When I first heard about this: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/stories/DN-gradefolo_16met.ART.State.Edition2.4d98197.html I thought I must have misunderstood.
But no, it appears to be true.
The Dallas school district has decided to force teachers to allow assignments to be turned in late and for kids to re-take tests on which they performed poorly.
This, of course, is to help students who are slow, or in need of a boost of self-esteem.
Let me be blunt: The people responsible for this are morons.
Faced with the problem of students not getting their work done and blowing off tests, these geniuses decided that school work must have been too hard. So, they take away any sense of responsibility, any sense of pride in a job well done and done on time and any sense that they must adhere to someone else's expectations.
The Dallas school district is creating a bunch of teenaged narcissists who will demand that the rest of the world conform to their demands on their time.
The people responsible for this are educrats who are themselves so lazy and weak they can't bring themselves to demand something from children. They're wimps and they ought to be sued for educational malpractice. They don't deserve to have a place of leadership over the development of young minds. They are a waste of taxpayer dollars.
I thought Texans were supposed to be tough. If y'all really are, boot these pantywaists out and put in some people who'll tell the kids that the people who will one day hire them from jobs take a real dim view of laziness, tardiness and selfishness, which appear to be the only things the Dallas schools are capable of teaching.
Think the Cowboys won Super Bowls with that kind of attitude? Nope.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Pinheads in the Ivory Tower
If ever you needed proof positive (in fact, I'd say this idea is about 80 proof - ha ha) that the Peter Principle is in good working order, check this out:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/08/19/20080819drinking-age0819.html .
The Peter Principle, of course, states that people will often rise to their highest level of incompetence. Well, I'd say a lot of college presidents fit that bill.
Yes, drinking on college campuses has reached epidemic proportions. Then why is the solution, according to these academics, to make booze MORE easily available? Isn't that how we got into this mess in the first place?
Now I understand that Prohibition was a failure and I guess these presidents are thinking that we should at least get the problem out in the open. But what I guess they don't know is that is ALREADY IS IN THE OPEN!
I had the chance to go to a football game at a huge midwestern university a few years back. In fact, it's one of the schools whose president advocates this strategy. The stadium seats 100,000 people or so, but there were easily twice that many outside before the game and most of them were having a beer or twenty.
I can tell you from personal observation that more than a handful of this throng was under the age of 21 and partaking of Mr. Anheuser's, Mr. Busch's, Mr. Miller's and Mr. Coors' finest products. Not to mention demon rum and a bit of Jose for good measure.
If the kids are flaunting the law, well, change the law! That'll do it! While we're at it, let's loosen up the laws on prostitution. After all, kids are having sex all over campus, why shouldn't some of them make money to pay for their outrageous textbook and tuition costs? Theft? THAT's a huge campus problem. It's hard to control, too. Make it legal, that way nobody will have to report these petty crimes like ripping off bikes or swiping a purse. Then the cops will be able to spend time chasing really bad criminals. Heck, everyone cheats. There's a whole industry based on buying term papers online. Schools presidents must know this, so why not condone or even endorse it?
Ridiculous, you say? Of course it is, but no more ridiculous than calling on the nation to lower the drinking age to 18 because adults who ostensibly operate these universities (many of them public) can't bring themselves to tell the students NO.
Here's a novel idea: Either get the cops to really crack down on these boozers (admittedly a tall order) or, do what colleges love to do in regards to guns - make the school an "alcohol-free zone." Hey, if it's good for firearms, why can't it be good for booze? Enforce the same penalties for alcohol possession that exist for weapons. Too extreme? O.K., but find something to do and really enforce it. There are large universities that do this very thing today. But, sshhhhh... they're religious in nature and we can't be nuts like them.... Yeah, well try it. You may like it.
Of course, the problem with that is at some point, the schools would lose a lot of students and the money they bring in. All you'd have left are the ones who want to learn and get a degree.
And we all know most universities gave up the mission of providing a quality undergrad education a long time ago to pursue the almighty grail of research and the money it brings...
