitol. They are self-serving and corrupt a$$holes and bullies.
The root of the problem is large numbers of people thinking of public education as a jobs program rather than as a program to better the youth. They're more concerned about the school employees than they are about the school students.

While this is true for a lot of government programs it seems to especially be the case with public education. It's wrongfully viewed as a jobs program that exists to provide teachers and administrators jobs and to benefit the employees.

They're allergic to accountability.
 
The root of the problem is large numbers of people thinking of public education as a jobs program rather than as a program to better the youth. They're more concerned about the school employees than they are about the school students.

While this is true for a lot of government programs it seems to especially be the case with public education. It's wrongfully viewed as a jobs program that exists to provide teachers and administrators jobs and to benefit the employees.

They're allergic to accountability.

Most government programs have this element. However, public education is more extreme about it than most. Furthermore, it hides behind the pretense of helping children and exploits children to shame anyone who pushes for accountability. That makes it particularly offensive to me.
 
Most government programs have this element. However, public education is more extreme about it than most. Furthermore, it hides behind the pretense of helping children and exploits children to shame anyone who pushes for accountability. That makes it particularly offensive to me.
I don't disagree about the lack of accountability. But to my understanding of the school choice bill, there is precious little accountability there either. Each entity will be able to set their own standards and their own audit. Comparing this outcome against that outcome will be next to impossible. Private schools get the advantage of having very select students. Students that come from homes that care about education. I'm a firm believer that it is the homefront that largely determines whether a kid is an "A" student or "F". Unless/Until private schools are forced to accept all applicants in a lottery system, they will always be able to cherry pick the best homes/students.
 
But to my understanding of the school choice bill, there is precious little accountability there either. Each entity will be able to set their own standards and their own audit. Comparing this outcome against that outcome will be next to impossible.

No accountability to whom? Local and state politicians and TEA bureaucrats? If accountability to them was useful, we wouldn't have a problem. The accountability of private schools is to parents, whether they're getting a voucher or not. If they aren't doing their jobs, parents can pull their kids - and the money.

Private schools get the advantage of having very select students. Students that come from homes that care about education. I'm a firm believer that it is the homefront that largely determines whether a kid is an "A" student or "F". Unless/Until private schools are forced to accept all applicants in a lottery system, they will always be able to cherry pick the best homes/students.

I'll never understand why opponents of school choice think this is a reason to deny even a chance at a choice.

The hope and expectation is that in time the presence of a choice and therefore greater demand for private education will lead some current private schools to expand capacity and for new ones to open to meet the demand (and make money). I would imagine that plenty of churches will open up schools. More capacity will mean less need for selectivity.

Does that mean schools like Hockaday will suddenly stop being elite and take any kid off the street? No, but other lower echelon schools will become available just as lower echelon colleges exist so people can get a college education even if they can't get into Yale or Stanford.

One other thing, you are correct that involved parents are who make the big difference. That is true, and school choice won't and isn't intended to change that. What it's intended to do is give an opportunity for the parent who tries to be involved but isn't wealthy to give his or her kids something better than an education at a failing and indifferent public school.
 
Most government programs have this element. However, public education is more extreme about it than most. Furthermore, it hides behind the pretense of helping children and exploits children to shame anyone who pushes for accountability. That makes it particularly offensive to me.
Oh yeah.

In the past, I would knee-jerk vote for almost every school bond that came up. I support education after all.

After seeing enough, I flipped about and vote against around 80% of school bond issues.
 
BOSD you may not be aware but private schools are governed by the Texas Private School Accreditation Commission which has standards that sometimes exceed TEA
Hardly renegade schools making it up as they go along.
 
I'll never understand why opponents of school choice think this is a reason to deny even a chance at a choice.

Deez, it's all they have, and on the surface it sounds good.

The hope and expectation is that in time the presence of a choice and therefore greater demand for private education will lead some current private schools to expand capacity and for new ones to open to meet the demand (and make money). I would imagine that plenty of churches will open up schools. More capacity will mean less need for selectivity.

Exactly, the point is to change the system and expose it to market accountability. The whole thing about private schools not being accountable and not having to meet government certification is a smoke screen. The government system sucks which is why people want to opt out. If government accountability meant anything we wouldn't need DOGE auditing all these agencies. Otherwise conservative people become Che Guevara anytime someone threatens the monopoly that government schools have on our education money.
 
Deez, it's all they have, and on the surface it sounds good.

I think they assume that if they can make private schools look bad with ad hominem attacks, it'll make people less resistant to the government monopoly, but it simply isn't logical. Whatever case you can make that private schools exercise selectivity doesn't lead to the conclusion that kids are better off with no choice and no chance at a private education. Hockaday in Dallas and Brentwood in Austin don't take everybody, so the black kid in East Austin should only get to attend a crappy school that hates his religious beliefs. Somebody please make it make sense.

