…and this is a 
This is the start of a big film project by Conceptual Guerilla: he's attending events by acolytes of Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck, teabagging (just the name is good for a giggle) parties and such, and simply recording their own words. It's a weird combination of certainty and ignorance, and as you'll see, these are ordinary people, Americans just like your neighbors and co-workers, and they're nuts.
Formally, I suppose this is going to be a documentary, but the effect is somewhere between a bad comedy movie and a psychological horror film.
Politics
Comments
Posted by: Brad Feaker | September 4, 2009 12:30 PM
Be afraid - be VERY afraid. And I thought the average IQ was going UP...
Posted by: F | September 4, 2009 12:33 PM
"the effect is somewhere between a bad comedy movie and a psychological horror film."
Sounds like "must see, but can't bear to watch" material.
Thanks for the heads-up.
/snort
Posted by: Fizzy | September 4, 2009 12:38 PM
Rush Said It, I Believe It, That Settles It
Posted by: 386sx | September 4, 2009 12:39 PM
So people will believe whatever people tell them. Nothing new about that! Especially when they're sore losers and other sore losers tell them things they want to hear.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | September 4, 2009 12:40 PM
Victoria Jackson-sounding woman:"Hhe's a Marxist...What is Marxism?"
Head go boom!
Posted by: Ken Cope | September 4, 2009 12:41 PM
The brainlessness on display is bad enough, but Lyle has got to lose that awful toy steel drum sound bed that he kept up through the entire video. He may as well have played cuckoo clocks over and over, and it still wouldn't have sounded as insane as the morons he had on camera.
Posted by: AJ Milne | September 4, 2009 12:44 PM
I haven't been able to click 'Play' yet. Between PZ's description and--well--the still that's showing in the player--I haven't quite got up the nerve yet.
(/Sounds to me like it's a two drinks minimum before clicking, finish the bottle in the first ten minutes kinda thing...)
Posted by: BeezleBob | September 4, 2009 12:45 PM
I agree with Ken Cope. I couldn't watch the whole thing because the continuous 'steel drum' in the background was really starting to irritate me.
Posted by: Islander | September 4, 2009 12:45 PM
Until yesterday I hadn't heard what Rush said about Ted Kennedy the day after he died. How anyone can listen to that hateful pile of stupid is beyond me, but I am truly bewildered when I hear bigots like Ann Coulter and Hannity complain about a "double standard" they're supposedly held to. It takes the shield of right wing fundamentalism to get away with the shit they do.
Can't wait to see the film, hopefully it will be as good as Outfoxed.
Posted by: Spocko | September 4, 2009 12:46 PM
That was action-packed!
Posted by: Dancaban | September 4, 2009 12:46 PM
The internet is a real disaster for non-thinkers.
Posted by: Psychodigger | September 4, 2009 12:47 PM
The government of your country may have improved dramatically (even allowing for the Obama administration not being able to live up to all it´s promises, and how could it possibly be worse than the last one anyway), but boy, do the US harbour an awful lot of stupid, ignorant, selfabsorbed bigots! I mean, the Netherlands, where I come from, know their share of morons, but they thankfully never aggregate in largish numbers (except for soccer matches and of course the EO-jongerendag, but please don´t ask about that). These people need to learn their place and shut up, or try to read beyond the soundbites.
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
September 4, 2009 12:48 PM
I'm waiting for them to get the collective nerve to just come out and say what they really mean--"There's a black man in the White House!" ("And he wants to talk to our kids in school!!!!!!!")
Posted by: aratina cage
|
September 4, 2009 12:50 PM
I thought the first person he was talking to was Victoria Jackson from Saturday Night Live. Hilarious. And Florida is full of nutters. You should have seen it before the election. Hmm, it's almost like the election never happened for the people in the documentary, like they still have a choice. The next three years are going to be interesting.
Posted by: afreudtolove | September 4, 2009 12:51 PM
That wasn't nearly as satisfying as I thought it would be.
Posted by: John | September 4, 2009 12:51 PM
The drum! Make is stop!
Posted by: McCorvic
|
September 4, 2009 12:52 PM
I like how the second the guy tried to explain the point to the "tax but not a tax!" lady she started to freak out. You can almost SEE her brain collapsing in on itself.
And damn you President Wilson for prolonging the Depression from beyond the grave! DAMMMMMN YOOOUUUU!
Posted by: Sara | September 4, 2009 12:58 PM
Um. I don't know what's more ridiculous, the ignorance, the Angry Voices of Outrage, or the smug, self-satisfied smiles *facepalm*
From an European perspective, this is sort of scary, though.
Posted by: NitricAcid | September 4, 2009 12:58 PM
It might actually have been Victoria Jackson. Once an SNL comic, now a political nutter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Jackson
"She has subsequently compared Obama to Hitler and said he wants to kill babies and old people."
Posted by: NixNoctua
|
September 4, 2009 1:02 PM
Did anyone else notice the woman with the video camera? What was that about?
Posted by: truthspeaker | September 4, 2009 1:02 PM
While there is undoubtedly a racial component to this, remember how they treated Clinton. He was accused of all kinds of crazy things, including trying to set up socialized medicine and raising taxes on "working Americans", but also that he made a secret trip to the Soviet Union during the Vietnam War.
Posted by: Yubal
|
September 4, 2009 1:03 PM
# 1
The average IQ is always 100, that is how IQ is defined. If people (in the test group) get smarter (or dumber), the center value of the Gaussian distribution is re-set to 100 with a standard deviation of 15.
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 1:03 PM
Too much percussion.
Posted by: Jojo | September 4, 2009 1:04 PM
I'm not sure which was more painful. The stoopid or the drums.
Posted by: Bob O'H | September 4, 2009 1:05 PM
I quite liked the drums.
Posted by: Bappi | September 4, 2009 1:06 PM
It's this kind of stupidity that has me considering moving back to Europe. We haven't made our final decision yet, but I'm hoping to make the move next June, when our kids get out of school.
Posted by: Reader5000 | September 4, 2009 1:09 PM
So, then, how do you get people to think when they don't bother to? How much of their nonsense is simple regurgitation of political propaganda? How much of it comes from a cultural identification with their in-group, which would persist even without the propaganda?
You need to figure out why they are like this before you can figure out a cure.
Hofstadter:
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/conspiracy_theory/the_paranoid_mentality/the_paranoid_style.html
Altemeyer:
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
Posted by: tytalus | September 4, 2009 1:12 PM
Needs more cowbell.
Still, an interesting demonstration of how the wealthy fool the poor into thinking taxes will apply to them when they don't. I wondered how that works.
Posted by: ernieball | September 4, 2009 1:14 PM
From over here (Europe) the seemingly organized dishonesty in the US never ceases to amaze, and somewhat scare me...
Posted by: Walton | September 4, 2009 1:15 PM
Is the host's accent really real, or is he exaggerating it for comic effect?
Posted by: Alyson Miers | September 4, 2009 1:19 PM
I find it hilarious that we're hearing accusations of Obama "brainwashing" kids and creating a "cult of personality" from the people who hang on Rush Limbaugh's and Sarah Palin's every word.
Though, come to think of it, if you consider Sarah Palin a good role model, I can imagine that letting a cool, likeable, kid-popular guy like Obama tell your children to work hard and stay in school would be terrifying.
Posted by: Snarly Old Fart | September 4, 2009 1:21 PM
I stuck it out to 06:01, which is big of me. Whatever points the maker was going after, the incessant steel drum made me want to take a sledgehammer to his teeth.
In general, to anyone making a video: Don't crap up a sound track if there is voice on it you want people hearing. If you are certain it needs music, try evidence-based decisions: let people compare the two versions -- no music-over-voice to voice-crapped-on-by-music -- to see which they like better.
Posted by: joe agnost | September 4, 2009 1:21 PM
tytalus: "Needs more cowbell."
You owe me a new keyboard! :)
You sure do have some serious issues down there in America... this disturbs me as much as creationism. The idea that the sitting president SHOULDN'T talk to the students of America is so utterly ridiculous! I don't think people would believe you if they couldn't see the evidence for themselves.
Posted by: daveau
|
September 4, 2009 1:23 PM
Be careful what you wish for. When the drums stop, the bass solo begins.
Posted by: Ray Ingles | September 4, 2009 1:25 PM
Those are surely wingnuts, but you gotta be careful drawing conclusions from them. As Larry Niven put it, "There is no cause so noble that it will not attract some kooks." For example, I'm sure a lot of New Age woomeisters voted for Obama.
What would be nice is some documentation of the prevalence of lunacy among the supporters of various policies and candidates.
Posted by: MikeTheInfidel | September 4, 2009 1:26 PM
I think I've got this whole thing figured out.
Teabaggers and birthers aren't wrong; they're from an alternate universe where Obama really was born in Kenya and the Great Depression really was solved by giving tax breaks to corporations and not by creating government employment and empowerment programs (no thanks to President Wilson).
Back when they first tried to fire up the LHC, the two universes temporarily merged, just long enough for some people to move between them.
Posted by: Carole | September 4, 2009 1:33 PM
I had to look up "teabaggers" as I had no idea what this meant - ended up in Urban Dictionary - I'm even more confused than I was before. Blimey.
Posted by: Alyson Miers | September 4, 2009 1:33 PM
@36:
But, the "death panel" rumors didn't start up until well after the LHC went into operation, so where did THAT come from? Or is the LHC still holding open the portal between different universes?
Posted by: chris | September 4, 2009 1:34 PM
Wow being in Japan has made me miss all the fun in my home city. Im so glad im not in Orlando anymore, I'm visiting in December. Hopefully I dont have to deal with this stuff. I didn't recognize anyone in the video which I'm thankful for.
Posted by: Thorne | September 4, 2009 1:34 PM
@Dancaban #11: "The internet is a real disaster for non-thinkers."
No, it's a real nightmare for those who want to manipulate non-thinkers. The worst thing you can possibly do to those manipulators is give people factual information. The internet makes the dissemination of that information far easier than it has ever been in history.
Sadly, it also makes the dissemination of MIS-information just as easy, so the non-thinkers can still be manipulated, especially when you tell them, "This is all you need to know!"
Posted by: Dean | September 4, 2009 1:34 PM
I have to say the 'teabagger' label sounds like boths sides are in a race to the bottom of discourse. So a 'documentarian' looks for ignorant wingnuts and finds them. It might have been more watchable if he had looked for the most reasonable and articulate spokesperson...and it might have been more telling.
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
September 4, 2009 1:36 PM
I passed the point where the steel drum was annoying, and kinda liked it near the end. But my wife tells me I listen to noise anyway. I can't help it. I loves me some Radiohead.
I so much wish we could call all of them traitors for not following the President. Not because I think it's true, but because I got so fucking tired of hearing that about me, when I didn't support going to war back in 2002-2003, and didn't support the war after. And then when I opposed torture: I was sure they were going to come up with something more foul than "traitor."
I guess I just wish I was a hypocrite, like them. Why won't my atheistic lack of morals allow me to be a hypocrite Why?!!111!??
Posted by: MikeTheInfidel | September 4, 2009 1:36 PM
@38,
Don't ask me. Ask those sneaky bastards at CERN. I bet they know all about it, what with their black holes and strangelets.
Posted by: No More Mr. Nice Guy! | September 4, 2009 1:44 PM
Do all women in Orlando sound like Lisa Simpson?
Posted by: JRD | September 4, 2009 1:52 PM
"The average IQ is always 100, that is how IQ is defined. If people (in the test group) get smarter (or dumber), the center value of the Gaussian distribution is re-set to 100 with a standard deviation of 15."
Not exactly. Google the "Flynn effect." It's true that the scores are recalibrated every few years to account for the shift, but it's also true that the numbers show a steady upward trend (and, except recently after a recalibration, the average IQ is actually a bit over 100.)
Posted by: Jim Cahill | September 4, 2009 1:55 PM
Al Franken seemed to handle these people pretty well at the Minnesota State Fair: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCNs7Zpqo98
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 1:56 PM
It might have been more watchable if he had looked for the most reasonable and articulate spokesperson - Dean
Oh, I think he probably did.
Posted by: Alyson Miers | September 4, 2009 1:57 PM
Only tangentially related, but here's Round 2 between Bill O'Reilly and Amsterdam. First called a "cesspool of corruption," now labeled "Disneyland for THOSE people." Sounds good to me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpU0NxPhA78&feature=player_embedded
Posted by: Epikt | September 4, 2009 1:59 PM
Dean:
This is the republican base. The "reasonable and articulate" people have been marginalized or purged from the party.
Posted by: Traveler | September 4, 2009 1:59 PM
I don't attribute their hate and paranoia to there being a black in the White House. I'm sure they would be just as bad if Clinton had won the Democratic nomination and the presidency. I think it's more a result of them believing the Repubs had some sort of divine right to rule. The Dems must have usurped that though some sort of evil and nefarious means.
