951–960 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>How good were you at your profession when you got your bachelor's? Rather a lot better than before I got it.
Which adds absolutely no information in this context. Well played.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem is that the public education sector has been - for years - continuously squeezed dry of any funding. Public school spending in the US is up almost 50% in the last 30 years.[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/203118/expenditures-per-...
Where the hell is all this money going ? It's certainly not to teachers, whose salaries have barely changed[1] when adjusted for inflation. Is it going to real estate costs? Technology costs? Administration? What? [1] https://www.statista.com/chart/20979/public-school-teacher-s...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have got bad news about that, the majority of abusive households send the kids to school and scare them into silence. Regulations against abusive households do exist but enforcing them completely would require a degree of inescapable surveillance that cannot exist.
That may be true, but way more kids get sent to school then are home schooled, so that doesn't mean much on its own. The issue is that when a kid's at school, there are many people who may notice something's wrong. From teachers, school nurses, school administrators, and even other kids. This is by no means perfect, and many, many cases of abuse slip through the cracks. But it is something, which is more then many ho…
The 4th amendment of the Constitution protects all of us from warrantless searches. If you turn public schools into a method of warrantless searches to ferret out criminal activity, then public schools become unconstitutional.
The strange thing is that you can probably turn public schools into a method of warrantless searches without actually codifying that in statute, without making any major changes to school policy. All you have to do is assert that this is one of the major benefits of public education, and get some large fraction of other Americans to believe the same thing.
> You may still feel home schooling is a net positive,
It's a net positive to undermine fundamental human rights?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, in your view of UBI "you have to be a person to get this money" would extend to children? If so, that would be a great way to fund homeschooling.
I find it hard to imagine a path to a working UBI system which does not first provide more basic things like healthcare are education. Arbitrary spending money isn't exactly foundational in the hierarchy of needs. But if somebody manages to find such a path, sure, why not give UBI to children. Expecting those children to then spend it on education seems like a stretch, but we're already playing what-if here, so why n…
And you'd give the money to the children's guardians, who can make those decisions on the children's behalf. Maybe they hire a tutor. Maybe they send their kids to a school. Maybe they use the money to offset a stay at home parent.
I don't think UBI makes sense for a variety of reasons, but that's the gist of it, no?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is oxygen flammable? I’m pretty well-educated and that question gave me pause. I know oxygen is involved in the combustion process, so I think the answer is yes, oxygen is flammable. That feels like a trick question though.
It is a tricky question, especially if you don't remember the precise definition of combustible/flammable. I believe only the fuel (the thing getting oxidized) in the reaction is considered combustible/flammable, not the oxidizing agent. So oxygen isn't flammable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The underlying problem is the completely unregulated nature. I didn't need your permission to give birth to my children, why do I need your permission when deciding how I educate them? > Only dad is allowed to talk to anyone and when he does it's extraordinarily weird. If you feel these children are legitimately being abused in some way, I'm guessing there are plenty of state resources to address that challenge. Do…
This is my thing, like what right does a public school have to regulate when I can and won't send my kids to school? If I decide to take a trip abroad for a month, that's on me... why do i have to worry about truancy court and CPS breathing down my neck?
Why can't you just do anything you want, regardless of the effect it has on your dependents?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, that's one model. The underlying problem is the completely unregulated nature. Similarly, there is household in my neighborhood that home schools. The kids (all 8 of them) never leave the house. They have a 8ft. fence and 1 acre yard where I assume they get some outside time. No one visits. Only dad is allowed to talk to anyone and when he does it's extraordinarily weird.
> The underlying problem is the completely unregulated nature. I didn't need your permission to give birth to my children, why do I need your permission when deciding how I educate them? > Only dad is allowed to talk to anyone and when he does it's extraordinarily weird. If you feel these children are legitimately being abused in some way, I'm guessing there are plenty of state resources to address that challenge. Do…
Because quite frankly, they didn‘t have a say in the matter and rely upon you entirely to provide an adequate education
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's not the socialization that I want for my kids. On the other hand, I'd definitely want my children to be familiar with it. Bullying is not something isolated to schools. I've seen it in nearly every social and political situation that exists at nearly every age group. In my estimation people are getting worse at identifying it and collectively we're getting worse at punishing it.
Public schools teach you all the wrong ways to deal with bullies, and forbid the correct ways. They teach kids to run to teachers for help whenever they get bullied; in the real world that doesn't work because there's no teacher to run to. And when a kid stands up to a bully themselves, the school punishes him for exercising precisely the skills he'll need later in life. Schools don't teach kids how to deal with bull…
"If another kid is throwing sand at you and won't stop when you ask, tell a grown up."
No, grown ups were also raised on this garbage and won't do anything. What's the teacher going to do if the other kid won't stop? Go tell the principal? And what will they do? Nothing.
The correct thing to do is to shove the other kid. Don't hurt them; just indicate they need to back off. If they still don't, throw sand at them, and then while they're recoiling, shove them down and kick them.
Society has a major problem where proper, proportionate, defensive violence is punished, and it traces back to this kind of crap.
Seems they should compare home-schooling growth to change in school quality. The best schools could decline in quality and still be the best. And parents of those schools might be the ones best-equipped to start home-schooling.