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/08/19/20080819drinking-age0819.html .
The Peter Principle, of course, states that people will often rise to their highest level of incompetence. Well, I'd say a lot of college presidents fit that bill.
Yes, drinking on college campuses has reached epidemic proportions. Then why is the solution, according to these academics, to make booze MORE easily available? Isn't that how we got into this mess in the first place?
Now I understand that Prohibition was a failure and I guess these presidents are thinking that we should at least get the problem out in the open. But what I guess they don't know is that is ALREADY IS IN THE OPEN!
I had the chance to go to a football game at a huge midwestern university a few years back. In fact, it's one of the schools whose president advocates this strategy. The stadium seats 100,000 people or so, but there were easily twice that many outside before the game and most of them were having a beer or twenty.
I can tell you from personal observation that more than a handful of this throng was under the age of 21 and partaking of Mr. Anheuser's, Mr. Busch's, Mr. Miller's and Mr. Coors' finest products. Not to mention demon rum and a bit of Jose for good measure.
If the kids are flaunting the law, well, change the law! That'll do it! While we're at it, let's loosen up the laws on prostitution. After all, kids are having sex all over campus, why shouldn't some of them make money to pay for their outrageous textbook and tuition costs? Theft? THAT's a huge campus problem. It's hard to control, too. Make it legal, that way nobody will have to report these petty crimes like ripping off bikes or swiping a purse. Then the cops will be able to spend time chasing really bad criminals. Heck, everyone cheats. There's a whole industry based on buying term papers online. Schools presidents must know this, so why not condone or even endorse it?
Ridiculous, you say? Of course it is, but no more ridiculous than calling on the nation to lower the drinking age to 18 because adults who ostensibly operate these universities (many of them public) can't bring themselves to tell the students NO.
Here's a novel idea: Either get the cops to really crack down on these boozers (admittedly a tall order) or, do what colleges love to do in regards to guns - make the school an "alcohol-free zone." Hey, if it's good for firearms, why can't it be good for booze? Enforce the same penalties for alcohol possession that exist for weapons. Too extreme? O.K., but find something to do and really enforce it. There are large universities that do this very thing today. But, sshhhhh... they're religious in nature and we can't be nuts like them.... Yeah, well try it. You may like it.
Of course, the problem with that is at some point, the schools would lose a lot of students and the money they bring in. All you'd have left are the ones who want to learn and get a degree.
And we all know most universities gave up the mission of providing a quality undergrad education a long time ago to pursue the almighty grail of research and the money it brings...
Friday, August 15, 2008
Just checking....
If you have a kid in school, have you:
1. Checked his or her backpack for homework?
2. Gotten to know the teacher?
3. Taken a look at any pertinent academic rankings for the school? (States differ in how they do this and federal "Adequate Yearly Progress" is a joke.)
4. Investigated a charter school (if your state has any)in case your district school, well, stinks?
5. Told your kid you love him (or her) and you expect junior to do his very, very best, even if it's not always fun?
6. If not, why not?
Yes, it's August, and school hasn't started everywhere. But in lots of places, classes are in session. In any case, it's never too early or late to think about these things.
Heck, half the battle in education is just being prepared.
1. Checked his or her backpack for homework?
2. Gotten to know the teacher?
3. Taken a look at any pertinent academic rankings for the school? (States differ in how they do this and federal "Adequate Yearly Progress" is a joke.)
4. Investigated a charter school (if your state has any)in case your district school, well, stinks?
5. Told your kid you love him (or her) and you expect junior to do his very, very best, even if it's not always fun?
6. If not, why not?
Yes, it's August, and school hasn't started everywhere. But in lots of places, classes are in session. In any case, it's never too early or late to think about these things.
Heck, half the battle in education is just being prepared.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Would you go back just to say hello?
Mr. and Mrs. Reformer went to parent night at Junior Reformer's high school not too long ago.
It's hard to get an idea of what the ol' sprout's teachers are really like in just a matter of minutes. They all seem nice, of course; but we're all on our best behavior at times such as these.