As for someone's comment that nothing could be worse than the last administration, just wait for the "Cheney/Bachmann 2012" bumper stickers. See if that doesn't make you nostalgic for Bush.
Posted by: F | September 4, 2009 2:00 PM
"toy steel drum"
Creatards Gone Wild!
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
September 4, 2009 2:06 PM
Just in time, there is a Slashdot link to this wonderful article about Unschooling, which is essentially not schooling at all.
When did we become a society that despises intellect and education? When did our desire to isolate ourselves from the real world cause us to desire incestuous education? What are we doing, trying to make sure our kids grow up as stupid and ignorant as we are?
Fuckity-fuck, this whole issue drives me nuts. It makes me miss the '50s. Not for the family values myth, or anything like that, but because we seemed to actually encourage our kids to learn, to study science.
We're raising a generation of teabaggers, crystal gazers, and woo-quaffers.
Grue protect us all.
Posted by: NH | September 4, 2009 2:09 PM
The astroturf is on the LEFT comrades... sorry to tell you that.
No one is funding the tea party movement.
Why should they talk to you?
Don't worry we know what Marxism is and we know Obama beleives in it as well as all the pukes who surround him...
DISGUSTING!
Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | September 4, 2009 2:11 PM
#53
Rush? Is that you?
Posted by: Steve_C | September 4, 2009 2:16 PM
Speaking if incredibly stupid.
Bachmann: Dems Are Sabotaging Me Because I Might Become President
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/bachmann-dems-are-sabotaging-me-because-i-might-become-president.php?ref=fpblg
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
September 4, 2009 2:17 PM
NH,
OMG, you are right. Why didn't I see it before? The health care bill does have provisions for death panels, even though nothing like that is mentioned in the bill itself. There is a tax that is called something not a tax, even though the wording of the bill itself says something different entirely. Herr Obama really does want to brainwash our children into studying and working hard, when they should be home playing on their PS3 or XBox.
His policies are so Marxist, I can't even begin to describe it. Even though there's no overt Marxist action, nor Marxist policy, nor any evidence of Marxism at all, except telling our kids to work hard.
Thank you for opening my eyes. They were blinded by the Satanic charisma that emanates from the man in waves, hypnotizing the weak-minded sheep, and the Satanists (which includes atheists).
Now I regret voting for him. If only he kept up the torture, and war in Iraq, and otherwise been more like Bush!
Posted by: daveau
|
September 4, 2009 2:19 PM
NH@53
Semantics, is it? OK: sponsoring and promoting the teabaggers, then.
Not enough CAPS. Are you sure you're a real troll?
Posted by: gaypaganunitarianagnostic | September 4, 2009 2:23 PM
Assassination,
Coup,
revolution,
There will be blood
Posted by: Joe Bob | September 4, 2009 2:26 PM
The drums didn't bother me. The narrator/interviewer's fake hick accent is atrocious, though.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | September 4, 2009 2:26 PM
NH,
How does Z.O.G. fit into all of this?
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 2:27 PM
Don't worry we know what Marxism is - NH
Teach us then, o wise one - give us a brief rundown of the main points of Marxist theory. Then tell us how you know Obama is a Marxist.
Posted by: IaMoL | September 4, 2009 2:28 PM
That is is his real accent.Posted by: JimmyfromChicago | September 4, 2009 2:33 PM
I disagree. Being non-thinkers, they're not concerned with factual information. Think "dining-room table."
Posted by: Mena | September 4, 2009 2:33 PM
Everything in the US is bigger and better, isn't it? We can't be satisfied with having a sucker born every minute nowadays, we have gone to it being every 30-45 seconds. Gawd bless America!
Posted by: Joe Bob | September 4, 2009 2:37 PM
@62 Listen to him at 8:30 when he's not exaggerating it. That sounds natural to me. The rest doesn't.
Posted by: Gyeong Hwa Pak | September 4, 2009 2:39 PM
Der Troll nennt NH:
If according to your rhetoric, Marxism=Nazism, then
it seems to me that you have NO clue what Marxism is.
Posted by: Dan | September 4, 2009 2:43 PM
From now on, let us refer to Rush fans as megadildoes.
Posted by: blondin | September 4, 2009 2:49 PM
And just what have you got against Groucho, anyways?
Posted by: Heidi | September 4, 2009 2:51 PM
No kidding. I read the other day that there are righties who actually want Dick to run. *shudder*
Posted by: rath | September 4, 2009 2:56 PM
Is this some sort of internet meme I have been missing, writing "Glenn Beck" with only one n?
Posted by: strange gods bless 'merica | September 4, 2009 2:56 PM
I think Joe Bob is right. The guy does have a Southron accent, but he is drawing it out on purpose. However, I don't think he is doing it to sound comical. A lot of folks on the radio in the South do this, and it may be that he is just trying to sound like them, because "that's what you're supposed to sound like on the radio."
Posted by: Zetetic
|
September 4, 2009 2:57 PM
@ Brad Freaker:
LOL! Unfortunately there is no correlation between intelligence and rationality.
NH ditto'ed @ #53:
Oh Really?
West Virginia GOP group funding 'tea parties'
Posted by: Benjamin Geiger | September 4, 2009 3:01 PM
Eeesh. Orlando is one of the more progressive parts of Florida. Lakeland is even 'redder', and Bartow (where I live) is 'redder' still.
I'm strongly considering moving to, say, Gainesville (home of the University of Florida)... or even Tampa.
Posted by: Islander | September 4, 2009 3:11 PM
From Zetetic #72's link:
"Is this an anti-Obama movement? From my standpoint and my organization's standpoint, it is not. This is an anti-big government movement," said Mike Stuart, a former state GOP official who leads the foundation. "There are as many Democrats, or more, as there are Republicans involved in this effort."
The story hasn't changed since day 1. "It's not a republican rally, I promise!! It's just that republican congressmen give us money and FOX runs ads for us, that's all!!" As many dems, if not more? Friggin' hilarious.
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
September 4, 2009 3:14 PM
Say, that was nice. It remains to be seen how good a politician he is, but that was actually relaxing to listen to.
Posted by: Meathead | September 4, 2009 3:22 PM
I had the misfortune to live in Orlando for some years and I can tell you these people sound exactly like all my neighbors and coworkers. This is just ordinary mainstream Orlando talking and its one big reason I left.
Posted by: jeronimusrex | September 4, 2009 3:30 PM
I made it to 4:35 (when the lady was talking about Woodrow Wilson as the President during the Great Depression) and then had to stop. First I winced when she identified Wilson as the president during the depression, then I recoiled in pain when she suggested tax cuts ended the depression. By the time she started talking about bridges blood was already streaking from my eyes and ears.
I'm pretty sure if I had been wearing 3-D glasses I would have been struck dead by such profound stupidity.
Posted by: Stagyar zil Doggo | September 4, 2009 3:31 PM
Ugh! Not a fan of "exclusion of judicial review" type shit; for anything. Tis a flagstone on the path to a Unitary Executive.
Posted by: RyanH
|
September 4, 2009 3:32 PM
Hopefully the actual documentary is a bit more professional and less condescending than that clip was. However, I appreciate what he was doing. Obviously it's impossible to counter every untrue claim about health care, but supporters need to do a better job of responding to these inanities with specific, point-by-point fact checks like this guy has done. I am from rural southwestern Pennsylvania, very red territory, and both of my parents are staunch conservatives, avid Limbaugh/Beck fans and volunteers for a local tea party which, coincidentally, is happening this evening. I have these arguments almost daily with them, correcting one falsehood after another. Granted it hasn't shaken their core belief that government is always bad no matter what unless we're allowing it to kill, imprison, and spy on people, but it's given them something to think about and changed their arguments.
The hilarious thing to me about so much of this debate is that these people who are so up in arms about these supposed atrocities the government is hiding in the health care bill probably have no problems with these things now. For example, how many people allow Netflix to automatically debit their account each month? I know I do. Why is a faceless corporation more desirable/trustworthy than a duly elected and responsive government? How many of these people have probably had a loved one in hospice care or have a living will, but are up in arms about "death panels"? This guy's goals are admirable, but I'd like to see him approach it a bit less like Michael Moore.
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
September 4, 2009 3:38 PM
Living in Florida, it’s easy to get skewed into thinking that all right-wingers are dumb-as-rocks-racists. A whole lot of them are, no denying it, but not all of them are driven by it. If Hilary had been elected, I don’t for a moment doubt that similar attacks on her would have been just as relentless and vicious. If anything, she commands less respect overall from the far right than Obama does. But I still think there is a strong racist undercurrent through pretty much the whole group. This ain’t their grandparent’s America, and it has them unnerved.
Posted by: Meathead | September 4, 2009 4:01 PM
Aristotle was not Belgian, the principle of Buddhism is not “every man for himself”, and the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up.
Posted by: varlo | September 4, 2009 4:03 PM
Only slightly OT, I wonder what the Birthers and other Obamaphobes will make of the shocking fact that the mint is now putting BLACK MUSICIANS on our coins. (We picked up a roll of quarters at the bank this morning and they turned out to be the new issue with Duke Ellington on the back side.) But surely anyone stupid enough to shelter their children from a talk urging studying and staying in school will find it the ultimate proof of their fears. Please, please, rapture these idiots away NOW.
Posted by: DemetriusOfPharos | September 4, 2009 4:09 PM
@NH: Sweet Zombie Jesus man, what the hell are you talking about?
@No More Mr. Nice Guy: Hey, HEY! Lisa Simpson is a thoughtful, intelligent individual and I resent you comparing her to those right-wing nutjobs! :)
@blondin: Groucho was a hack - Harpo was the brains.
Posted by: Tuck | September 4, 2009 4:16 PM
This is a very cheap kind of thrill. Take a camara to any kind of political rally, and you can accomplish the same results. Something about political rallys draws idiots of all stripes.
(Recall the viral video during the election of the woman on the street saying she was voting for Obama so she would no longer have to pay for food or gas)
Posted by: DS | September 4, 2009 4:18 PM
Humm, sort of like the people walking around with Che t-shirts who have no idea what they are promoting, huh?
Yes, it's always fun to point and laugh, but there are just as much nut-jobs on both sides of the fence.
Posted by: MaxH
|
September 4, 2009 4:20 PM
My FSM, when she said President Wilson extended the Depression, I about DIED LAUGHING.
Posted by: tsg | September 4, 2009 4:21 PM
Tu Quoque. And a false equivalency at that...
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 4:23 PM
Yes, it's always fun to point and laugh, but there are just as much nut-jobs on both sides of the fence. - DS.
Nope.
Posted by: Dania
|
September 4, 2009 4:27 PM
Huh. President Wilson prolonged the Great Depression? Wow...
It seems that I know more about the history of the USA than some* Americans. And I'm not American, nor do I have a special interest in history.
Isn't that a little weird?
*most? I sincerely hope not...
Posted by: Desert Son, OM
|
September 4, 2009 4:28 PM
RamblinDude,
Good point; this kind of thing always puzzles me.
Attention Romanticizers of the Past: I like flights of fancy and movies and books about the past, too, but let's try to remember what life was like back in our various grandparents' days, shall we?
Institutionalized racism! Women without the right to vote! Economic depression! Dustbowl agriculture! Polio! No clean air standards! Poor water quality! No telecommunications!
How much would you expect to pay for this fabulous trip into the past? Well don't answer yet, because there's more!
Poor dental hygiene! Extensive tuberculosis! More limited medical care! Union busting! Wool clothes in the summer! Slower travel! No air conditioning! World Wars! Eugenics! More limited access to education!
In addition to our nation's science education improvements, we need more people paying attention in history class. Gaaaaahhhh!
No kings,
Robert
Posted by: Carlie | September 4, 2009 4:39 PM
I can't bear to watch it yet, but is the background this kind of drum?
Posted by: Jorge | September 4, 2009 4:40 PM
Just think about this: The children/relatives of these folks could be serving in the US Armed Forces as pilots/submarine commanders & crew/nuke artillery and so forth. Nothing like having a bit of crazy on "the button", eh?
Posted by: fauxrs | September 4, 2009 4:50 PM
Well he needs to fire his sound mixer - between 150db blasts of steel drums and see-saw sound levels I most of the time couldnt hear the background talk of the emcee over the cacaphonous levels of the idjits he was interviewing
Posted by: griff | September 4, 2009 5:12 PM
These people are willfully ignorant. They believe Mayberry was a real place, because they want to believe it. the reality of multi-cultural, tolerant modernity scares them to death. It takes away their "special status" as white Christianists.
We should remember that scared people are dangerous.
Just sayin',
Griff
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 5:14 PM
nigelTheBold #52
Rather OT I know but I think this merits a response. Apologies for the length as well.
Just in time, there is a Slashdot link to this wonderful article about Unschooling, which is essentially not schooling at all.
Correct. It's not schooling. It is education though. It just doesn't happen in a school.
When did we become a society that despises intellect and education?
Some of us haven't. That's why we home school.
