Su Moo Nein The Belgium Comeex Foliatet Hist Wat Is Leepking Ingin Thes Tifler
-
You and @mrguyorama both know that we've had a couple of decades of ever-increasing spending on education with no measurable improvement in outcome, right?
I think you missed my link before, so here, let me make it more obvious for you.
Also,
-
We can't keep the fucking heater on in the winter. The "piles of money" you refer to are in other states, where they can afford to buy new textbooks more than once every five or ten years.
-
It's unfortunate that your mother's union is worthless
Yeah, it's pretty tough for his mom to make a living when nobody will pay her for "union." Maybe Kegel exercises would help.
-
to make sure those checks are being put to good use
The problem is the definition of "good use" has a social/political agenda (which changes depending on who's running the show at the moment) behind it.
-
We can't keep the fucking heater on in the winter. The "piles of money" you refer to are in other states, where they can afford to buy new textbooks more than once every five or ten years.
Perhaps you and the bra fox could spend a bit of time on a refresher course of the fallacy of the excluded middle, is all I'm saying.
-
The problem is the definition of "good use" has a social/political agenda (which changes depending on who's running the show at the moment) behind it.
Yes, that is a problem. We need to have reliable standards for what a good education is. Maybe if we had some governing body overseeing all education in the country...
-
@boomzilla said:
We've arrested people who were planning to join ISIS life al-shabob our whatever that Ethiopian terrorist group is.
can people be arrested for planning something now?
First link on google for me:
Feds: Mississippi couple planned honeymoon to join ISIS in Syria | CNN
Jaelyn Delshaun Young and Muhammad Oda Dakhlalla of Mississippi are accused of attempting and conspiring to provide material support and resources to ISIS.
-
I don't understand what false dichotomy you are talking about here, but I will concede that funding the DoE != spending less on education and poor sector schooling
-
There is almost always a state level DoE, but in the end they need to answer to a higher power in terms of learning standards so that states in the south wont be able to completely strike evolution from their textbooks.
They need to answer to a higher power. Need to. Need to. Hmm...no, not seeing it. But I got a chuckle out of your sentence.
The Feds can get stuff wrong, too.
-
@anonymous234 said:
It can be illegal to leave the country in some circumstances... for example if you go there with the intention to do something illegal (female genital mutilation being the most common example), but that doesn't seem the case here.
Illegal under UK law? Dafuq. So theoretically they could jail every kid that goes to Amsterdam to have a spliff or three?Extraterritorial jurisdiction is typically only asserted in certain specific laws which are for particularly severe crimes. E.g. bans on sex tourism, murder, etc.
These type of laws are partly necessary because they're the only way to assert jurisdiction over the actions committed by anyone who decided to get a boat, travel a few miles off the coast into international waters, and commit some heinous act which would normally be illegal (fuck a man in the ass; feed their wife to sharks; have sex with a child; etc.). Also partly necessary because they cover actions committed in countries which didn't sign on to international law / human rights treaties, have no age of consent law, and other things of that sort.
-
I think you missed my link before, so here, let me make it more obvious for you.
That you're begging the question about funding levels? I think he gets that just fine.
-
How else do you have centralized standards than a higher power? Texas alone will never agree to standards other states find normal unless you force them to
-
Loooooollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
You honestly think states in the South haven't been trying to remove evolution and slavery from textbooks?
-
I don't understand what false dichotomy you are talking about here, but I will concede that funding the DoE != spending less on education and poor sector schooling
I suggest that Federalizing everything may not always be the answer, and you seem to think I am advocating eliminating ending any funding for kids in poor states. "may not always be the answer" implies that maybe it actually is. Or here's an idea, off the top of my head, perhaps a few neighboring states could group together and pool funding.
"Throw moar money at schools!" is demonstrably not the answer, because we've been doing that to no avail, as measured by test scores and the like. I don't know what the answers are. I just object to the idea that everything has to involve raising taxes and getting the Feds involved.
-
@boomzilla said:
We've arrested people who were planning to join ISIS life al-shabob our whatever that Ethiopian terrorist group is.
can people be arrested for planning something now?
Yes, actually, conspiracy is a criminal offense.
-
That you're begging the question about funding levels? I think he gets that just fine.
How is it begging the question to flat out prove that he's wrong about funding levels increasing constantly?
-
perhaps a few neighboring states could group together and pool funding
I don't know what universe you live in, but here on earth, there is a near zero percent chance that a state would willingly fund my state's education for zero benefit to them."Throw moar money at schools!" is demonstrably not the answer, because we've been doing that to no avail,
It is for some schools, and heavily NOT for others. The bottom line though is that a school produces zero useful education without having a minimum level of funding to function. So something somewhere needs to make sure that at the very least, every american has an equal and reasonable access to minimum education levels.I don't know what the answers are.