But there are some things that just can't be faked...
Take Junior's world history teacher, for example. We entered the classroom knowing nothing about this man. No advance intelligence, no neighbor kids raving good things or bad about him.
He was a blank slate to us.
The room was filled, which was not unexpected, but there were lots of students without parents hanging out in the back. "What's up with that?" we wondered.
It turns out they weren't students at all; they were graduates. They had come back to say hello to a teacher who had really made a difference in their lives. This is apparently a man who has a rare ability to connect with the kids, to make the material stand out and who inspires former students to take a night out of their lives to go back to their old high school -- the very place they rejoiced upon graduating just three months ago -- to bask in the warmth of a teacher who made them love learning.
This is what school is all about, folks. I bet this teacher does not grouse to students about lousy pay. He does not moan about standardized testing or idiotic administrators. I'm sure he does expect a lot out of his students and he knows the subject inside and out. He demands that they join a service club on campus, and no job is too big or small. In other words, this teacher lives in the real world, teaches to the real world, and the students know it.
This man does not need any accolades from me. He does not need his name in the paper or on some plaque.
This is a teacher. And his reward is the people standing in the back of the room.
It's hard to get an idea of what the ol' sprout's teachers are really like in just a matter of minutes. They all seem nice, of course; but we're all on our best behavior at times such as these.
But there are some things that just can't be faked...
Take Junior's world history teacher, for example. We entered the classroom knowing nothing about this man. No advance intelligence, no neighbor kids raving good things or bad about him.
He was a blank slate to us.
The room was filled, which was not unexpected, but there were lots of students without parents hanging out in the back. "What's up with that?" we wondered.
It turns out they weren't students at all; they were graduates. They had come back to say hello to a teacher who had really made a difference in their lives. This is apparently a man who has a rare ability to connect with the kids, to make the material stand out and who inspires former students to take a night out of their lives to go back to their old high school -- the very place they rejoiced upon graduating just three months ago -- to bask in the warmth of a teacher who made them love learning.
This is what school is all about, folks. I bet this teacher does not grouse to students about lousy pay. He does not moan about standardized testing or idiotic administrators. I'm sure he does expect a lot out of his students and he knows the subject inside and out. He demands that they join a service club on campus, and no job is too big or small. In other words, this teacher lives in the real world, teaches to the real world, and the students know it.
This man does not need any accolades from me. He does not need his name in the paper or on some plaque.
This is a teacher. And his reward is the people standing in the back of the room.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
What are my children's names?
Great.
As if having federal micromanagement of local schools isn't enough of a burden, our intrepid Congress wants to stick its Pete Townsend - sized nose into our family rooms.
Take a look at this bill that was passed by the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR02343:@@@L&summ2=m&
Don't you just love the Title? The "Education Begins at Home Act." No kidding! It just occurred to these geniuses in Congress that kids begin their lives at home before they are shipped off - for the most part - to government-run public schools six hours a day.
But the Democrats in Congress (remember, they run the joint these days) aren't satisfied with tinkering with education at schools. Now, they want to send a local friendly bureaucrat to your door to make sure you can handle raising little junior. And if you can't? Well, brothers and sisters... We got the gubmint to help us!
Here's the summary of what the bill will do:
Education Begins at Home Act - Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to: (1) allot grants to states, Indians, territories, and possessions for programs of early childhood home visitation; and (2) make competitive grants to local educational agencies and other eligible applicants for early home visitation for families with English language learners. Directs the Secretary of Defense to make competitive grants to eligible applicants for early home visitation for military families.
Amends the Head Start Act to direct the Secretary of HHS to establish standards for home visitor staff in Early Head Start programs with respect to their training, qualifications, and conduct of home visits.
Revises Early Head Start programs to provide for: (1) training in parenting skills and child development; (2) certain home-based and family support services; (3) procedures for transition into Head Start or other local early childhood education programs; (4) staff communication and program coordination; and (5) professional development and personnel enhancement.
Directs the Secretary of HHS to develop and implement a public information and educational campaign to inform the public and new parents about the importance of proper care for infants and children under five years of age.