Fuckity-fuck, this whole issue drives me nuts. It makes me miss the '50s. Not for the family values myth, or anything like that, but because we seemed to actually encourage our kids to learn, to study science.
Would that be the same science my ten year old daughter studied yesterday. Covalent vs ionic bonding, s-shells, p-shells, all that good shit? Or even the the science we did a week or so ago when we studied acid-base reactions and cooked up some table salt in our little science shed. Or the science we did a couple of days ago when we were videoing the various organs in bdelloid rotifers. Or the science we did a couple of weeks ago when she worked out how much I weighed by getting me to walk back and forth on the teeter-totter at the local park until we balanced. Or the science we did when she was lecturing me on conservation of energy and conversions between chemical, potential, kinetic, thermal and acoustic energy on the swing set about ten minutes later. Or the science we did ten minutes after that when I explained how roller bearings were better suited to some applications than ball bearings. Or perhaps the science we did this morning when we met another group of home schoolers at the local climbing wall and did some hands on (or rather off) gravity investigation along with discussing the reasoning behind warming up and lactic acid build up in the forearms. Or the science we did on the way home when she watched Malcolm Gladwell's TED talk about spaghetti sauce. Or this afternoon when we were doing some archery at the local park and she was trying to work out the optimal angle to maximise the horizontal component of the arrow's trajectory. Or the science we did this evening when we talked about amino acids and the bonds involved in protein folding.
Show me a public school system that can provide that kind of science education to a ten year old and then you might have a case.
We're raising a generation of teabaggers, crystal gazers, and woo-quaffers.
You're kind of confusing causation and correlation. Home schooling isn't to blame here. It's nutters that are to blame. Home schooling is just the vehicle they frequently use to perpetuate their nuttery. That says nothing whatsoever about the ability of home schooling to provide an excellent education. Frankly I expected people here to know better.
I know there have been other comments on here that have been scathing of home schooling and I'm not picking on you in particular but this kind of stuff really, really pisses me off. The simple fact is the public school system, in the US as well as here in the UK, cannot cater adequately for a lot of children. Home schooling is no silver bullet, it has significant problems, some of which we personally have yet to fully overcome, but for us it's absolutely fantastic. Ten times as productive for half the work, a 90% reduction in boredom and a corresponding increase in "Whoa! Dad that is so cool!".
And shouldn't that be what education is about? Aren't we supposed to get our kids excited about learning? Aren't we supposed to enable them to think for themselves, to teach them to how to learn, to value learning and knowledge and the power that brings to them?
Put them in a school if you want them to learn mathematical recipes rather than grokking mathematical beauty or if you want them to be able to regurgitate Shakespearean quotations on demand like some intellectual Pavlovian puppy. Personally I say 'fuck dat shit'. Your brain's a CPU not RAM. That's why the good Lord gave us Google.
Posted by: MikeTheInfidel | September 4, 2009 5:38 PM
Forgive me, but I think that having a completely wrong view of the function of the brain isn't going to help.
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 5:40 PM
Put them in a school if you want them to learn mathematical recipes rather than grokking mathematical beauty or if you want them to be able to regurgitate Shakespearean quotations on demand like some intellectual Pavlovian puppy. - Mike Higginbottom
Mike,
You're being just as prejudiced against schools as some are against home schooling. You or your children may have had bad experiences, but they're not universal. I'll give you that I'm very glad to live in Scotland, where Sats are absent; but my son enjoys his school, gets a lot from it that my wife and I couldn't provide, and has undiminished curiosity and creativity.
Posted by: Tangent | September 4, 2009 5:40 PM
@#95:
Or if you don't want them to be a socially maladjusted freak.
Posted by: Numad | September 4, 2009 5:48 PM
Dean at 41,
"I have to say the 'teabagger' label sounds like boths sides are in a race to the bottom of discourse."
How so? 'Teabagger' is an unfortunate label with derogatory tones, but the people who came up with it were on the "side" to which it's applied.
Posted by: MikeTheInfidel | September 4, 2009 5:51 PM
Tangent said:
And that's the really important part. If you think school is just about education, you're sorely mistaken. Keeping your kids at home because you think all they need during their adolescence is a proper education is going to be incredibly damaging to their social skills.Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 6:00 PM
@#96 I am aware that brains don't work like computers. It was an analogy to make the point that learning bald facts is of little relevance these days unless learning those facts makes one's life more pleasurable or efficient in some way. This was less the case twenty or fifty years ago. Schools have not caught up yet.
Posted by: salix | September 4, 2009 6:03 PM
Thanks, Mike Higginbottom @ 95 --
Homeschooling rocks! Just because there are families that use it to isolate their kids from evil secular influences, that doesn't mean it can't be a fantastic way to learn for those of us who are into it for entirely different reasons. Our homeschooling community here in Canada is quite secular, enthusiastic, and includes about 200 highly involved families (so no, the kids don't necessarily turn into, what was it, "socially maladjusted freak(s)"?)
Sure, schools can provide an education -- even a great one, if you're lucky in your location and your school board and the teachers you get. But before you tar all homeschoolers with the same fundie-brush, maybe consider a different perspective. Thanks.
Posted by: MikeM | September 4, 2009 6:11 PM
These people love to put their ignorance on display, and frankly, I'm even madder about their objections to Obama's planned Sept 8 Back To School message.
We knew it'd happen, though. Those people who showed up at Palin speeches? We knew they weren't going away, didn't we?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/04/obama.schools/index.html
People who call Obama a "Nazi-Stalinist-Marxist"... I have a term for them: Clueless.
Damn, and they vote with those things.
I don't remember have any objections to GHW Bush giving a similar message in 1991.
Posted by: Alan C | September 4, 2009 6:17 PM
Cheney?! That craven bald turd of a man effectively has been already, for two terms.
"
When did we become a society that despises intellect and education? When did our desire to isolate ourselves from the real world cause us to desire incestuous education? What are we doing, trying to make sure our kids grow up as stupid and ignorant as we are?
Fuckity-fuck, this whole issue drives me nuts. It makes me miss the '50s. Not for the family values myth, or anything like that, but because we seemed to actually encourage our kids to learn, to study science.
We're raising a generation of teabaggers, crystal gazers, and woo-quaffers.
Grue protect us all."
I have to agree with this. I don't live in the US, I don't mean to sound snarky but things like this make me glad I don't. However, I do have relatives there and I worry that they have to deal with this insanity.
re the home-school anecdote, I thought that was interesting. However, I think that not all parents would be qualified to give quality education like that.
Posted by: Pete | September 4, 2009 6:26 PM
Interesting, I don't see the homeschooling fight erupt much on liberal blogs. As usual, both sides are exaggerating their case. If you would listen to the passionate home schoolers, anyone who gets a public education will graduate a complete dumb ass who likely won't be able to read. If you would listen to the public school supporters anyone who is home schooled will have exactly zero social skills and likely struggle to effectively communicate through a grocery store check out line.
In reality every situation will be different. Some children will do fine in public school, some will excel and benefit from leaning beside their piers. Some kids would do better in a smaller more focused environment and some kids can't learn in any environment. Some parents enjoy the homeschooling enviorment, some parents are not very good teachers and some simply don't want to spend all day with their kids. We're all different, its okay. We don't need to be threatened by the choices of others.
I used to have a strong stereotype that home school children were weird. To be sure, they were weird, but it wasn't because they were home schooled, it was because their parents were weird. In a culture were home schooling was very rare if parents found this the best option they were probably pretty different to begin with. Things are a lot different in this day and age.
Posted by: Gregory Greenwood | September 4, 2009 6:26 PM
Essentially, the helium-voiced woman seems to be saying;
'Obama's like kinda a Socialist. And Socialism is kinda like Marxism. And Marxism is bad. Dang, if only I knew what Marxism was!'
It is hard to believe anyone that stupid could actually function in society. Maybe she earns a living using her voice as a dog whistle?
Unfortunately, confused animosity like that on display in this video is hardly uncommom in the USA. The Obama critics in the States cannot seem to make up their collective mind as to which political extreme the President is supposed to belong to. He has been accused of being both a Communist and a Neo-Nazi in almost the same breath by some of his more hysterical critics. The funniest part being that they actually seem to think that the two terms are interchangeable. Apparently, he's a damned Fasci-Commie(tm). In addition, he is a closet Muslim (his middle name is Hussein, what more proof does a watcher of Faux News need?).
As we all know only too well, many fundies appear to believe that there is somekind of unholy alliance between muslims and atheists. Indeed atheists have been accused of trying to propagate Islam in the US. So, according to the 'logic' of these people, Obama must a Fasci-Commie Godless Muslim Fundamentalist Terrorist. Who knows, he might be a polytheist too.
This is clearly the end of civilisation as we know it. The sky scrapers have already begun to fall, and cities have already begun to flood in a pre-emptive expression of holy sky fairy wrath. The economic depression is just the latest expression of his fit of godly pique. All because those damned Fasci-Commie, Godless, Muslim Fundamentalist, Polytheist Liberals voted a Black man into the White House.
If the above paragraph makes no sense to you, it is because you are not paranoid and deluded enough. And since you are either with us or agin us, that makes you one of them . . . (que scary music. Just so long as it is not anymore of those damned drums.)
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 6:27 PM
@#97
You're being just as prejudiced against schools as some are against home schooling.
Not at all. My wife has worked in primary education for (ahem) years in both the state and private sector and my mother was a teacher for (ahem) even more years so I know first hand that teachers do a great job and that schools do a great job.
But they certainly aren't perfect and even if they did the best possible job they could in theory, the fact that a teacher has to bring a wide spectrum of interest and ability levels up to meet specific educational knowledge thresholds means both ends of the bell curve end up disenfranchised. The slow ones get left behind and the quick ones get bored.
Couple that with the drivers that teachers and schools operate under and it's easy to see how they have no choice but to prepare pupils for the next year's input and/or the next government or industry requested test. Teaching deep understanding and interconnection is a long term strategy that does not have any short-term payback. Teaching facts and recipes is the only practical method available to teachers to meet their targets.
You or your children may have had bad experiences, but they're not universal.
Not really. Of course, all parents and all children have bad experiences in many things in life but my daughter's school was a fantastic school. Much, much better than most. Home education has turned out to be better.
but my son enjoys his school
My daughter enjoyed her school too. But we keep asking her if she wants to go back and every time we get "No way". It's her call and it will continue to be her call. The fact is she enjoys home ed more.
gets a lot from it that my wife and I couldn't provide
Like what? Genuine question.
and has undiminished curiosity and creativity.
Compared to what? My daughter's curiosity and creativity has increased since she left school. It was beginning to nose dive in school. Of course, it's horses for courses but I get really pissed off when people criticise home schooling across the board.
Posted by: Jessa | September 4, 2009 6:30 PM
I was annoyed at first by the steel drums, too. Then I realized that it was playing the Limbo song. When you consider the contorted reality that these people obviously live in, the song really fits.
Posted by: JefFlyingV | September 4, 2009 6:35 PM
Gregory, you left out the militant urban Christian from Chi-town.
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 6:43 PM
@#100
And that's the really important part. If you think school is just about education, you're sorely mistaken. Keeping your kids at home because you think all they need during their adolescence is a proper education is going to be incredibly damaging to their social skills.
Absolutely agree. But I thought strawmen were frowned upon here.
Of course home schoolers don't think school is just about education. In fact, one of the main reasons people home school is because school is not a good model for the wider world. How many adults spend their working day interacting with people who are all the same age as them?
The fact is home educated kids are generally better socialised than school kids. They interact with other kids their own age (yes we don't lock them in the basement with a candle and a dictionary all day) as well as with younger kids, babies, older kids, and adults of all ages, backgrounds and outlooks. The social life of a home ed kid is way richer than most people imagine and is usually richer than that of a non-home educated child.
Of course this all takes some effort and it's obviously safe to say that home ed kids don't spend as much time with their peer group as school kids do but phrases such as "socially maladjusted freak" just bespeak a huge degree of ignorance and massive lack of thought.
Posted by: Gregory Greenwood | September 4, 2009 6:45 PM
JefFlyingV @ 109;
"Gregory, you left out the militant urban Christian from Chi-town."
How could I make such a rudimentary omission unless . . . Obama has got to me too and I didn't even realise it? Dear Sky Fairy no, no it can't be! Am I becoming an idiot savant? Am I on the path to Fasci-Commiedom myself? He's so damn insidious, you almost have to admire him. Oh Holy Spirit of Woo, now I am admiring the Pious Muslim, Godless, Fasci-Commie, polytheist, militant urban Christian from Chi-town anti-Christ. Gaarrrghhh!
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | September 4, 2009 6:47 PM
as much as I understand the point of homeschooling rather than sending kids to a public school (if I had kids and were forced to raise them in the U.S., I would likely succumb to doing that, too), but it's such a... limited solution. it's helping exactly one kid(or however many kids you happen to have)!