And I'm not here to hassle BOSDe. He's one of the good people here, but I get frustrated, because these are the same old talking points I've been having to address since 1997. It's getting old, and the bottom line is that the anti-voucher position simply isn't defensible when held to any serious scrutiny. It's a product of union propaganda and falsehoods.
 
Oh yeah.

In the past, I would knee-jerk vote for almost every school bond that came up. I support education after all.

After seeing enough, I flipped about and vote against around 80% of school bond issues.

I vote against all school bonds. I am yet to see one single bond in the last 25 years in my area that is not mostly tied to athletic facility funding. I grew up playing sports, but I can not stand the absolute waste on extravagant facilities. I think Texas should pass a law that all athletic bonds must be separate from academic facility bonds. I'm sick of the "you must not love the kids" crowd.
 
I grew up playing sports, but I can not stand the absolute waste on extravagant facilities.
Exactly what I think about it. Everything a HS student-athlete could gain from playing football in Allen's ridiculous stadium could be gained by playing football in an old-school aluminum grandstand stadium with a crappy scoreboard.
 
And I'm not here to hassle BOSDe. He's one of the good people here, but I get frustrated, because these are the same old talking points I've been having to address since 1997. It's getting old, and the bottom line is that the anti-voucher position simply isn't defensible when held to any serious scrutiny. It's a product of union propaganda and falsehoods.

Yeah. I don't want BOSDe to think may beef is with him. It isn't. It is with people I grew up with or know in the real world that spread this misinformation with no self awareness. I had one person tell me that "public education is the foundation of our society." All of them to a person work in the public school system. I guess they teach the concept of "conflict of interest" in public school.
 
Our public school system is based on the Prussian model. It's purpose: produce a multitude of literate young men who can also do basic math, and above all, who follow orders. They would form the core of the military. The ultimate goal: raise young men who will make better soldiers.

Promotes:
Regimentation
Standardization
Respect for authority

Discourages:
Critical thinking
Creativity
 
Our public school system is based on the Prussian model. It's purpose: produce a multitude of literate young men who can also do basic math, and above all, who follow orders. They would form the core of the military. The ultimate goal: raise young men who will make better soldiers.

Promotes:
Regimentation
Standardization
Respect for authority

Discourages:
Critical thinking
Creativity

It also was designed to produce 19th century style factory workers. "Sit there for 8 hours and pull that lever!"

Klausewitz wrote about the importance of critical thinking and creativity on the battle field. The German army in WW1 and WW2 used those principles to good effect. The US has tried to adopt some of it but not fully like we should.
 
The German army in WW1 and WW2 used those principles to good effect.
An old man I worked with was on Gen Patton's staff. A squad of Germans typically had big problems when their Sr. Enlisted or Jr. Officers went down, in that they didn't think for themselves, they just took orders. Same problem with a lot of the Euros. A few other Greatest Generation men I knew said more-or-less the same thing. And don't even get started on the IJA--they wouldn't do anything unless they were told; however, if they were told to do something--they'd do absolutely anything. Americans, well you know how our people are. That wasn't a problem.

My Granddad got to hire on some German POWs to work on his farm. Regular German Army, not Nazi party members. Mexico was too far away to risk an escape. They opined that the reason why America had the advantage is that our lads were mostly a bunch of farm boys who could fix anything on the spot. The Germans usually needed to call in a specially trained mechanic. On the farm, the Germans did valuable work and were treated well--so well that some were able to become Americans and came back to the region to farm.
 
I would bet my left nut that DoDEA teachers encouraged this. Every one of them should be fired immediately, and the union should be broken if it resists. Also, the parents of the kids who participated need to be hauled in by their commanders and ripped. The military isn't the place for this crap.

 
An old man I worked with was on Gen Patton's staff. A squad of Germans typically had big problems when their Sr. Enlisted or Jr. Officers went down, in that they didn't think for themselves, they just took orders.

Klausewitz's doctrine wasn't implemented all the way down to the individual soldier but it existed further down in the military structure than in any other army. So if it was a difficulty for the German army it would have been more so for anyone else. I think now the US has taken those lessons to heart and at least in some organizations individuals are empowered to make decisions on the ground. Listening to some veterans there isn't near enough of that, but improvements are being made.

German POWs to work on his farm. Regular German Army, not Nazi party members

Not sure what this means. I thought the whole country was guilty of war crimes after WW2.
 
Explain why?
To be clear I think they were vile but I do think they have their rights

They're living in a government facility, and they can't undermine the mission. They can say what they want but not necessarily on government property to the detriment of the mission. The government may choose to tolerate it to a point, but it doesn't have to.
 
Interesting and I agree with that because I think the disrespect was unconscionable. But I am loathe to take away a person's right to express a wrong opinion
So how does being on gov't propery change things. People can protest at the capitiol and wh
 

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top