Republicans are ruining American education

Ya know I don't come on here and talk about how 90% of the mechanics in the world are crooked or how 90% of the carpenters in the world don't know a 2 x 4 from their ass.

So because I express an opinion that happens to differ from someone else's that means I think I'm superior.
I'm sorry but when someone levels baseless acquisitions against my profession I respond by asking for facts.
If you can't respond with intelligent criticism, data, or facts, don't blame me for asking for it. Produce it.

 

It's very simple Spiff,
You come into this thread and proclaim that 90% of all teachers in the U.S are only in the profession because of the money and because they're on some kind of power trip.

With nothing to back up your claim, nada.

You attack and degrade a profession and 90% of the people in it.
I simply said that I don't come on here and attack and degrade any profession or job as you do, and I gave two examples.
For some reason you expressed hatred toward of certain profession of people.
Again, I am saying I don't hate any particular profession.

I used carpenters and mechanics as an example, which apparently you don't understand. I said I don't say things like that. I don't say them because I don't believe them. You then said that 90% of mechanics are crooked.

We're talking about carpenters and mechanics because you can't or won't back up your claim about teachers.

Is there anyone you like?

 

Conservative Republicans by definition are conservative. They're opposed to change unless that change is in a direction that supports their own views.
The purpose of a liberal education is to expose students to things they don't know, aren't aware of, and don't know they aren't aware of.
If you hold specific values and morals and you're a conservative then you wish to conserve those values, you are resistant to seeing them changed.
As the primary goal of liberal education is an expansion of world views, conservatives will resist a liberal education.

Thus a stanch conservative doesn't believe in liberal education, their style of education is more in alignment with indoctrination.
Students are to be schooled in the morals, values, and views that the conservatives already hold. There's no room for the introduction of opposing morals, values, and views as that could lead to the student possibly questioning what they already know or even changing their morals, values, or views.

​

 

Now as teachers seem to be getting bashed in this thread by some, let's look at one of the primary complaints, teachers' unions.

Diane Ravitch has an interesting section in her book. In it she describes the Houston based ultraconservative group called the Minute Women.
The Minute Women would drop in on classes unannounced and sit in the back to see if any teachers expressed any unacceptable political opinions. Nothing wrong with unannounced classroom observation, what's wrong is the purpose of those observations.
One teacher Miss Nelda Davis was targeted by them because she sought to attend the convention of the National Council for the Social Studies.
It seems the Minute Women labeled this organization as leftist.....along with the United Nations, the NAACP, the Urban League and all other groups that advocated for desegregation or human rights. They were also considered to be Communist Fronts.
(All this is from of THE DEATH AND LIFE OF THE GREAT AMERICAN SCHOOL SYSTEM, How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education, by Diane Ravitch, starting on page 174)

She had no protection from a teachers' union. Before unions teachers could be, and were, fired for getting married, getting pregnant while married, expressing pacifist beliefs, for being of the wrong religion or the wrong race, for being gay, for belonging to some out group, for not making the right political contribution or not paying bribes, for speaking outside of the classroom, for disagreeing with administration, or because someone on the school board wanted to get a relative a job.
With unions tenure was secured, which simply means that teachers must be granted due process before being fired for things such as insubordination, incompetence, or moral or criminal infractions.

Teachers don't join unions only to get higher pay.....as Raditch says, "...they join to protect their right to think, speak, and teach without fear."

Edit (I should have said "nothing wrong with unannounced observations...I corrected it)

 

There are countless instructional ways and programs that have been and are being tried in schools.

Not all learning is done alone. Team learning has been going on for years.
Team learning has pros and cons.
Here are some resources:
Learning Strategis - Eric
ERIC - Using Student Team Learning. The Johns Hopkins Team ...
Cooperative learning in middle and secondary schools - High Point ...
Using Student Team Learning - ResearchGate
student team learning, slavin.pdf | Reading (Process) | Self Esteem
student team learning - DIDA NET

etc.

 

It depends on how the businesses participate.
I was involved in STEM.

If the business supplies funds, technical knowledge, and practical experience opportunities to students based on a curriculum developed through parental, school board, and educator input, all is fine and dandy.
But if the business or corporation begins to influence the curriculum to its own end, problems arise.

 

I can't speak to other states as I haven't done the research, but in Pennsylvania we ended up with public pension problems due to several reasons.

In 2001 the pension system was flooded with money, it was over funded and could meet all of its needs. In May Republican Governor Tom Ridge thought that giving lawmakers a 50% boost in their pensions would gain him political favor, after all the funds where there. The rest of the public sector complained about the lawmakers getting a boost, but not them. So Ridge also gave all other public employees a 25% boost in their pensions. Both increases were to take effect retroactively and for the future.

As a trade off employees had to contribute more to the system and the state contributed less. Employees contribute a certain percentage and the state does likewise.

Times were good and the stock market was booming. Contributions from the government reached zero in some areas beginning in 1995. The pension systems were funded at 132%, state workers and 124%, teachers.

So the government quit contributing and then in 2002 employees contributions were capped at 1.15% as money was plentiful.
Then the stock market went sour and everyone was in trouble. The government suddenly found out they had no money.

Democratic Governor Ed Rendell tried to fix the problem by refinancing the losses to be paid off in 30 years instead of 10.
Then the 2008 recession hit and the teachers' fund alone lost $19.5 billion in one year.
In 2010 Rendell reduced pension benefits for those hired after 2011.
Today the fund is still struggling due to poor management.

In short pension problems are not the sole result of unions.