Yeah, the way public school works is antiquated by now, but it needs fixing so that all of society can benefit. I was one of those kids who was bored stupid in school, even though it was all AP; but here's the thing: my mom wouldn't have been able to do any better. Homeschooling would have never been a solution, and it's not a solution for too many people. Fixing public schools to reflect the fact that this is the 21st century, not the 19th, would help sooo many more students, and eventually society as a whole.
but when the best and brightest and most suited to work towards this change can just disconnect... well then nothing is ever going to improve, is it? :-(
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 6:54 PM
Mike Higginbottom,
I said "You're being just as prejudiced against schools as some are against home schooling.", because you said:
Put them in a school if you want them to learn mathematical recipes rather than grokking mathematical beauty or if you want them to be able to regurgitate Shakespearean quotations on demand like some intellectual Pavlovian puppy. - Mike Higginbottom
This is just bullshit, and I stand by what I said.
"gets a lot from it that my wife and I couldn't provide"
Like what? Genuine question.
Oh, the school concert band he's in, which gained the highest grade in a UK-wide competiton last year. Tuition in technical drawing, which is essential to his career ambitions but in which neither of us is competent. The science labs. The pride he has in his school and in contributing to it.
My daughter's curiosity and creativity has increased since she left school. It was beginning to nose dive in school.
Well, my son's hasn't. Which rather confirms that we've had different experiences.
I get really pissed off when people criticise home schooling across the board.
Well then perhaps you might refrain from doing the same in reverse.
Posted by: No BS | September 4, 2009 7:11 PM
I like the military veteran of twenty years complaining about the government taking his health care away.
Where the fuck did he think his health care came from when he was in the military? Blue cross blue shield?
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
September 4, 2009 7:17 PM
As soon as I heard about Wilson prolonging the Great Depression I had to shut it off.
Incidentally, the accent is typical Northern Florida. There are enough Yankee retirees living in South Florida that it's a part of the North. Northern Florida is Baja Georgia.
Posted by: ChrisE | September 4, 2009 7:18 PM
I like the German approach to homeschooling. (fines, loss of costudy, jail)
Posted by: truebutnotuseful | September 4, 2009 7:18 PM
Mike Higginbottom wrote @#110:
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 7:20 PM
@#104
However, I think that not all parents would be qualified to give quality education like that.
For sure. I just happen to be a bit of a geek on the maths and science front so she gets a ton of really good stuff there. I'm crap at other stuff though.
But one of the main things about home schooling is that most kids don't need to be taught stuff. They just need to be helped to learn it. In fact, as far as I can tell, that's what the best teachers do. It's about helping the kids to learn and show off what they've learned. It's not about the teacher showing how much he or she knows.
The other advantage parents have is that they don't need to be seen to know everything. Teachers are supposed to know what they're teaching. Parents can just say, "I have no idea why the sky is blue. Fire up Google son. I feel a learning experience coming on."
Noodling about round a subject in that way is actually a very efficient way of learning stuff. You just tend to end up learning a lot of stuff that you didn't intend to learn when you started. But it all helps to build connections within and between different areas of knowledge and that helps when it comes to learning other stuff later on because there's already some kind of a framework of understanding in place.
That "I don't know." is tremendously liberating for kids as well. They realise that it's OK not to know stuff. What's not OK is not bothering to find out about stuff that matters to them.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that most parents think they can't be a professional teacher when in fact they don't need to be a professional teacher.
Posted by: Fred The Hun | September 4, 2009 7:21 PM
Pete @ 105,
Would that be in Sailing 101?
Though I guess it would kinda depend on what exactly they're leaning on beside their piers...
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
September 4, 2009 7:24 PM
@Mike #95,
Absolutely. Homeschooling can be superior to the regular education system. Or not.
There is a direct correlation between parent involvement in education, and the quality of that education. I know that correlation is not causation; however, I suspect that the kinds of communities in which parents actively participate in the educational process are the same communities with kids interested in their own education.
I was educated in the public school system; I was studying biology from about the time I was 10 (my mom was a biology major around that time, and later went into education). I was fascinated with physics from the time I was 13, including studying quantum physics from the few books I could get the library to purchase. I was more responsible for my education than the school system.
Except it was the school system and my mom who interested me in these things in the first place.
I guess I didn't express my worries in my rant above. First, few parents have the knowledge necessary to teach their own children the breadth they will receive from the school system. Second, homeschooling is quite often used to keep kids from being exposed to certain ideas. My ex-wife homeschooled my daughter specifically to keep her from being exposed to evolution. Thirdly, it is parental involvement that is key; this is true whether a child is homeschooled, or attends public school. If the parent doesn't get involved, at least the public school actually attempts to teach.
Thirdly, and most importantly, parents who homeschool have removed themselves from the education system, when the system needs them the most. If our education system is broken, we need to fix it. The only way to fix it is for individuals to get involve and demand change. This starts with changing the way schools are funded (as there is huge iniquity even within the same school districts), the standards to which schools are held, and the methodology used in teaching.
I have known too many homeschooled children who neither have a good education, nor are socially prepared for adulthood. This can't be attributed to a faulty public school system.
I have also known homeschool graduates with excellent education.
We know public education can be excellent. There are schools that turn out consistently well-educated students. To turn our collective backs on the problem is simply to abdicate responsibility for our own society's education. And that's what homeschooling parents are doing: turning their backs on the problem, rather than attempting to help fix it.
In any case, too many parents see homeschooling (and now unschooling) as carte blanche to keep their kids from learning how to think for themselves. This is harmful to society, pure and simple.
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | September 4, 2009 7:28 PM
I'm trying to imagine my mom trying to be any kind of teacher to me. Considering that she even had to give up on the standard "mom waking the kids, making breakfast and sending them to school" thing because it always led to mutual snarling, I predict we would have killed each other in any attempt to teach me anything :-p
Posted by: Carlie | September 4, 2009 7:29 PM
I guess what I'm trying to say is that most parents think they can't be a professional teacher when in fact they don't need to be a professional teacher.
But they do need to be some kind of teacher. Knowing the subject material is at least a minimum, and sadly that isn't always the case. I can think of two examples of homeschooling within my own extended family where it failed miserably because the parents didn't know the subjects or how to teach them, and the kids are several grades behind where they should be.
That homeschooling free-form method isn't a cure-all for all children, either. You can't generalize the positive experiences to everyone. My son has Asperger's, and he works best in a very structured environment, with very clear rules and expectations and directions, and particularly needs as much interaction with as many other kids as possible to help reinforce his social skills. The kind of setup you're describing would send him into fits of frustration and anxiety and he wouldn't be able to concentrate on anything. Different kids do need different educational situations.
Posted by: tmaxPA | September 4, 2009 7:35 PM
I fear this, too, will grow on me. The facts, omg, the facts, they're... beautiful.
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 7:45 PM
@#113
This is just bullshit, and I stand by what I said.
OK. You win that one then.
Oh, the school concert band he's in, which gained the highest grade in a UK-wide competiton last year.
Sure. But it's not as though home schooled kids are excluded from joining bands.
Tuition in technical drawing, which is essential to his career ambitions but in which neither of us is competent.
See my earlier post. Home schooled kids learn how to teach themselves this stuff to a large extent. That's not to say there aren't barriers in place but they're not as insurmountable as most people think.
The science labs.
Setting up a science lab to take a child up to UK 'A' level standard (18 years old) costs a few hundred dollars. Again, it's a barrier but it's not insurmountable.
The pride he has in his school and in contributing to it.
Yep. But school is not the only social construct that a child can take pride in contributing to. You seem to be assuming that things like this would have to replaced exactly in order for the benefit to be realised. That's just not true.
Well, my son's hasn't. Which rather confirms that we've had different experiences.
Agreed. What's your point?
I get really pissed off when people criticise home schooling across the board.
Well then perhaps you might refrain from doing the same in reverse.
If you read the OP you'll find it wasn't me that started this. And if you read my subsequent posts you'll find I'm not continuing it either.
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 7:58 PM
@#116
I like the German approach to homeschooling. (fines, loss of costudy, jail)
I like the German approach to spelling. Far simpler than English don't you think? Sorry. Couldn't resist.
Posted by: Wowbagger, OM | September 4, 2009 8:02 PM
NigeltheBold, #120, wrote:
Well put. I'd never thought of it that way before.
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 8:04 PM
The fact is home educated kids are generally better socialised than school kids[citation needed].
Paula Rothermel, A Nation-wide Study of Home Education in Education Now: 25 Years of Home-Based Education, 2001
That's the one that usually gets trotted out. Google is your friend if you want more.
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 8:23 PM
Mike Higginbottom,
That "I don't know." is tremendously liberating for kids as well. They realise that it's OK not to know stuff.
Wow. This is industrial-grade smug. You really think my son doesn't ask me questions? Or that I don't say "I don't know", when I don't know?
it's not as though home schooled kids are excluded from joining bands.
Sure, but he gets a free instrument and free tuition. If we were earning less (as we would be) money for those might be hard to find.
That's not to say there aren't barriers in place but they're not as insurmountable as most people think.
So you admit there are barriers, but somehow we're not supposed to take this into account when weighing up the pros and cons.
Setting up a science lab to take a child up to UK 'A' level standard
Hmm, and I thought education wasn't supposed to be about just meeting an exam standard.
You seem to be assuming that things like this would have to replaced exactly in order for the benefit to be realised.
Where do you get off telling me what I assume? You asked a question, I answered it.
What's your point? - Mike Higginbottom
That you seem rather confused. Your daughter attended an excellent school, but her creativity and curiosity were withering? That's not an excellent school.
If you read the OP you'll find it wasn't me that started this.
Nor me; I'm sure home schooling is excellent in some cases, poor in others, just like the alternative. I'd not have got involved had it not been for your over-generalization about schools.
And if you read my subsequent posts you'll find I'm not continuing it either.
Hmm, now who's going to teach your daughter self-awareness?
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 8:24 PM
@#120
Agree with pretty much everything in your post.
Thirdly, and most importantly, parents who homeschool have removed themselves from the education system, when the system needs them the most. If our education system is broken, we need to fix it.
Yep. We considered this. On balance, the prospect of quite extensive damage to our daughter's education outweighed our sense of social conscience. Is that selfish? Possibly. But whilst I'm reasonably happy to make sacrifices on this sort of scale for others I don't think my daughter should have to. I'm afraid she comes first here.
Having said that it's interesting to note the general tone of the response I've received here where I've tried to point out the flaws in the education system. It's difficult to fix something when the stakeholders are opposed to the notion that it's broken.
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 8:27 PM
Having said that it's interesting to note the general tone of the response I've received here where I've tried to point out the flaws in the education system.
Could that have anything to do with the self-congratulation oozing from your every word?
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 8:42 PM
Wow. This is industrial-grade smug. You really think my son doesn't ask me questions? Or that I don't say "I don't know", when I don't know?
And this is weapons grade not reading what was posted.
So you admit there are barriers, but somehow we're not supposed to take this into account when weighing up the pros and cons.
Did I say that? Did you read the bits where I explicitly stated the opposite?
Hmm, and I thought education wasn't supposed to be about just meeting an exam standard.
Did I say that? Did you read the bits where I explicitly stated the opposite?
Your daughter attended an excellent school, but her creativity and curiosity were withering? That's not an excellent school.
Yes it is. School is not the right environment for her. That's kind of the whole point of this. I thought that was clear.
Hmm, now who's going to teach your daughter self-awareness?
Someone who is self-aware.
Posted by: Pete | September 4, 2009 8:52 PM
Let it go people. I'm sure you both are making sure your children get a good education. That another student might do better/worse/the same in a different environment need not reflect on your own choices.
Posted by: Ktesibios | September 4, 2009 8:55 PM
@ Mena- A while ago I looked up some numbers on the change in US population and birth rate since 1870, whence Hannum's "sucker born every minute" quote comes-
and it turns out that if you adjust for those there are now approximately 2.6 suckers born every minute.
Posted by: SC, OM | September 4, 2009 8:59 PM
There are elements of reason here, especially at the beginning. They could have been the start of a productive discussion of how some schools fail some children, why, and what are the most moral and effective responses to the problems among parents and others (which, of course, may vary). But then you presented a silly monolithic image of public schools and an arrogant simpleton's response to the alleged problems.
Posted by: maxamillion | September 4, 2009 9:00 PM
PZ needs to moderate these threads.
As usual most of the posts on this thread have nothing to do with the topic.
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 4, 2009 9:05 PM
So either your wife, or you'll be bringing in an outsider. Fair enough.
Posted by: SC, OM | September 4, 2009 9:07 PM
Posts unrelated to the topic?! Teh hooror! Yes, I'm sure PZ will get on that right away!
Posted by: Carlie | September 4, 2009 9:08 PM
Don't forget that there is also a huge amount of class privilege involved with homeschooling. You have to have one adult who is able to stay at home all the time with the child. They can't even be a work from home person, because so much time has to be (ought to be) devoted to actual teaching and supervising. And then, of course, the extra expense. Outfitting the home chemistry lab, renting instruments and paying for lessons, etc.