In other words, you, my friend, must be an IDIOT. Therefore, the government will render its expertise. It's not like people have been raising kids on their own for oh, five millenia!
This reminds me of an exchange between Sen. Phil Gramm and a Clinton appointee who ran a federal agency. The appointee was touting a new government program that would "help" children. Sen. Gramm wanted to know the justification for this program and the appointee assured the Senator that government workers really, truly and sincerely love other people's children.
The Senator, God bless him, said: "You mean the government can care for my children as well as I can?" The reply: "Yes, senator, I believe we can." To which Sen. Gramm queried... "Then what are their names?"
Keep your eyes on these jokers in Congress. They want to strip you of everything.
As if having federal micromanagement of local schools isn't enough of a burden, our intrepid Congress wants to stick its Pete Townsend - sized nose into our family rooms.
Take a look at this bill that was passed by the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR02343:@@@L&summ2=m&
Don't you just love the Title? The "Education Begins at Home Act." No kidding! It just occurred to these geniuses in Congress that kids begin their lives at home before they are shipped off - for the most part - to government-run public schools six hours a day.
But the Democrats in Congress (remember, they run the joint these days) aren't satisfied with tinkering with education at schools. Now, they want to send a local friendly bureaucrat to your door to make sure you can handle raising little junior. And if you can't? Well, brothers and sisters... We got the gubmint to help us!
Here's the summary of what the bill will do:
Education Begins at Home Act - Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to: (1) allot grants to states, Indians, territories, and possessions for programs of early childhood home visitation; and (2) make competitive grants to local educational agencies and other eligible applicants for early home visitation for families with English language learners. Directs the Secretary of Defense to make competitive grants to eligible applicants for early home visitation for military families.
Amends the Head Start Act to direct the Secretary of HHS to establish standards for home visitor staff in Early Head Start programs with respect to their training, qualifications, and conduct of home visits.
Revises Early Head Start programs to provide for: (1) training in parenting skills and child development; (2) certain home-based and family support services; (3) procedures for transition into Head Start or other local early childhood education programs; (4) staff communication and program coordination; and (5) professional development and personnel enhancement.
Directs the Secretary of HHS to develop and implement a public information and educational campaign to inform the public and new parents about the importance of proper care for infants and children under five years of age.
In other words, you, my friend, must be an IDIOT. Therefore, the government will render its expertise. It's not like people have been raising kids on their own for oh, five millenia!
This reminds me of an exchange between Sen. Phil Gramm and a Clinton appointee who ran a federal agency. The appointee was touting a new government program that would "help" children. Sen. Gramm wanted to know the justification for this program and the appointee assured the Senator that government workers really, truly and sincerely love other people's children.
The Senator, God bless him, said: "You mean the government can care for my children as well as I can?" The reply: "Yes, senator, I believe we can." To which Sen. Gramm queried... "Then what are their names?"
Keep your eyes on these jokers in Congress. They want to strip you of everything.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Haven't these people been thoroughly discredited yet?
I was reading the hometown fishwrap the other day and ran across a column (apparently it was written apropos of nothing) that tried to discredit phonics. And yes, the author (a retired educrat) did sneak in a snide reference to "Hooked on Phonics" while he was at it. Cute, if not trite.
Now my role in life is not to bore you with technical stuff, so I will distill his argument into this: phonics doesn't work because... well, um, because... uh.... BECAUSE IT DOESN'T!!!
Yes I know, I'm being unfair. His argument wasn't even as good as that.
He tried to argue that some words cannot be deconstructed phonetically, therefore phonics fails at all levels. There are, in fact, a few words such as "for", "come" and "who" that can't be deciphered phonetically and therefore must be learned by sight.
But the alternative to phonics is whole language. And whole language requires that virtually ALL words must be read by sight and memorized. I'm sure future chemistry majors, doctors and lawyers will all really appreciate that.
