You've made these neat little categories and clearly feel that you are correct on everything and could not possibly be wrong
oh, not at all, I don?t keep brash views a secret, if I?m wrong I?ll throw them into the market, someone like yourself will knock me down, and I?ll adjust my views.
I?m not on these forums to get others to believe what I do, I?m here to qualify, quantify, and justify my own views.
You've made these neat little categories and clearly feel that you are correct on everything and could not possibly be wrong
I agree, I?m over generalizing, but that is what goes on all the time in the left-vs-right arguments, isn?t it? I?ve found someone willing to standup and say ?I?m the exception? much more rare than you seem to believe it is, and anyone not willing to take a generalization say ?that?s not me? and standup for their honest views pretty much deserves to be painted with a wide brush.
LMK. Even when race, income and locatin are all held constant, charter schools do worse. From the NYT article:
yep, I?m not registered from the nytimes, but I?d like to see a state breakdown, as i know from my own research that in the state of Texas *which i admitted to being only knowledgeable of earlier* the scores are lower than average, but usually twice that of the surrounding locations.
using such flaming rhetoric will only put off the potential moderate supporters.
I suppose it comes down to: why am I posting? I want someone to bat down my ideas.
I do it all the time IRL, and every once in a while someone will engage me with their own views and we?ll actually come to a compromised thoughtful conclusion.
Otherwise it?s just me pushing some rhetorical banter, something I?m sure I can do, but something that wouldn?t help me grow as a person. I can write posts that most everyone will agree with, but what do I gain from pushing people into rhetorical corners if I don?t leave something open worth coming back at me from. My quotes from that old Limbaugh book seemed far-stretched enough to pull up some fine targeted counter arguments, something that might even lead to an argument over the relative merits of ?it takes a village? vs. ?it takes two good parents?.
You could be so much more effective if you'd act a little humble and respond in a matter that promotes a positive exchange of ideas.
I?ve done that, I?ve even supported myself, but always we get the nuts who want to go so far to one direction they run out of support and fall into fallacious thinking. Hopefully by pointing out the problems with my own argument such people can come to their own conclusions as to why they, themselves, are holding equally fallacious reasoning as a base view.
I can?t convince anyone that they are making emotional arguments based on a slippery slope fallacy, but I can let someone figure out that I?m doing what they are and thus realize that we?ve both fallen away from logical lines.
Homeschooling Co-ops pwn private, public, and charter schools. Nuff said
definitely best way to teach, but many people feel the need for greater material wealth and personal satisfaction is more important than razing better children, so they leave it to the public schools to deal with as both parents peruse a career. They may also be ignorant to the benefits, possibilities, or simply not understand that, if even moderately intelligent, they can do a better job teaching their children than the schools can.
No matter how it breaks down, it?s sad to see that children are being raised by the school and day-care systems instead of by a loving fulltime parent.
They hire young, idealistic, enthusiastic teachers, pay them far less than their compatriots, and overburden them with expectations of after hours "volunteer" work. These teachers eventually get burnt out, and move on to better paying opportunities. It is NOT a sustainable paradigm.
I think it would be, if only we paid them on par with performance, let the teachers earn what they deserve instead of under funding our charter schools at the behest of the teachers unions desires to keep things status quo.