The one thing I see as a huge advantage schools have is in the area of special ed. Not even for every child, because there are too many districts that are strapped for support, and some kids really can't handle school, but for a lot of them, it's the teachers who first notice that the child is acting differently than average, when parents with a sample size of one or two might not know their child is an outlier. Schools (hopefully) have people who are trained specifically in diagnosing and dealing with special needs. My kid is pretty close to neurotypical, and he still had a social worker, a psychologist, an occupational therapist, and a physical therapist his first couple of years of school, and his brother had speech therapy. There's no way my husband or I could have given them that kind of therapy, or could have afforded for private providers to do so even though we have stellar health insurance (thanks, union!).
There simply is not a one size fits all approach to educating the 74 million kids in this country. We can agree on basic standards that education should meet, but blanket statements that "schools are failing" or "homeschoolers are stupid" don't have any meaning.
Posted by: IaMoL | September 4, 2009 9:12 PM
Watson! I say - it seems to have... evolved naturally! *bum pum puuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum*Posted by: mikecbraun | September 4, 2009 9:21 PM
Ah, I see! President Wilson prolonged the Depression by leaving office eight years before it even began! Those Democrats... Remember kids, public school is bad. They teach you actual facts about history, if you decide to pay attention, which this turd obviously did not do.
Posted by: Badger3k | September 4, 2009 9:25 PM
Rothermel's work seems to be all in the UK, so I am not sure how it applies to other parts of the world, as our home school culture here in the US is heavily on the fundy/insulate-my-kids side. I'll have to see if my school library has access to the journal, so I can't comment on that. At least it has (hopefully) been peer-reviewed.
As for home schooling, don't forget that it also requires people who are able to stay home for long periods of time, something that only the well-off in my district would be able to do, and with 80% of our kids qualifying as "at-risk", with parent(s) who work possibly more than one minimum-wage job, whose education is often only at a high-school level, home schooling isn't an option. But at least in my disctrict, we are trying new methods that will hopefully work at engaging the students and getting them to think. I always try to encourage my students to question everything, and try to give them the tools they need to interpret what they read - since google is not always your friend, as there is a lot of waste and garbage filling the web, as we all know.
Unfortunately, my district (in Texas, natch) has of course caved in to the bigots (probably out of fear of a lawsuit) and will not show the speech, and parents have to be notified if it is shown and will have the ability to opt-out. And this is in a predominantly african-american area that voted (I think) more for Obama!
As for the video, I can't see it at work, but does anyone mention Teh Gay? Can't be a Republican gathering without that boogie-man showing up.
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 4, 2009 9:47 PM
@#141
...as our home school culture here in the US is heavily on the fundy/insulate-my-kids side.
Sure. Which brings us back to the central point I was originally trying to make. I'm not arguing that home schooling is right for all kids. I'm not arguing that it's possible for all parents who want to do it. I'm not saying it doesn't have drawbacks. I'm not arguing it's a panacea for every educational problem in the universe.
What I am arguing is that home schooling is not about isolating kids and denying them a science education. People who want to do that find home schooling a convenient mechanism by which to do it but that's an implementation issue.
Conflating idiots and freaks with home schooling does a disservice to those of us who try to do it properly and to those kids and parents who would benefit from it but are put off because they see it presented as some form of child abuse every time it is mentioned.
Anyway, I think (along with many others I'm sure) that's quite enough so I'll shut up now.
Posted by: PlaydoPlato | September 4, 2009 9:58 PM
Some home school observations:
1. Not all home-schooled (HS) kids are home schooled by choice. Some are actually kids who have developmental, behavioral, and other issues that require they be instructed at home.
2. Home school co-ops provide a variety of teacher/parents with advanced skills/degrees in multiple disciplines.
3. The popular belief that HS kids are, as a group, unsocialized, is a myth. They spend far more time socializing with a far more diverse population than the average public schooler.
4. Secular home school families do exist. These families often home school because of the poor quality of schools in their area. This includes everything from low educational standards to religious fuck-nuttery posing as public education.
5. Home school can be a very positive experience for some students, but not every student, or his/her parents, is cut out for home school.
6. Home school doesn't mean that the kids never leave the house. Nor does it mean that their parents are their only teachers.
7. Some school districts allow home schoolers to take select classes and participate in extra-curricular activities, like school sports.
8. The Internet, educational DVDs, and extremely flexible schedules allow home schoolers to enjoy a rich educational experience.
9. The idea that you have to be affluent to home school is a myth. Affluent families are more likely to send their kids to private schools or to the better public schools that require more of a financial investment. Most of the home school families I've seen fall into the simple-living, stretch-the-dollar, hippie, back-to-the-land category. They can live off of one income because they drive older cars, live in smaller houses, and don't have much consumer debt.
I'm a hard core godless liberal and have voted Democratic since I was eighteen, but one thing that bothers me about the Dems in congress is their slavish loyalty to the NEA.
In my opinion, K-12 education in the US is broken beyond repair. The problem isn't just the schools or the teachers. It's deeper than that. I don't know what the solution is, but I've found home school to be the only affordable, sustainable option for my family.
Posted by: Shane | September 4, 2009 10:29 PM
Oh, you mean something like this?
http://www.protestwarrior.com/
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 10:35 PM
Having lived in Florida and Massachusetts, I would agree with the first statement.
Just because one side's nutjobs are increasingly overt racists and the other side's think that the US government caused 9/11, that dancing in the street makes for a really effective political protest, and that "we're killing the Earth" with toxins that make us fat ... and these things may not be MORALLY equivalent, it doesn't follow that the right is nuttier than the left. Don't try to sweep the sheer lunacy of the far left under the rug. The difference between them and the wacko right is that the wacko right has powerful (rich) friends.
The reason the "liberal" media doesn't call the far right out on its anarchist bent is that the main ones making the insane statements are themselves extremely wealthy and part of the power elite--in other words, statist. Thus, the media, who are generally culled these days from the 'poorer' branch of a rich family (they could only afford 6 wks in the Hamptons each summer), know that the FOX clowns aren't serious.
What's really sad is that the dittoheads who watch said clowns don't.
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 10:46 PM
Knockgoats said:
I'll give you that I'm very glad to live in Scotland, where Sats are absent; but my son enjoys his school, gets a lot from it that my wife and I couldn't provide, and has undiminished curiosity and creativity.
I was immensely privileged to attend the Newton Public Schools prior to MCAS: The Great Fucker-Upper (a Texas-originated prelude to NCLB). The curriculum was really excellent, although my elementary school could have been better in some areas, including math. (I was good at math so that didn't affect me.)
By junior high my mother (educated in Oklahoma, which she says was not nearly so batshit when she was in HS as it is now, and it was pretty bad then) admitted she could no longer really help with our homework. Dad, the sole provider and main choremaster (my mother is ... well ... a piece of work), did not have much time to help us, and his "help" usually consisted of twisting the concept around in a way that wouldn't become clear for another two years or so. And there was the time he tried to manipulate some algebra for me but his handwriting was so sloppy he lost a "-". :P
By high school my mother was blown away by the curriculum, freely admitting it was well advanced beyond what they'd had in her hometown.
And on top of that I got extracurriculars and friends and exposure to different people and socialization outside the family unit (important!). (For example, me and my sibs were in the habit of kicking and punching each other at home, so it's a good thing they had The Talk with all of us in high school about domestic violence, or I very likely would have hit my future wife the first time I got severely frustrated with her. I had to tell myself 'this isn't my sibling, this is assault' and for the first time in my life had to come up with a different way to solve the problem.)
Public schools were VERY good to me.
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 10:51 PM
@102
Sure, schools can provide an education -- even a great one, if you're lucky in your location and your school board and the teachers you get. But before you tar all homeschoolers with the same fundie-brush, maybe consider a different perspective. Thanks.
That's great for you, but I really hope it stays a small group. Also, I hope you push for high standards for homeschooling so you aren't giving cover to child abusers who don't actually teach their kids much of anything.
If homeschooling had been mainstream, I might have spent even MORE of my childhood trapped in that house with my abusive mother. Thank goodness she was raised in an era where if your child didn't turn up for school the truant officer came knocking...
Posted by: John Morales | September 4, 2009 10:59 PM
nag,
Good comment, but you're not disputing the point of that response to the comment — if anything, you're endorsing it. (Though that might be your intent, it's unclear to me).
Tu quoque, because that others may also be nut-jobs doesn't imply the subjects of his remark aren't.
False equivalency ["just as much"], because the expression of nuttiness is different (as you emphasise, in this case, morally different).
--
PS You would agree? You mean you agree, right? :)
The subjunctive mood is a conditional, which your intent clearly isn't.
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 11:28 PM
@110
Not in my experience. Got something besides your bald assertion to back that up?
Yes, yes, but somehow you imply this is harmful. Despite the fact that human children have played and learned about their world with their agemates as long as there has been a human race. Anthro texts don't dwell on children much, but I think I'm not going out on a limb here by stating that in most cultures, pre-adolescent children play with children roughly their own age.
Human languages are created by very small children talking to their peers. That is why parents cannot pass on their language and accent to their children, no matter how hard they try. Creole languages are created by children. Accents are acquired at age 2 or 3 from other children.
Generally after initiation (a pubertal rite that ends the state of childhood), it's typical for kids to work closely with adults to apprentice or otherwise learn the responsibilities they will now have to take on and perhaps to develop them as citizens. Mentoring.
I went to school with a kid who was I guess homeschooled and then pushed into her "grade level", which was not her age level. Having been isolated from all but adults, she talked like an adult ... and had an extremely hard time fitting in in high school. Her peers regarded her as arrogant, uppity, and rude. They also were irritated by some of her personal habits.
The upper classes in antiquity had tutors for their kids rather than sending them to the filthy public schools with the filthy proles, but if you're a patrician, being arrogant, uppity, and rude is not exactly a failing.
In a capitalistic society where you must sell your value as an employee (and don't doubt for a moment that much of public schooling is really indoctrination for proper employee attitude/behavior--though not quite and entirely), being perceived as the above might as well be suicide.
Gee, public school kids NEVER come from large nuclear families, or see their extended families, or live in mixed neighborhoods, never mind see their neighbors, or go to community centers or churches, where you might run into people of different ages and backgrounds.
Also, I hope those kid-kid interactions are supervised, because in my neighborhood, when the 3rd graders ran into some 5th graders, or some 5th grader ran into some 8th graders, somebody was running home crying with soiled undies, a bloodied nose, and no lunch money.
Before you allege that school caused that, a la Rousseau, let me present the following example: my brothers, 9 and 11, transferred into new schools. The younger one met a kid in the neighborhood and they started hanging out. These two were not the same age or in the same class, but they were both misfits. The older brother runs into them in the 'hood and makes threats. Why? B/c he's a bully and much bigger than them. Other boy's parents come at my parents. School had nothing to do with this situation. My brothers were totally new. Big kids will pick on little kids.
The social life of school children is quite rich, it just doesn't involve adults.
It's nice that you have such a great relationship with your child. There's plenty of precedent for fathers educating their children. This was done in the Puritan community, for example. I'm glad she likes it. But the idea that there is no social world going on at school is kind of absurd. And who determines richer? Because all I'm drawing out of what you said is "involves an adult, and therefore richer."
I learned a great deal from my peers in school. In fact, most of what I can specifically remember from elementary school involved my peers, although obviously I learned from teachers how to read, write, and do some simple math. (Most of the social studies was probably bullshit, although it did plant the bug to be interested in history and other cultures. But then again, so did PBS.) I'm also curious how you reconcile your view of school socialization bad, home socialization good with the following:
A study/book from France about touch between pre-schoolers (compared to US, a lot more in France), with the assertion that if you hug someone, you can't hurt them (that was from radio interview), and;
The well-established fact that murder rates are far down from historical levels, attributed to the rise of cities and the flow of moral ideas out from cities into the countryside.
Farm kids had plenty of interaction with humans (and sheep, snigger) of all ages, but they were starved for interaction with peers (other than siblings). Does this account for the 'stupid' rural with his poor language acquisition? Rape was not uncommon on the farm. Rape of siblings goes on in the US to this day in the Amish communities, but it happened in my family in Kansas in the 1930's. Talk about poor socialization. They went to school but the males were pulled out early because they were needed at home.
I dunno, at my very competitive suburban high school most kids were too busy studying too many advanced subjects to have time to date until the last years ... but when they did date they treated each other with respect.
You may not think rurals are poorly socialized... but they do kill each other more often (for reals). I don't know what your def of socialized is, tho'.
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 11:32 PM
OMWTF?
I'm glad you weren't principal at any public school I attended. I WENT THERE TO LEARN. If not for instructors, I might as well have played hooky. It's fun, and there were berries to be picked and eaten.
Helping kids learn and show off??? what they've learned? So this is all about (discredited) notions about self-esteem?