No, sir, phonics is time-tested and proven to work. In fact, very few colleges of education insist in perpetuating whole language instruction. The most prominent of the dinosaur thinkers is the University of Arizona in Tucson, AZ, and they invented the thing.
Critics of phonics say they find it lacking because some kids who learn using phonics are poor readers. That's a circular argument not worthy of an academic thinker. There are endless reasons why kids are poor learners, blaming phonics is just scapegoating. Note that this guest columnist did not have the temerity to claim that all kids taught with whole language are excellent readers, one and all. He knows better.
His claims are pure sophistry designed to prop up a failed and unloved system of reading instruction - whole language. I am so happy the author of that article is now a retired educator.
And I am so happy I learned how to read by phonics.
Now my role in life is not to bore you with technical stuff, so I will distill his argument into this: phonics doesn't work because... well, um, because... uh.... BECAUSE IT DOESN'T!!!
Yes I know, I'm being unfair. His argument wasn't even as good as that.
He tried to argue that some words cannot be deconstructed phonetically, therefore phonics fails at all levels. There are, in fact, a few words such as "for", "come" and "who" that can't be deciphered phonetically and therefore must be learned by sight.
But the alternative to phonics is whole language. And whole language requires that virtually ALL words must be read by sight and memorized. I'm sure future chemistry majors, doctors and lawyers will all really appreciate that.
No, sir, phonics is time-tested and proven to work. In fact, very few colleges of education insist in perpetuating whole language instruction. The most prominent of the dinosaur thinkers is the University of Arizona in Tucson, AZ, and they invented the thing.
Critics of phonics say they find it lacking because some kids who learn using phonics are poor readers. That's a circular argument not worthy of an academic thinker. There are endless reasons why kids are poor learners, blaming phonics is just scapegoating. Note that this guest columnist did not have the temerity to claim that all kids taught with whole language are excellent readers, one and all. He knows better.
His claims are pure sophistry designed to prop up a failed and unloved system of reading instruction - whole language. I am so happy the author of that article is now a retired educator.
And I am so happy I learned how to read by phonics.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
...more rucketing in the brain...
I kind of like my new word, "rucketing" but I might get tired of it, too. You may hate it. You may hate me. I hope not. But let's try the new word on for a while...
Seeing as it's summer, you may have seen something slip by. Even though the schools are not in session (for the most part), school boards are still meeting in many precincts of this great nation.
You know what they're talking about? Money.
I don't know if you've noticed, but budgets are pretty tight these days. we're in a growing economy, by the way, but it's pretty flat. But despite the growth, states have spent so much in the past few years, they have little or no reserve funds. And guess who takes some of the hit for that less-than-stellar planning? Yup, schools.
We've got districts cutting back on nurses, librarians, field trips, the whole Magilla. Now what's been rucketing in my head (slick, no?) is that you almost never see cuts to six-figure administrative jobs in the district offices. Or, you rarely see the pricey consultant services trimmed back.
Here's a thought for you: Go online to your local district website and find when the board meetings are. Pay them a visit. Ask the tough questions and make you voice heard.
Don't the the boards run their budget knife through the heart of education - the classroom and library (nurses, too) while leaving the fat untouched.
Seeing as it's summer, you may have seen something slip by. Even though the schools are not in session (for the most part), school boards are still meeting in many precincts of this great nation.
You know what they're talking about? Money.
I don't know if you've noticed, but budgets are pretty tight these days. we're in a growing economy, by the way, but it's pretty flat. But despite the growth, states have spent so much in the past few years, they have little or no reserve funds. And guess who takes some of the hit for that less-than-stellar planning? Yup, schools.
We've got districts cutting back on nurses, librarians, field trips, the whole Magilla. Now what's been rucketing in my head (slick, no?) is that you almost never see cuts to six-figure administrative jobs in the district offices. Or, you rarely see the pricey consultant services trimmed back.
Here's a thought for you: Go online to your local district website and find when the board meetings are. Pay them a visit. Ask the tough questions and make you voice heard.
Don't the the boards run their budget knife through the heart of education - the classroom and library (nurses, too) while leaving the fat untouched.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)