Nobody else does either. In my experience, a good teacher will teach better, but most teachers have no idea how to actually teach. But we also don't know how to teach teachers to teach.
-
How else do you have centralized standards than a higher power?
Do you really need centralized standards? Do the standards need to come from the government?
Texas alone will never agree to standards other states find normal unless you force them to
My state has thumbed its nose at common core, and good for it.
-
You honestly think states in the South haven't been trying to remove evolution and slavery from textbooks?
I'm aware that some of them have been trying not to teach evolution. This is the first claim I've heard about slavery.
Do you really think evolution should be a primary goal of education? How about getting some basic literacy and math skills?
How is it begging the question to flat out prove that he's wrong about funding levels increasing constantly?
OK, you can win that minor pedantic point, but there's an embedded assumption in your larger argument that more funding is always a good thing.
-
This is the first claim I've heard about slavery.
Texas just got called out for calling slaves "migrant workers" in its history textbooks. They also consistently teach here that "states' rights" were the cause of the Civil War, and that the "belief" that slavery was the primary cause is a "common misconception".
-
Do you really think evolution should be a primary goal of education? How about getting some basic literacy and math skills?
ACTUAL SCIENCE should be a primary goal of education, yes. Critical thinking skills are at least as important as literacy and math, though I will not argue that we definitely need improvement in those subjects as well.
-
How is it begging the question to flat out prove that he's wrong about funding levels increasing constantly?
Did I say "constantly"? If so I didn't mean to. But using a starting point of the recession is kind of cherry-picking. Any idea what the numbers were like 20 years go compared to today? Which I think I actually was talking about?
-
I've looked into common core, and my understanding is it has some good ideas. It wants to teach children the simple and effective tricks to do complicated operations by splitting them into quick disparate calculations. The problem is that often the textbook writers are dumb as shit, do not understand the standard, and write stupid test questions. Teachers should see those stupid test questions and throw them out. Any teacher not ignoring these stupid test questions is a bad teacher.
Do you really think evolution should be a primary goal of education? How about getting some basic literacy and math skills?
Evolution is one of the basic facts of biology and biome development. If you don't learn it, you are missing an important tenant of science. There's no reason schools can't teach scientific fact and reasoning skills together. They are not mutually exclusive.
-
there's an embedded assumption in your larger argument that more funding is always a good thing.
No, the embedded assumption in my larger argument is that enough funding is always a good thing, and that cutting major sources of education funding is the most reliable way to not have enough funding.
-
@HardwareGeek said:
The problem is the definition of "good use" has a social/political agenda (which changes depending on who's running the show at the moment) behind it.
Yes, that is a problem. We need to have reliable standards for what a good education is. Maybe if we had some governing body overseeing all education in the country...
If that governing body is part of the Federal government (and even if it isn't), it will have an agenda attached. If the standards are set by the government, the agenda will swing left or right depending on which party is in charge. If the standards are set by the education profession, it's likely the agenda will stay to the left, probably farther left than it would be if political compromises were necessary to get government appointees confirmed.
-
ever-increasing spending
"constantly" is implied there.
And judging funding for the entire country's education based on aggregating scores across the entire country is a nice fallacy of division.
-
Texas just got called out for calling slaves "migrant workers" in its history textbooks.
But that's not really a great summary:
“The Atlantic Slave Trade between the 1500s and 1800s brought millions of workers from Africa to the southern United States to work on agricultural plantations.”
The word "slave" is right there in the sentence. I'm guessing some editor told them to not use the same noun twice in the same sentence. But who knows. In any case, the Feds seem to have had nothing to do with this.
-
The standards body MUST have a teaching background. Too much education administration is run by people who have never been in front of a class in their life. How the holy hell would they know how to teach?!
The word "slave" is right there in the sentence.
I agree with you that this complaint should not have been a major one.
-
-
"constantly" is implied there.
Congratulations on your minor pendantry point. Please show me a graph of spending from 1990 to today and tell me what the trend is.
-
I've looked into common core, and my understanding is it has some good ideas. It wants to teach children the simple and effective tricks to do complicated operations by splitting them into quick disparate calculations
Fuck......trying not to start another CC flame war. We've explored several times why this is retarded.
There's no reason schools can't teach scientific fact and reasoning skills together. They are not mutually exclusive.
Sure there is. See above: Teachers' Unions!
-
In any case, the Feds seem to have had nothing to do with this.
Exactly. It was Texas.
Also, it's really just part of a larger problem.
Do new Texas textbooks whitewash slavery and segregation?
New social studies textbooks planned for use in Texas public schools this year are under fire for the way they depict slavery, the Civil War and racial segregation.