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 11:41 PM
@124
Or they read up and skip over the hard parts because no one is holding them accountable, then come in for a rude awakening when they really do have to know their shit.
Self-directed learning works great for computer programming, sewing, and other crafts because you tackle the hard parts to make the finished product come out right. But many basic subjects can only be mastered with a good deal of (gulp) boring homework. You know, that practice thing. For example, in math I found classroom instruction very engaging. I would follow along with the blackboard enthusiastically, trying to anticipate the next move or pick apart the last one (or try something different).
When it was words on a page, my eyes would glaze over.
Sure, some kids did great at that experimental school in Lincoln, MA where they told their teachers what they wanted to learn, but this was never applied universally because it would never work for most kids. I know personally this shit would have never worked for me and my life would be in a much suckier place today as a result.
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 11:45 PM
Google IS my friend:
The study involved 35 home-educated children aged between four and five years of age, from diverse socio-economic backgrounds. The children were assessed using the Performance Indicators in Primary Schools (Start and End of Reception). Whilst the home-educated children outscored their school counterparts, those from lower socio-economic groups outperformed their middle class peers. It appeared that a flexible approach to education, and a high level of parental attention and commitment, regardless of their socioeconomic group and level of education, seemed the most important factors in the children’s development and progress.
So four and five year-olds at home with a parent are doing better than kids in preschool? Who woulda thunk it? Maybe it's class size. *nods*
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 11:52 PM
@129
My, you have a way with words. Just because it's flawed doesn't mean it's broken.
I'm frankly tired of these sweeping generalizations about public schools. I went to excellent public schools, schools which were quite frankly superior in many ways to the private high schools some of my friends went to. (For one friend, going to the private school DID prevent her dropping out, because some stuff had happened at public school and the private school was much smaller and could focus on her a lot more. But even she lamented the lack of class options on the higher levels.)
People keep poisoning the well wrt public schools when there's plenty of evidence that they CAN work. Why didn't everyone try to replicate Newton, rather than trying to turn Newton into another Tejas--which is proven craptitude? Now that's stupid.
Some urban school systems are truly broken, I agree. When kids are afraid for their safety and 1/3 of the pupils are high and nobody's meeting minimal grade level standards, you got problems.
Posted by: not a gator | September 4, 2009 11:56 PM
@138
Thank you!!
Alternatively, they are dirt dead broke and the only 'edumacation' they are getting is how to make baking soda and dirt last a week and that comes at the end of a belt buckle. Yum.
North Central Florida: where parents send their children to school for a good meal.
Posted by: BGT | September 5, 2009 12:03 AM
OK, I haven't read much of teh previous comments, just scanned them. I am just giving my initial impression of this video, which may or may not comply with previous commenters...
The people interviewed in this video are bug/rodent/cattle/(cattle includes sheep for the irish)/protozoan/metazoan fucking insane.
WTF happening to reading comprehension? And even if someone trots out the excuse that the didn't read all of the actual proposed legislation, well that just leaves the people that they listened to to be insane.
Goddamnit, I live in the south, do I have to go postal on all of my neighbors? When did stupidity by lack of reading comprehension become a positive in our society?
Why can't we as a nation actually read the laws?
(yes, I know i have missed many point made by previous commentors, but fuck them. :) they agree with me)
What makes me a sad drinking educated redneck is that the alleged "libruls" have a vastly higher IQ than any of my peers.
WTF ever happened to "common sense".
........wasn't there a quote about common sense being so celebrated becasue it wasn't actually common?
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
September 5, 2009 12:13 AM
@Mike #129,
Yeah. I understand. I'd not trade my daughter for 100 civilizations, too. She's way more important than an entire city to me.
I get your point. I think that's why it's such a difficult discussion: emotion trumps reason when it comes to our kids. Every time.
And that's the way it should be. Otherwise, we wouldn't be human.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 12:25 AM
@143
1. Not all home-schooled (HS) kids are home schooled by choice. Some are actually kids who have developmental, behavioral, and other issues that require they be instructed at home.
Public schools provide services to homebound kids. Yah, I did know this Aspie mom who homeschooled her Aspie kids. She lived in rural Ohio and the spec ed was crap. But in many modernized districts the spec ed is far better than what parent could provide on their own. They have full-time aides and specialists, individual learning plans, physical therapy, small groups, and time in classroom.
Many special ed students can be successfully integrated into the school population now. Why is it that disabled activists see this as a good thing and you don't?
2. Home school co-ops provide a variety of teacher/parents with advanced skills/degrees in multiple disciplines.
Fine.
3. The popular belief that HS kids are, as a group, unsocialized, is a myth. They spend far more time socializing with a far more diverse population than the average public schooler.
This assertion is both unproven and poorly defined. Do they encounter viewpoints that differ from their family? Do they participate in programs like "Understanding Handicaps" (they changed the name, but I don't know to what)? Do they have the opportunity to socialize with a good number of their age-mates, something that is normal to human development?
The "co-op" you describe, btw, is start to sound more and more like an alternative school. It's weird, I think you should check out Montessori, because I think they have some of the same ideas.
4. Secular home school families do exist. These families often home school because of the poor quality of schools in their area. This includes everything from low educational standards to religious fuck-nuttery posing as public education.
Sure. Want some irony? My mother in OK ran into less religious nuttery in Catholic school than in public. In public she had a Southern Baptist "history" teacher who pretty much was of the "the KJV was good enough for Jesus" school. She also was asked by the lockers if she was "saved". The Catholic school was run by Ursulines who didn't believe in capital punishment (very different from the evil French nuns in the northeast) and who took on kids who weren't making it in public school due to behavior problems.
Which is not arguing with you--I'm agreeing. But there are also plenty of places in the country where the schools are not run by fundies. For example, looks like Alachua County Schools has won round one against the "Islam is of the Devil" tshirts.
5. Home school can be a very positive experience for some students, but not every student, or his/her parents, is cut out for home school.
True.
6. Home school doesn't mean that the kids never leave the house. Nor does it mean that their parents are their only teachers.
Yeah, they go to church, too. ~_^
7. Some school districts allow home schoolers to take select classes and participate in extra-curricular activities, like school sports.
True.
8. The Internet, educational DVDs, and extremely flexible schedules allow home schoolers to enjoy a rich educational experience.
All of which are no replacement for classroom instruction. I learned A LOT from PBS, the library, and later, the internet. However, I would be horribly ignorant without having been in science and math and English classrooms. The instructor brings an organized lesson plan and has certain goals. The student is in a structured environment where they are accountable. The good instructor knows all about the subject*; the student doesn't even know what they don't know. And that's dangerous.
*-yeah, I had some crappy ones who had to rely on the book too much. they were in the minority.
9. The idea that you have to be affluent to home school is a myth. Affluent families are more likely to send their kids to private schools or to the better public schools that require more of a financial investment. Most of the home school families I've seen fall into the simple-living, stretch-the-dollar, hippie, back-to-the-land category. They can live off of one income because they drive older cars, live in smaller houses, and don't have much consumer debt.
My parents were like this (my mother was a homemaker) but you can forget about us getting an equivalent education past third grade level. Absolutely forget about it.
For one thing, a school can purchase a piece of equipment that is used by 100 students a year for 10 years. So if it costs $3000, it costs only $3/head--$3 in tax burden per student per year. But the parent might be at best be able to rent it once for $100. At 30x the price, many times less the time! So in this case public school is much more cost effective.
Property tax bought WAY more stuff than my parents could have bought for the same money.
Weekly art class at school vs. art lessons
Recorder class vs. private music lessons
Free beginning instrument instruction vs. private teacher
fully equipped gym vs. Gymboree
science labs vs. science kits
school assemblies and class speakers vs. youtube?
librarians vs. Google, and that's, of course, post google
I left of computers because we all have computers here, but in the 80's that was WELL out of my parent's price range, yet my school had a whole lab.
As for the "affluent community" business, my parents sacrificed a lot (and were willing to pay more taxes) so we could live in a good school district. Maybe the housing bubble makes that ridiculous now, but before things got so distorted "good school district" vs. "cheap" was a valid choice. Those who took "cheap" spent their money on cars and booze to take their mind off how they shortchanged their kids. Or something.
I'm a hard core godless liberal and have voted Democratic since I was eighteen, but one thing that bothers me about the Dems in congress is their slavish loyalty to the NEA.
It's about money, duh. The NEA sucks. I mean, they don't suck if you're a member. They just suck if you look at the overall outcome.
Yeah, that's right, skimp on lesson plans, grading papers, etc, so you can study for that master's and get paid more. BC getting a pointless master's degree is more important than teaching students. Thanks, NEA.
In my opinion, K-12 education in the US is broken beyond repair. The problem isn't just the schools or the teachers. It's deeper than that.
That's just ridiculous. Broken beyond repair? How is it that we keep winning math olympiads? Problems isn't just schools or teachers--yah, it's kids who are behind before they ever show up, due to massive income inequality and lack of health insurance, as well as little interest in teaching the future mothers (and fathers) of america any life coping skills.
"It's deeper than that." ? =I can't be arsed to actually research this subject, so I'll just declare it profound and inscrutable.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 12:32 AM
Morales--
Maybe it's short for "I would agree with that statement--if anybody asked me"?
(Oh, and sorry about my typos above. I've been up for, euych, 20 hrs after getting 4 hrs sleep last night. Sorry if I was rude as well. Brain cells prolly fragged by now. G'night.)
Posted by: Pygmy Loris | September 5, 2009 1:17 AM
not a gator,
From the daughter of an NEA member: Go fuck yourself.
What makes you an expert on the "pointless" nature of an M.Ed.? Do you think that having teachers continue to expand their education to better instruct students is a bad thing? Do you really think most teachers are skimping on grading and lesson plans to get a master's? My mom has been an NEA member my whole life. She never skimped on grading or lesson plans. I remember all the extra hours she worked at home grading various assignments nearly every night of the week. Mom and every other teacher I have ever known worked hours at night and on the weekends for their students. That includes classes for master's degrees, which aim at improving the quality of education a teacher provides. It's not all about the benjamins for most teachers. Those who go into teaching for the money burn out quickly.
Posted by: Jafafa Hots | September 5, 2009 3:27 AM
I hate these homeschooling arguments, I really do. Might as well argue about libertarian creationist circumcisions.
There is one thing I wonder about though, why it's seen as an either-or.
Seems to me like if you have enough time to home-school your kid, you have enough time to supplement their education in the areas you feel its lacking if they go to public school. An oversimplification sure, but it just feels like you're playing into the hands of those who have none of our interests at heart if you jump on the "abandon public schools" bandwagon.
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 5, 2009 3:48 AM
Seems to me like if you have enough time to home-school your kid, you have enough time to supplement their education in the areas you feel its lacking if they go to public school. - Jafafa Hots
Exactly. And to help (and push) the school to do better - which has the advantage that it may also help children other than your own. In my annoyance with Mike Higginbottom, I may have given the impression I think there's nothing wrong with state schools in the UK, which is certainly not the case. But if you have the time to homeschool, you certainly have the time to get involved with both the schooling and the broader education of your children who are attending school.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg | September 5, 2009 4:01 AM
Rather than inflict my thinking regarding the video in question upon you in this thread, I've posted it at Them Niggers is Dumb. As you can tell from the title, I hold Conceptual Gorilla in no greater esteem than any other bigot. Far as I'm concerned, he is nothing less than a Ken Ham style creationist, with a video camera and contempt for those who disagree with him.
And one more thing; PZ, how about supporting Obama instead of insulting his opposition?
Posted by: Hmmm | September 5, 2009 4:05 AM
I see someone said that there are crazy people on both sides of the fence. Let's pretend there is only one fence, and that it clearly divides people into two sides.
Does that means that both sides are equally valid? Of course not. Are there nutjobs on both sides? Of course.
But one side can also represent the worst ideology. It follows that people who support idiotic and bad ideas can't always be very bright themselves.
Posted by: Citizen of the Cosmos | September 5, 2009 4:13 AM
Homeschooling can be an alternative, but you still have to follow the national curriculum.
Posted by: Q.E.D | September 5, 2009 5:58 AM
How can any American with access to google believe this whole "birther", "death panels" "euthanisia for veterans" propaganda that has been propagated by health care industry lobbyists and the far-right?
It appears there is a segment of the right in America that prefers their ideology regardless of any facts to the contrary. Very much like religion. They will make up their own facts to fit and deny any facts that don't fit their ideology.
In addition there seems to be a resurgence of a very ugly Nativist view that is almost Gnostic: "an America with a black President and a social policy to help all in society is not the Real America. Those who support healthcare for all are not Real Americans. We white, christian, free-marketer are the Real Americans".
How does a society debate any issue when the opposition refuses to engage with facts?
