http://mwhodges.home.att.net/
Grandfather Economic Report series
I have long known about this website. The people who run it are VERY fiscally conservative.
It is where I first really read about the coming collapse of oil production, and where I became VERY aware of our overall personal, corporate, and governmental debt load.
Anybody who really wants to call themselves a true conservative, should read through every single page on this website.
I personally don't quite buy 100% of what the website implies is good policy, but I am not a true 100% conservative. I DO trust in most of the statistics and graphs, though.
Given the financial crisis, it might be good to put some of it in perspective from this website.
All this said, they are out to make something of a point. The statistics and arguments may be backed up by data, but they don't quite give any space to opposing viewpoints or contravening data that might mitigate some of the rather alarmist things they post. Keep your critical thinking caps on.
Good website for data though, and they do support their arguments fairly well. This is old-school conservatism, and not new-school hackery.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 03-17-2009 at 09:46 AM.
#2 Core Problem: POOR EDUCATION QUALITY PERFORMANCE:
![]()
Obama's plan will definitely fix that problem.
Spoken (ok, typed) like a true conservative.
As I said, this website is my gift to you. Read through it, it is very well put together.
RG,
You know, it's sad that people feel the need to point out 1) debt is a bad thing, and 2) indebtedness is a bad thing.
I'm surprised about that 'percentage of national income' graph. Pretty amazing that nearly half of the US is on the government dole. (Of which I am one.)
I wonder why the literacy and math rates are dropping so rapidly. (An actual reason would be nice, not the usual "LIBERAL VALUES RUIN SOCIETY!" or "CONSERVATIVES ONLY TEACH GOD! stuff.)
Couldn't possibly be underfunding. We already spend a TON of money on education.
The irony is, as high-tech devices become more ubiquitous, fewer people know how they actually work.
Ok, we've cut funding out of the equation.
So... what is it?
Good question. I wish I had the answer. The suck thing is that I have two boys and this problem VERY directly affects me, my boys, and MY future grandkids.
My gut says:
Science and engineering is hard. Not everybody is cracked up to do it.
We don't push this kind of stuff at the junior-high and high-school level.
The website given in the OP thinks it has the answer:
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/education.htm
Quite frankly, I suspect they are probably missing a few things, and don't fully grasp the entirety of the situation, because they view the problem through their own ideological prism.
That said:
it, we should try it their way. If it works, then great. If not, then we know what doesn't. I want SOMETHING to change.
I have occasionally said that Health Care is our most immediate crisis, and vacillate between that and education.
Long term, I think education is more important, if I really had to nail it down. This is something of a change in my thinking, but if we can't prepare our kids for things that pay a LOT of dividends down the road, we will be hurting in everything else.
That assertion would seem to be the case.
I think that there are a lot of underlying social problems that all need to be dealt with on a concurrant basis as well, if we are to really improve things.
By the way, as if the link up there wasn't long and complicated enough, there is also a page 2:
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/education-b.htm
It is a VERY complicated problem, with no easy answers.
Here is the ending summary by the websites' author:
I would tend to agree with him.
A few questions (forgive me if they're explained on the site, as I haven't had a chance to read it yet):
One, if it's all free-market based, how would you enforce strict standards on textbooks?
Two, wouldn't this end up forcing poorer families into less-successful schools, as free-market policies would allow better schools to charge higher prices? I'm assuming he would remedy that through his idea of no-strings attached funding for poor districts, which is admirable.
Three, no way they're ever passing that idea that colleges would be able to charge high schools if students needed remedial college courses. Just not feasible.
Those are the big problems I see. Still, at least someone's trying to come up with ideas.
I also agree with those recommendations, but the teachers union wouldn't have it. IMO, the public school system is, at the micro level, what the federal govt is at the macro level. They take in enormous tax revenue, have incompetents at high-level positions, and can't solve real problems.
This is already going on.
The funny thing is, Obama is trying to ram business in the ass for stacking the cheese while having ty performance, yet Government doesn't have to run the country like a business. They can spend, get no results, have no accountability, and print more money to enjoy more ups all while stuffing their pockets.
Thanks for the link RG.
1. Society works hard and becomes prosperous.
2. There is so much prosperity that it becomes possible to be comfortable without working hard.
3. The kids of these prosperous hard workers don't work as hard because they don't have to.
4. They are prosperous anyway.
5. Their kids work even less hard.
6. They are still pretty prosperous.
7. Society stops thinking there is a connection between working hard and prospering. Prosperity is taken as a given.
8. Society becomes so committed to not working hard that it finds new ways not to work, such as not committing to families, and not raising its children.
9. Children become undisciplined and stupid.
10. Society blames somebody else for its undisciplined, stupid children.
11. The undisciplined, stupid children grow to become undisciplined, stupid adults.
12. Prosperity fades.
13. Society blames someone else for the fading prosperity.
14. The undisciplined, stupid adults have children they don't raise, who become even more undisciplined and stupid.
15. Cycle repeates for several generations.
16. Prosperity disappears.
17. Society becomes feral and ceases to be society.
18. Collapse.
I like this graph. I think it goes to show you that you can't just throw more money at the problem and expect students to start wanting to study. You have to change the academic culture.
How about this: Instead of shoving more money down the throat of schools, mandatory pay raises for all teachers making a certain salary or lower? This would cause that job to escalate in demand, and schools could become more picky about who they hire to teach.
Test results are not nearly as important as instilling a "want" to learn in students. That's what good teachers do. Good test results will not result from better facilities or more advanced computers. Good tests are the result of students who want to study and put time and effort into class.
To put it another way -- good test results are not the goal we should seek. They are the result of seeking the right goal -- which is to encourage positive, innovative learning in the classroom.
My wife is a Biochemistry Professor - with a capital B. Undergrad B.S. in both Chemistry AND Biology; Ph.D. from Texas A&M in Biochemistry.
When she took the sciences in school she was taught by Biologists and Chemists, who took and passed the real science classes in college. Today, the VAST majority of students are taught by Education majors with an emphasis in this or the other. They don't take the "Real" science classes - the ones the pre-med and graduate bound students take. They take a few watered down versions; but mostly education classes. I guess they can "teach", but they aren't passionate, or even particularly good at the subject they are teaching; probably don't even recognize the students coming through their classes who might be predisposed to a career in the sciences; much less are they able to inspire and nurture them.
Finally, when the students get through high school, and enter college and go to take that Chem 101 class; they are, for the most part, disiterested, and WORSE convinced that it is simply TOOO hard; they accept their inability to NOT learn the subject matter, and move on. She just graded the 2nd test of the semester for 102 (2nd semester Chem 1) class; the average was a 47! I took the test (I was a liberal arts major; and took the "baby" classes myself 20 years ago) - I made a 66! She teaches a medium sized state school up here in PA - roughly equivalent to UTSA in admittance standard.
Oh, and don't forget computers. LOTS of those science led - geeky minds have gone that direction.
In the school district my kids are in; next year's starting salary for teachers is over 50K; with 20 years service, they make nearly 6 figures - all teachers, all levels, regardless of subject; k-12.
That's for 9 months work. I think you are on to something; when people realize HOW much teachers are actually getting paid now (after all 2 of them married; 20 years in are "rich" by Obama standards) - compe ion might actually increase.
DarrinS, it may be. I don't have children yet, so I'm not familiar with the way education functions. I know that there are private schools, but it seems like this plan would make public schools more like them.
Thanks for putting such a positive spin on it![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)