"There would be those who would say the reason for the Civil War was over slavery. No. It was over states' rights."
-Texas State Board of Education MemberThis is pretty much a good indicator of how trustworthy the southern states are about accurate teaching.
-
Sure there is. See above: Teachers' Unions!
Do you have proof/a chain of logic behind this assertion or am I wooshing hard?We've explored several times why this is retarded
It's the basic concept of problem solving? The retarded thing is it is often taught before the kids learn to do it the long way
-
@boomzilla said:
there's an embedded assumption in your larger argument that more funding is always a good thing.
No, the embedded assumption in my larger argument is that enough funding is always a good thing, and that cutting major sources of education funding is the most reliable way to not have enough funding.
There are poor places, to be sure. But then, some of the worst schools get pretty much the most funding, e.g., Washington, DC. Speaking of a place where the teachers' unions are actively working against innovation in education.
-
Do you have proof/a chain of logic behind this assertion or am I wooshing hard?
It was mostly a joke. But I think several examples of unions being impediments to education were provided.
The retarded thing is it is often taught before the kids learn to do it the long way
Yes.
-
But I think several examples of unions being impediments to education were provided
I was wooshing. Although I think most of the examples were about the unions being the root cause of money waste.
Yes.
A real educator would understand how important it is to do it the other way around. Hence why the standards need to be written by educators, not "professionals"
-
-
-
@boomzilla said:
Do you really think evolution should be a primary goal of education? How about getting some basic literacy and math skills?
ACTUAL SCIENCE should be a primary goal of education, yes. Critical thinking skills are at least as important as literacy and math, though I will not argue that we definitely need improvement in those subjects as well.
Whether scientific principles such as physics and genetics (which should be taught) can be used to accurately predict what the universe or life were like 13 billion or 130 million years ago, or whether or not those predictions are correct, should not be filed under "actual science" and taught in primary schools. Things that happened millions of years ago by means of processes which will have zero net effect in any of their lifetimes have zero net importance in their education, until and unless they go on to actively pursue careers in those particular fields of knowledge.
-
Everyone who passes through the totality of highschool should have a basic understanding of most concepts. This includes all of the sciences, literature, writing both creatively and technically, rational thought, maths, music, art, history, and many other important things.
-
Things that happened millions of years ago by means of processes which will have zero net effect in any of their lifetimes have zero net importance in their education, until and unless they go on to actively pursue careers in those particular fields of knowledge.
Evolution does not just occur over millions of years. It occurs over generations. In some species, that amounts to mere hours. It's actually quite relevant to our lifetimes.
-
You'll notice that I said the concepts should be taught. The specific applications of those concepts when it comes to what happened millions of years ago are not relevant to hardly anyone other than researchers and theorists.
-
You spoke as if evolution isn't one of those concepts which should be taught, which is quite false.
-
Most of these topics require context to teach effectively, otherwise you have shitloads of lazy dumbass teenagers going "But I don't wanna learn about this"
-
As far as I know, most creationists have no objection to the sort of "evolution" which occurs over generations. You're talking about the basic processes of genetics, which I did say should be taught.
-
As far as I know, most creationists have no objection to the sort of "evolution" which occurs over generations. You're talking about the basic processes of genetics, which I did say should be taught.
No, they just have a problem with calling it evolution, when it is still evolution. And you implied that you also had a problem with calling it evolution. Also, yes, context helps. "For example, this dinosaur evolved from this fish by this process, and this dog evolved from this canid"
-
Most of these topics require context to teach effectively
So teach them about drug resistance in bacteria. That's relevant.
MonkeysProto-human ape-like creatures evolving into humans is not relevant.they just have a problem with calling it evolution, when it is still evolution. And you implied that you also had a problem with calling it evolution.
I put "evolution" in quotes because I was referring to a subset of evolution, not the whole.
-
How is that not history? Are you telling me we shouldn't teach people about the freaking origin of our species?
-
MonkeysProto-human ape-like creatures evolving into humans is not relevant.
It is actually relevant to human history. If there is anything in evolutionary history over the course of millions of years that is relevant to a modern education, it is that exact evolutionary chain of events.
-
How is that not history? Are you telling me we shouldn't teach people about the freaking origin of our species?
So you're saying that it should be taught in history textbooks, rather than science textbooks?
The problem with that is, in most cases at least, to be printed in history textbooks, it has to be independently verifiable fact. Or, at least, prefaced with a glaring disclaimer that it's unverifiable.
[Proto-human ape-like creatures evolving into humans] is actually relevant to human history. If there is anything in evolutionary history over the course of millions of years that is relevant to a modern education, it is that exact evolutionary chain of events.
So you're saying that it's the least irrelevant thing in evolutionary history?
Not exactly a shining endorsement. I'll take it.