Woe to the Republic
Posted by: Knockgoats | September 5, 2009 6:35 AM
Alan Kellogg,
I think it's quite clear from the title you've chosen who is the bigot in this matter. It's not PZ, or Conceptual Gorilla. Your screed, by the way, is mind-numbingly stupid. You admit you are reliant on state-funded health care, yet all you do is whinge that your particular needs are not well-enough funded by the public sector. If the private sector is so wonderful, why don't you rely on it, you stinking hypocrite?
Posted by: Carlie | September 5, 2009 7:18 AM
I call bullshit. Or, I guess to be more charitable, I should say your class privilege is blinding you to the families I'm thinking of when I say some families can't afford to have one person stay home and not work. I'm talking about the huge numbers of people who are invisible in society to the middle class - the ones who don't "drive older cars", because they can't afford a car in the first place. I'm talking about the ones who don't "live in smaller houses", they live in shitty HUD apartments. Consumer debt? They can't get credit cards; they have to use payday loans for emergencies and pay a couple hundred percent interest on them, taking the payments out of their grocery money and hoping that the school lunches plus some Ramen will be enough for their kids to get by on for a couple of months. A good friend of mine teaches in a rural Ozark district - her kids can't afford to bring their own damned pencils and Kleenex to school. Resources for homeschooling? Not even.
So that's my beef with some of the homeschooling attitudes. Go ahead and take your kids out if you can, but stop bashing the schools for not performing perfectly with the constraints they have. Stop bashing teachers for having some low scores and not being able to teach as well as you can teach your own child, because it's a false comparison - you're not trying to teach kids who can't concentrate because they're so hungry, or keep even a small group on the same curriculum when one is brilliant and one is average and one is dyslexic and one has ADD and one has social anxiety. Stop voting against school tax increases because you think schools are irreparably broken and you don't use the system so you shouldn't have to pay into it (well, except for forcing them to take your homeschooled child into the extracurricular activities whose funding is based on the number of kids enrolled IN THE SCHOOL in the first place). Stop assuming that your small, insular, privileged experience means that you are so much better at education than any school can be with any set of children.
The reason so many people are so vehemently anti-homeschool is because so many homeschoolers are so damned arrogant about it, and so willing to cut off everyone else at the knees. Mike, by #142 your comments were more moderate, but look at the rhetoric you started with - in #95 you responded to "When did we become a society that despises intellect and education?" with "Some of us haven't. That's why we home school." Can you see how condescending and dismissive that is? When you start off with guns blazing like that, is it any wonder you get so much anger back so quickly? Give other people some credit, please.
Posted by: strange gods bless 'merica | September 5, 2009 7:28 AM
Ditto!
Uh, I mean, Carlie makes some excellent points.
Posted by: colico | September 5, 2009 7:32 AM
logos77.wordpress.com
Enjoy the stupidity (in spanish)
Posted by: strange gods bless 'merica | September 5, 2009 8:01 AM
One objection I have is not about home schooling itself, but the way that public libraries make accommodations for home schooled kids.
It is not uncommon around here to see the libraries putting on presentations and workshops for kids during the hours that the public schools are in session. And I'm not talking about the "trip to the library" that is coordinated with a public school; I mean supplementary educational programs that are aimed at home schoolers.
This is not an efficient use of tax dollars. These programs should be after school hours, when all students can have the opportunity to take advantage of them.
Posted by: Eidolon | September 5, 2009 8:42 AM
Carlie @167
Spot on! Here in CO, a fair percentage of home schoolers are not "hippies" but godbots wanting to shield their kidlets from the perils of interacting with all those OTHER kids - the ones who are not of their particular system of superstition.
After 30 years in the classroom, I am so fucking tired of the "schools are broken beyond repair" crap. My school was in a low income area and the education was there for those who were able to take advantage of it. Unfortunately, it's hard to overcome students dropping out because they were "acting white" and peer pressure won. It's tough when when kids are shuffled between relatives or friends parents because of having parents in jail or just gone missing. We were the district magnet school for special needs kids and the deaf students. This fact was not taken into account when the school was evaluated with the annual testing.
In point of fact, most kids learn well in areas of their particular interest and do O.K. in others. Some students excel in non-traditional areas that are not part of the testing. The bottom line is, no home school parent can begin to provide the depth and breadth of experience available in even a low income school. And no, I think that extra curricular activities should not be available to home schoolers. They are funded and staffed based on student enrollment. This means that Henry Homeschool is a lousy parasite when he sits in with the band or suits up for football. If schools are so damn bad, feel free to start your own EC programs.
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 5, 2009 10:30 AM
@#171
They are funded and staffed based on student enrollment. This means that Henry Homeschool is a lousy parasite when he sits in with the band or suits up for football.
I don't follow. Are you suggesting that Henry has not paid for his place on this course? Or are you saying that his place is not funded by the state because he's not enrolled with a school thus leading to a shortfall in the school's budget? Or something else?
Posted by: strange gods bless 'merica | September 5, 2009 10:36 AM
That's it.
Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | September 5, 2009 10:56 AM
Somewhat OT... The "Obama speech to school-kids" kerfuffle has reached my little corner of Upstate NY, of all places. My daughter's school doesn't start till Wednesday, but the principal sent a letter to parents stating that it would "review the speech" and that a "decision would be made" as to whether or not it would be shown to students the following day.
If the decision was simply "the kids aren't going to be in school that day so we're not going to bother with it", I'd likely be fine with it, but this letter implies that the inclination is to show it to the children, as that is the intended audience, but that it will be reviewed for content and then a determination will be made.
Of course, I was outraged. I sent an email back to the principal. You can read it here if you'd like.
Posted by: Eidolon | September 5, 2009 10:56 AM
To clarify...
In our state and most others, school funding is based on a per pupil rate. These students have to be actually enrolled and attending the school.
The salaries and costs associated with any EC activity are part of the school budget. If Henry is not enrolled at the school, then he is freeloading. Now - since much of the school funding comes from property taxes, the argument is made that since Henry's parents may be paying property taxes, they have effectively paid for his place. The real problem with this is that out of all the things that property tax money goes for, the actual contribution towards the schools is not even close to the amount lost by Henry's non-enrollment. This is in contrast to renters who pay no direct property tax - although they do indirectly - do bring in state funds.
Posted by: Carlie | September 5, 2009 11:02 AM
Exactly. Property tax goes to a lot of other things besides just schools, and money is alloctated to each school within a district/county/state based on enrollment. So if, say, a school had 500 families within the district paying property tax, but only 5 of them sent their kids to school, the school would only get funding sufficient for 5 kids, and the rest of the money would be redistributed to either other schools in the area or to other county budget items the tax is used for.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 1:27 PM
@159
I was a high school student in the US. (It's called "eating the dogfood." Your question recalls the IT exec who never uses his company's product railing against its critics.) I learned much more from teachers who had masters in the course they were teaching (& no education degree) than teachers who had masters in education. The latter may have "believed in the method" but they *knew nothing.
Of course not, and if I had seen Mr. Rousseau, the english teacher and union steward shoved into teaching math go take some remedial math classes so he could actually TEACH honors math, instead of doing problems wrong out of the teacher's manual and scratching his head, I wouldn't have such a bad attitude.
Instead he whined and complained about not getting a raise while 1/3 of the kids in the class were watching their parents GET LAID OFF.
A lot of kids in the class failed to learn the material--not because he didn't know how to teach, but because he kept explaining things wrong and confusing them. Knowledge of subject matter trumps method.
Edumacation degrees have value for elementary education, although I don't have a great deal of respect for the current state of the field, since instead of just accepting the well-established fact that every class is going to have kids with different learning styles (memorization AND phonics, for example), they're so eager to run with the herd on some unproven educational theory, like "invented spelling". You know why 13yr olds on AOL in the late 1990s couldn't spell loose or lose? Invented spelling. Maybe teachers need to go back to the old school. They knew how to teach, and how to control a classroom so everyone had the chance to learn. Sadly, they've all retired by now.
YES. It happened to me.
The cherry on top: this same "teacher" didn't realize there was a stock market before the 20th century. She thought that 1929 was the first market crash ever. I vaguely remembered seeing something about "panics" in the 19th century, so I ended up schooling *her. And I didn't really know sh*t about history (at the time). I mean, WTF?
She came out and said she wasn't assigning as many papers & tests because grading them took time and she was studying for her master's so she could make more money.
Good for your mom. She was one of the good eggs.
When I was in high school the teacher's union was pissed about not getting a raise (even though we were in a hard local recession and people were losing their jobs left and right), so they decided to go on a "soft strike" by refusing to do any work outside of class time, which meant that they left at the end of school, sharp, instead of staying 2-3 hrs to help students who needed to catch up and to work on lesson plans as they had in the past. They figured that would make us "appreciate" "everything that they do". I don't think any of our parents were really impressed, given that they work full days and a full year, and get paid the same, even if they have higher degrees, AND they work in the private sector and get less benefits.
Hell, my dad's employer declared him and his coworkers "exempt" in violation of federal law and forced them to come in on unpaid overtime and nobody complained for YEARS because you had to have a security clearance to work there.
So cry me a river.
It was hard to take seriously a bunch of "professionals" who decided to screw the students over a 3% raise in a hard recession with massive job losses.
Well, when the NEA stops requiring 2+ years of "education" degrees for high school science teachers and starts encouraging the coaches and so on teaching biology now to go in for a master's in phys, chem, or bio, I'll go along with that.
My high school chem teacher could not speak the language of the humans, but we NEVER learned so much so quickly as in his class. HE KNEW HIS SHIT.
NEWFLASH: kids don't respect teachers who don't know the material. And it's easy to find out who they are.
The learning method should be, in the malapropism of today, transparent to the student. The subject matter should be paramount. Otherwise school is just expensive babysitting.
No, my experience in college was that edumacation majors were those who couldn't hack it in any other degree. (Maybe they might have made it in marketing. Similar skillset. Though some marketing profs demand you know maths. Ooo, so much for that path.)
Those who go into teaching because they're bright and idealistic burn out quickly.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 1:30 PM
@174
They're going to play it backwards to scour it for subliminal Black Power messages.
Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | September 5, 2009 1:42 PM
I keep wondering if the right-wing loonies really think Obama is going to do like those old 50's and 60's movies that used to interweave subliminal advertisements into the film, with some guy whispering "sooooooocialism" in the background while Obama gives his speech.
They really are getting desperate...
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 1:55 PM
@163
Oh, of course. Perhaps I should have mentioned that I've consistently (though not exclusively) voted for one side and not the other because the other guys want--at the very least--to hurt me, while my side is at worst neutral.
I really hate it, though, when they go off and lie and make things up and push stupid agendas, like ranting about how "organic" farming is "kind to mother earth" (bullshit and more bullshit) while totally ignoring issues like the child slave labor that picks their fancy-pants organic single-source dark chocolate.
But is that as bad as trying (for example) to see me fired because I'm gay? Well, from my point of view, no.
Btw, it's hard to hold my side's feet to fire on their idiocy when the other side is so nutty and ill-informed. That Al Franken video made me jealous as hell. Maybe those frozen winters lead to a lot of reading?
Most of my coworkers (here in the South) have never read any book (outside school) but
the Bibleeasy-reader Biblical apologies.Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 2:00 PM
To the person who told me to fuck myself, re: NEA (wow, somehow that does not turn me on):
I'm sorry I got exercised. However, you questioned my standing to criticize, so let me put it to you like this:
You talk about experience with one teacher, your mother (of whom you had a privileged view).
I have experience with dozens.
You may have gone to public school, too, but I am picking up that you (like my wife, whose mother is also a teacher, and who also puts her all into her work, but who really can't stand admin or her coworkers or the NEA except for what it can get her) relied on your mother as your teacher.
I did too... until the start of 3rd grade. After that, I was mostly at the mercy of my school system. (Thank you, library and PBS, back before Gingrich cut CPB and it stopped being so awesome.) So those teachers were my last chance. (Now, I was lucky: my system was awesome and most of my teachers were great.)
Therefore, I think I am in a position to lob criticism, thank you very much.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 2:02 PM
Knockgoats quoth,
If the private sector is so wonderful, why don't you rely on it, you stinking hypocrite?
Or to put it another way, we should be happy to have your problems!
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 2:06 PM
@170
Not knowing the situation, my gut feeling is that the librarians in question are valiantly striving to be a "light in the darkness" to these children.
Yeah, in the case of parents like Mike above I guess you could see it as slumming, but not all homeschoolers are high educated class privileged folks like Mike.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 2:11 PM
@179
They can't figure why so many of their fellow (gasp! white!) Americans voted for them.
I mean, can't they see he's a @@@@@@!
(You know what's sad? I didn't even think people thought this way until I'd had one too many brushes with comments on news stories. I want to clean my brain out with soap now. Ugh.)
Posted by: Eidolon | September 5, 2009 2:23 PM
Not a gator:
I don't think you can accurately extrapolate your HS experience to all, which appears to be what you are doing.
