RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater level
View related threads:
(in this forum
| in all forums)
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/1/2008 3:45:40 PM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 120
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
I've got an idea!!! Let's get rid of grades altogether. They only make some students feel inferior to others.
Carrying this a bit further, let's demolish everybody's home and give everyone identical doublewides. Big expensive homes make some of us feel like failures in the game of life.
And, everyone should be paid the same, no matter whether they are brain surgeons or burger flippers. Both occupations are vital to our way of life.
Also, let's not keep score in any sports events. It's not fair if someone has to lose after trying his best. NASCAR races should be a real hoot. Imagine them coming off turn 4 toward the finish line at Daytona 43 cars abreast!! Now that would be exciting!!
Any more great socialistic ideas out there?
_____________________________
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/1/2008 3:51:14 PM
|
|
|
mcp
Posts: 109
Joined: 4/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
mapachito 13: Socialism doesn't recognize private property which is something that this country doesn't either. If it did there would be no such thing as imminent domain.
This isn't the best of examples. There are always issues of public interest in any society. But in our country, the beginning assumption is that the individual owns the land; hence, proper offers are "supposed" to be provided to property owner as just compensation. At least the understanding is that the property is owned and individuals are not just homesteading share croppers for the gov't.
quote:
I think that what's really interesting is that most private schools are run by Christian organizations. I guess they don't feel it is in their calling to help those with special needs.
Well, this is an assumption about the big picture; and while it may be partially damning, I think it misses some of our current cultural dynamics in play. One, the state has already funded process for handling many learning disabilities. This is a difficult area for many small/private schools to specialize in, and even under current programs, the chances of some disabilities being overcome and producing self-supporting, functioning adults is a struggle. But the speed/curriculum of the public system is already more geared for slower learning. This puts those kids who can learn under traditional discipline and curricula out of the education agenda so to speak. The private schools have filled that vacuum. I believe that if the state was not involved already at the level it is, that private orgs would take up some of the responsibilities.
As to the 'ministry' of Christian schools- I don't know how things are up North in US, but in the South, there were many fundy schools that would take the troubled kids (who were kicked out of public even) and try to expose them to a level of love, attention, and discipline that they may need. It tended to work with some kids (I saw first hand), especially if the parents were working with the school since it was the last hope for their kids. Some kids were still belligerent and ended kicked out of the private school as well. There are limits in how you can address the obstinate in the US.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/1/2008 9:36:50 PM
|
|
|
Boofhead
Posts: 75
Joined: 8/1/2005
From: Alice Springs, Northern Territory of Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mapachito13
I love public education! It's not as elitist as private education that basically states, "If you're slow or have learning disabilities, go away! You are unwanted! You are not worth educating."
My brother found that out when his son was diagnosed with autism. The private school he sends his other kids to wouldn't take him. They have no resources to take care of him. The public school by his house has special programs for autistic kids since they can't and won't send kids away. Now, instead of the derision you used to hear from him for public education. He's singing their praises!
I think that what's really interesting is that most private schools are run by Christian organizations. I guess they don't feel it is in their calling to help those with special needs.
I had learning difficulties in my early years of school. In fact I had it quiet severely and I also struggled with a life threatening illness. At the time, which was in the early to mid 80's, a public school would not recognise learning difficulties and when my parents sought help, they were turned down. In their socialistic minds, they said it was unfair to all the other students that I received extra privileges. My parents reluctantly sent me to an expensive elite Grammar school which gave me all the help in the world. This Grammar school was run by the Anglican church. I received all the help that was required. If I had not gone to a private school, I would have never passed in my primary education. At the time, I struggled through my education with a lot of damn hard work.
I admit, the public education now at least recognises learning difficulties, even better then most private schools. However, their 'ideal' of helping the children now who are disadvantaged is to dumb everything down by lowering the literacy and numeracy thresholds. Remember, every child is suppose to be equal and by doing this every child will be equal. When a child has a special need, their impractical ideals become unstuck. In the long term it is doing nothing for the children who are disadvantaged or any other child for that matter. It only dumbs down the education system and in Australia we are starting to see the effects of this stupidity.
< Message edited by Boofhead -- 5/1/2008 9:43:59 PM >
_____________________________
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
John 3:16
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/1/2008 11:18:43 PM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 394
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TomTurn
The bell curve was never about actually taking from one to give to another, it was about grading on different levels.
Actually, it was about grading against a convoluted "norm" for the entire class.
quote:
The curve just lowers the bar for all (i.e. in 1 - 100, if 90 is the high it becomes the 100 and the 60 becomes a 70 and so on), so not the same.
Well, that isn't quite right, either. But I will go so far as to admit that grading on the curve is not quite the same thing as the concept of taking from one and giving to another.
quote:
The student who worked hard was punished and not allowed to move to the level of achivement she earned.
