Rand Paul's proposed budget, deficit reduction plan.

[matt0611]

I just want to know what aqua buddha is.

From what I understand, its a bong...

 

[LegendKiller]

Not when we spend so much on the WORST PERFORMERS! Isn't is worrisome that we spend the same or more money on bad students that we spend on good students? Shouldn't we be able to cut the bad apples loose and pool our resources on the top students?

In most cases even the worst performers are improved by education.

As I said before, I don't see why we don't bifurcate education at somewhere around 9th grade. Those that aren't college bound can take more practical classes, those that are can take college prep courses.

The biggest problem I see there is that effectively creates a caste system at a very young age and does not encourage cross movement among the castes at a greater age. However, it does put the parents on the spot for making sure their kid passes.

 

[Brigandier]

The biggest problem I see there is that effectively creates a caste system at a very young age and does not encourage cross movement among the castes at a greater age. However, it does put the parents on the spot for making sure their kid passes.

That sums up my opposition to the European system, not matter how I might admire the results. I figure as long as you still have a general exam at the end of all schooling, be it trade or professional(as the two paths would be), that allows for one group to move to the other, it would be fine.

America really needs to take a look at what it wants with its people and education system, this isn't happening so we make jacks of all and masters of none.

 

[werepossum]

From what I understand, its a bong...

Huh. I thought it was something one splashed on after shaving one's karma.

 

[Anarchist420]

The Constitutional law professor I had expects the FY2011 Federal budget to be 3.5T. So it will be a spending freeze, which isn't good enough for me.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Not when we spend so much on the WORST PERFORMERS! Isn't is worrisome that we spend the same or more money on bad students that we spend on good students? Shouldn't we be able to cut the bad apples loose and pool our resources on the top students?

If they "cut the bad apples loose" how would you ever have gotten as meager an education as you have?

 

[Siddhartha]

I was a "bad apple" in school. If they had cut me loose, I definitely would not have gone to college and I probably would be earning a third to a half of what I am earning now. Cutting education, particularly with transfer of factory jobs offshore, is a good way of fucking the country mid and long term.

 

[CallMeJoe]

In most cases even the worst performers are improved by education.
As I said before, I don't see why we don't bifurcate education at somewhere around 9th grade. Those that aren't college bound can take more practical classes, those that are can take college prep courses.
The biggest problem I see there is that effectively creates a caste system at a very young age and does not encourage cross movement among the castes at a greater age. However, it does put the parents on the spot for making sure their kid passes.

I shall again resurrect a thread I started here back in February, 2006 (link):

Much has recently been made of the importance of improving education in the United States, with proposals ranging from President Bush's "no child left behind" initiative, to school voucher programs and "parental choice" options. Lawsuits have been filed across the nation concerning inequities in funding between school districts within a state, leading to complex systems to redistribute funds, even as there is decreasing evidence that throwing more money into failing systems will make any difference. Students are endlessly tested and evaluated. Teachers and schools are graded and regulated. The situation has gotten to the point that very few citizens even question the federalization of what have traditionally been local or at most state decisions on schools.

I dare to propose that the underlying problem has little to do with money, and that no number of new federal mandates or new testing or new teacher requirements will make any difference in our childrens' learning. I propose that we need radically to change the underlying philosophy of education in the United States. We must recognise that we do not live in an educational Lake Wobegone, and that, despite parents' beliefs, not all children are "above average". We must recognize that to allow the average and above average students to progress, some children must be left behind. We must abandon a false egalitarianism so that all students may progress to the best of their abilities, though not all to the current supposed "grade level".

My Proposal:
All students start with equal opportunity. Kindergarten and early elementary education would change little. Things would start to shake around elementary grade 3 with a gradual stratification of performance levels, dividing students initially into 3 levels based on academic performance. Higher achieving students - average students - underachieving students. Each term there would be opportunity for promotion/demotion between levels. As grades progress, there would be a further division into as many as 5 levels. Each group would advance at its own pace, with slower students no longer holding back the average and faster students able to push on ahead. Again, opportunity for movement between levels as students show either ability to move up or need to move down. Around grade 9 (3d year secondary) there would be a transition to vocational/technical training emphasis for lower levels as upper levels are moved into college preparatory. This system allows our best students to progress at a pace far beyond what they are now permitted. It allows our average students still to receive a quality education. It lets even the slowest students progress at a pace beyond what they can today, since they would be instructed at a level they can maintain, rather than being forced to try to keep up with a class average beyond their abilities.

The obvious weakness I see in this proposal is the unwillingness of parents to admit that their precious little one might actually be below average in ability or application. Anyone who has seen Mommy and Daddy screaming at a teacher who dared give little Johnny or Janie the failing grade they deserved for not doing assigned work will know whereof I speak. Nonetheless, I sincerely think this proposal gives all students an opportunity to learn at their own highest level.

Does anyone reading this missive think our brave politicians would ever vote this proposal?

This idea was inspired by my brief period of secondary education in Great Britain during the '60s, and my subsequent return to the mediocrity of the American educational system, during what now almost seems a Golden Age of American education.