Having seen and worked with a number of entering 'second career' teachers, I can tell you it is NOT about content knowledge. There is a certain skill set related to teaching and while content knowledge is important, it is quite inadequate for successful teaching. If you think classroom management is something only old school teachers can do, you are seriously mistaken. Do you seriously think all classrooms are now like some version of Bedlam? It is still a central skill and one that not all can master. Position power only goes so far. More importantly, teaching is about communication. Yes, it is important to know your stuff but more important than that is knowing how to communicate with students so they can integrate the new knowledge. You Chem teacher fit your learning style. Was that true for everyone else in the class or did his unintelligible explanations lose many others?
I am willing to bet that your parents typically did not spend at least one day of the weekend doing work related things. Teachers get to do grading and planning. I suspect your parents also spent very little time in the evening doing work related tasks. So, as you say, cry me a river. Since you've got your panties in a twist over the 3% raise issue, what do you know about the terms of that increase? One year or over the term of the contract - usually 3 years. Had there been pay concessions earlier? In short, you most likely know jack about the specific contract issues.
You are unhappy because teachers left on the clock "instead of staying 2-3 hrs to help students who needed to catch up and to work on lesson plans as they had in the past". So they should work off the clock because why? You are angry about you father having to work off the clock so why should the teachers?
I'm glad you were able to overcome some lousy teachers but I also suspect you had more than one good teacher as well. Sometimes it is the non-academic aspect of the teacher/student relationship that determines the success of the educational process.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 2:24 PM
Let me just get this last thing off my chest before I clear out and go to work:
I like a system where you can homeschool, but your kids will be tested for how they're coming along (appropriate arrangements made for those with learning disabilities, of course) and an aide comes by occasionally during the year to look over lesson plans and see that the kids are being schooled (and not abused). I heard they were doing that in Cali.
This way, at least someone is looking in on these children and seeing the home situation.
My abusive crazy mother was terrified that the school would figure out how she was raising us and that DFC would take us away. Now, I was freaked about DFC because it was pretty clear even to me at a young age that being in the foster care system sucked and that they split up siblings. So I kept my mouth shut. I am certain if she didn't think she HAD to send us to school, she wouldn't have.
It wasn't until years later that she gained an appreciation for how much more advanced our education was than what she had back in Okey and for how many resources the school put into learning disabilities and other behavioral problems. Also, because her kids were in school she was heavily involved in the PTA. So today she's a public school booster and stayed in a more expensive 'burb because of my youngest brother's special needs. Multiple specialists have been working on his case his whole life (before the start of school they used to come to the house) and they knew tons and tons that my mother didn't know and knew she didn't know.
Even though my mother is a crazy batshit abusive loon, that doesn't mean she doesn't care about us and in the end she wanted us to have a good chance in life and the public schools gave that to us.
However, had homeschooling been as big then as it is now we never would have gotten the chance and I would be a grocery bagger with emotional problems instead of a successful adult with a science degree from a good school.
My grade school
bestonly friend's parents would have certainly homeschooled her as well (they are rightwing fundy evangelicals) but we never would have met b/c my family is Catholic. (Mom was into feminism and natural birth--wrong circle of crazy.) Wow, no friends at all during elementary years. That would have done wonders for my social development.And yeah, this is an argument from consequences. That's all I've got. What I'm saying is, don't lose all those social service functions when you remove the child from school. (Of course, providing all that costs more when they aren't brought through the school clearinghouse, but damn the taxpayers, right?) Children are not the slaves of their parents to dispose with as they please.
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | September 5, 2009 2:26 PM
I *heart* Carlie. She's right about everything she said in this thread!
On a different note, I've mentioned this in another thread but wasn't able to follow up on it (because the thread was stressing me out, and stress = very very bad), so I mention it again here because it fits the topic. Mike H. chose homeschooling because in his mind, putting his energies into improving a public school instead of homeschooling would be sacrificing his daughter. As such, his choice is an understandable sentiment, since I think we all can agree that sacrificing children to an ideal makes a bad parent.
but
there is a point at which the "sacrifice" is minimal, negligible, or downright imaginary; and yet, most parents wouldn't see it that way. which brings me to my actual point, i.e. something I have, for lack of a better term, named "inertia of the middle". Basically, it's the concept that between the "villains" (people who will create, support and propagate knowingly a destructive system for their own benefit, sacrificing others) and the "heroes" (people who will sacrifice large chunks of themselves to fight detrimental systems and build up beneficial ones, for the benefit of others) there's this vast group of "normal people" in the middle, who pretty much go with whatever system is there, and try to carve a beneficial niche for themselves in it. There's many strategies to do that (denial or blissful ignorance being probably the most common), and finding loopholes that make the bad parts of the system not affect you is one of them. Homeschooling is an educational loophole like that.
This is the "all it takes for evil to succeed is for good to do nothing" scenario, where a vast majority of people, a lot of them good, do nothing or nothing much to change the system, so the system skews to the "villain's" benefit. This is where most of us are on most issues (with some erare exceptions). We don't give this support on purpose, we believe (and are sometimes even right) that we don't have a choice in the matter, or we believe that their minimum-sacrifice actions are well enough to assuage any twinges of consciousness we might feel. and generally, we are wrong.
This "inertia of the middle" seems to be the main reason most badly needed reforms are failing, be it healthcare or environmental protection (nevermind more deeply ingrained issues such as the imperialistic nature of our economic systems). I've got no solution for this problem, but there it is.
Posted by: not a gator | September 5, 2009 2:46 PM
Mike's comments strongly reminded me of the Sudbury Valley alternative school.
In Mass. we have some alternative schools for those who don't thrive in the standard school environment. Sudbury is great for those whom it fits, but many kids do NOT thrive there. If they did, their methods would have long ago been adopted more broadly (at least in Mass.).
One of my brothers actually went to an alternative school in Mass. as well. He has Asperger's and might not have finished HS without it. It was called Broccoli Hall.
Mass. is really great in that you have some alternatives within the public system for kids who might otherwise fall through the cracks. It's not perfect and I know at least one parent who had to put her kid in a private school and of some others who sued. Basically, the school system legally MUST provide an education, but sending the student out of the local system costs them more money so they don't want to do it. Squeaky wheels and all that.
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 5, 2009 4:05 PM
@#175
I'm still not following you here. You seem to be saying that Henry is a "lousy parasite" because the budget allocation process fails to take into account the fact that home schoolers may choose to take advantage of resources that they have paid for and are entitled to. I suspect that's not what you mean but it's what I'm seeing at the moment. Could you clarify please?
Posted by: Carlie | September 5, 2009 4:15 PM
You seem to be saying that Henry is a "lousy parasite" because the budget allocation process fails to take into account the fact that home schoolers may choose to take advantage of resources that they have paid for and are entitled to.
THEY HAVE NOT PAID FOR THOSE RESOURCES. Is that clear enough? You do not earmark your taxes for specific purposes. Your taxes are not tuition. The state takes it all, and doles it back out to dozens of state agencies according to various Byzantine formulas. The formula for school funding is based on how many students are enrolled at each specific school. If you want to say that state budgets should count homeschoolers in a district as a fraction of a student, fine, but currently that is not the case, so currently Henry is parasitizing resources that were allocated to different students. Let's say the school has 100 enrolled students. The state gives them enough money to educate 100 students. Now 100 homeschooled kids show up and demand that they get the extracurriculars (which cost the most in the first place). Where exactly is that money supposed to come from? It's not the homeschool families' taxes; those have gone to road maintenance, or the latest union raise, or whatever. And what do the homeschoolers do? They don't go to the state to advocate for different budgeting; instead, they threaten to sue the school if they are not accommodated.
Posted by: Christophe Thill | September 5, 2009 4:59 PM
"I was annoyed at first by the steel drums, too. Then I realized that it was playing the Limbo song. When you consider the contorted reality that these people obviously live in, the song really fits."
Limbaugh! Limbaugh low! How low can you go?
Hey, who'd have thought that there was a political message in Caribbean steel drums?
Posted by: Mike Higginbottom | September 5, 2009 5:56 PM
@#190
You do not earmark your taxes for specific purposes.
Sure. I pay my taxes as a contribution towards a range of services that are provided for society as a whole. Education for all is part of that. And as a tax payer I've paid my contribution towards the education system. So Henry is perfectly entitled to go to school and enjoy the extra curricular activities. It seems reasonable to conclude he's also entitled to partake of only part of that resource. But maybe this is the point of principle we disagree on.
Of course, your point about him doing so causing a budget shortfall for the school is valid. But that's hardly Henry's fault is it? If it's a big issue for school budgets, and my hunch is that it is not, then the process for allocating budgets needs fixing. It's an implementation issue not a point of principle. And if we have a sane system then simply having Henry fill in a single page form should be enough to obtain the relevant funding from the state. I don't see how this is enough of a barrier to allow bureaucracy to subvert a point of principle.
Posted by: Neil B ♪ | September 5, 2009 8:46 PM
Here's some really horrible stuff, I saw at Washington Monthly (the best leftie political blog and the sharpest commenters):
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/04/23/report-bill-nye-the-science-guy-revealed-as-godless-soulless-blasphemer-in-texas/
There is an interesting account out of Waco, Texas where Bill Nye “The Science Guy” was booed for saying that the Moon does not generate it own light — in contradiction to the Bible. This will likely end any designs of Nye to open a new Bill Nye “The Religion Guy” line of products. The speech reportedly occurred in 2006 but the controversy was rekindled after critics cried foul at the removal of the story from the local newspaper’s online archive.
...
Maybe hit Snopes? Some part of me says, please let this be a Poe, it just can't be real ... But I'll bet it is.
Posted by: a_ray_in_dilbert_space
|
September 5, 2009 8:48 PM
"If you fail to build a school, you will sooner or later have to build a prison."--Mark Twain (I think)
Posted by: salix | September 5, 2009 9:08 PM
As homeschooling becomes more common, school systems are slowly changing to accommodate kids who may want to go to a public school only for band, say, or sports programs. I know several families here who have enrolled their children at local public schools only for the specific programs they feel they need -- and the particular school gets paid based on these part-time enrollments, just as they are given funds for full-time students. (At least that seems to be the trend here in Canada.)
I would also agree with the poster who said that most of the homeschooling families they had seen were -- what did they say? Oh here it is, "simple-living, stretch-the-dollar, hippie, back-to-the-land" types. I teach science classes to homeschooling kids, and through my courses I've easily met well over a hundred families. I would go out on a limb to say that absolutely none of them are well-off -- many, many of them make-do, grow some of their own food, and live a fairly simple lifestyle. Many times I've had parents who couldn't afford my course fees , and so we bartered instead, no worries.
They're choosing to homeschool despite the financial hardships, each for their own reasons. Whatever problems you've seen with the public school system (and no, I'm not saying it's 'broken beyond repair', but no one here will argue that the system is problem-free) -- they've seen them too, and usually there's been one difficulty that for them was the straw that broke the public-schoolers back: bullying or boredom, nasty teachers or nasty policies. One family left their school after repeated bomb threats, metal detectors at the doors, and constant locker searches. Another family found it horrific that, in their school, every Friday afternoon became, "let's all learn better sales techniques and sell magazine subscriptions/seeds/chocolate to everyone we know". And so on.
I tend to get in my classes lots of highly intelligent, motivated kids who were bored to tears in their school classes; I also tend to get the kids who have issues like autism, Asperger's, OCD, Tourettes, etc. Almost everyone does well with me -- my class size is quite small, I can give everyone a lot of individual attention (and my classes are (if I may say so myself) phenomenally cool).
In my view, I'm not giving up on the educational system by my involvement in homeschooling. I don't see it as a choice between supporting public schools in their current form (by enrolling my son in them, for example), or else turning my back on education in my country, and hence indirectly bringing about the collapse of civilization. I'm devoting my time to the teaching of science to large numbers of kids (some who are currently attending school as well -- their parents had heard of my classes), who learn from me that science is fun, relevant, fascinating, often surprising, and definitely not beyond their abilities. That's the choice I've made -- and by saying that I'm not criticizing anyone else here for their choices for their children.
Posted by: Pygmy Loris | September 5, 2009 11:41 PM
not a gator @181
I went to a public school too. I've had experience with dozens of teachers both inside the classroom and in my personal life. My mother has been teaching for 40 years, so I'm probably going to think she knows more about it than you do.
I'm sorry you had an incompetent math teacher. I had a high school math teacher with a PhD. in math who couldn't teach the subject to anyone. She kept her position because the school didn't seem to understand the abysmal grades students got in her advanced math classes weren't because the subject was difficult, but because she was an awful teacher. You actually need to both know the subject and be able to teach it.
I've taught incompetent education majors in my classes at the university. Other education majors have been stellar students interested in learning as much as possible so that they can be great teachers.
Posted by: Rachal Killmer | January 1, 2010 1:57 PM
I knw ths s rlly brng nd y r skppng t th nxt cmmnt, bt I jst wntd t thrw y bg thnks - y clrd p sm thngs fr m!