"Punished?" Isn't the concept of punishment that a person is penalized for wrong-doing? Should I consider myself punished when a gob of my pay is automatically removed from the total that I earned? Of course not.
That is what is interesting about your paradigm. You think of grades as reward/punishment when, in fact, grades are neither one. Grades are a scale of evaluation, a meter to measure scholastic progress.
Grades are not a reward for learning.
Therefore, one cannot be punished with diminished grades.
quote:
She is caught in a trap of socialism where her grade eraned was taken from her and became part of the collective.
Again, we don't "earn" grades. Students either meets the cirriculum's requirements, or they don't. To the degree they do or do not meet the cirriculum's requirements is reflected in their grades. At least, this is how it functions idealistically.
What you failed to point out is that it is not the person with the high grade who was disserviced, but rather the person with the lower grade. Changing their grade on paper will do nothing to make up for their deficiencies in a subject, and will thus affect them in any future performance in life that requires them to know that which they have not sufficiently learned.
You seem to be equating the concept of grades with the concept of dollars; they are not the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/1/2008 11:38:59 PM
|
|
|
upNORTder
Posts: 177
Joined: 7/20/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TomTurn
quote:
I'd bet that the public schools would never teach this socialistic quote:
All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.
The all important, context? You brought it up, you explain it.
Apparently the disciples were socialists. I wonder Who they got that from?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 8:53:39 AM
|
|
|
TomTurn
Posts: 640
Joined: 3/13/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
"Punished?" Isn't the concept of punishment that a person is penalized for wrong-doing?
You would think, kind of sick where socialism and the like takes you, is it not?
quote:
Should I consider myself punished when a gob of my pay is automatically removed from the total that I earned? Of course not.
If your employer came to you and said "hey you have been working real hard, putting in the overtime, you and the spouse trying to pay off the house and all but Tom over there still wants a new car. Now I know he works a lot less than you, never overtime, comes in late and all but anyway I think we should go ahead and start today taking an additional $100 a week form your pay so he can get that car. Now that does not mean you and the spouse cannot pay off the house, just going to take you longer. But if you work harder and more overtime, well you might make it, unless I hire another Tom and he wants a car too"
And your thought would be, why am I being __________ (rewarded, evaluated, punished) ?
quote:
That is what is interesting about your paradigm. You think of grades as reward/punishment when, in fact, grades are neither one. Grades are a scale of evaluation, a meter to measure scholastic progress. Grades are not a reward for learning. Therefore, one cannot be punished with diminished grades.
Am going to have to say that this is about the worst gobbeldy gook I have seen in a long time. You have got to be a public school administrator
quote:
Again, we don't "earn" grades.
earn - To acquire or deserve as a result of effort or action
The person in the example was "punished" (in the sick mind of socialistic ideals)
quote:
Students either meets the cirriculum's requirements, or they don't. To the degree they do or do not meet the cirriculum's requirements is reflected in their grades. At least, this is how it functions idealistically.
See gobbeldy gook and school administrator mentioned above
quote:
What you failed to point out is that it is not the person with the high grade who was disserviced, but rather the person with the lower grade. Changing their grade on paper will do nothing to make up for their deficiencies in a subject, and will thus affect them in any future performance in life that requires them to know that which they have not sufficiently learned.
I pointed out that they will continue together in the community (next school) where she will be forced to carry him again, thereby holding her back more.
quote:
You seem to be equating the concept of grades with the concept of dollars; they are not the same thing.
Am equating it to anything
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 9:01:32 AM
|
|
|
TomTurn
Posts: 640
Joined: 3/13/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
"I'd bet that the public schools would never teach this socialistic quote:
All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need."
..........
The all important, context? You brought it up, you explain it.
............
quote:
Apparently the disciples were socialists.
How?
quote:
I wonder Who they got that from?"
You tell us, it is your story
Anyway, setting aside your soundbytes. Were you aware one of the foundations of the U.S, the Pilgrims, used your first comment of "All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need." to build on.
.......
On November 11, 1620, the Mayflower landed at Plymouth Rock. The ship lay at anchor until March, the pilgrims living onboard while permanent housing was being built. When the Mayflower finally left, 27 adults and 23 children were left of the 102 people who set out across the ocean. Their governor was William Bradford and under his leadership, these first Americans began to make a new life in the New World.
What very few Americans today know is this very first colony on the shores of America started out as a socialist colony. The Pilgrims at Plymouth set up a common store that worked on the principle of "From Each According To His Ability - To Each According To His Need". Everything that the colony produced was placed in the common store and was then distributed out as needed.
For two years the colony worked to create a socialist Utopia but even with an additional 30 settlers who arrived a year after the Mayflower, the colony barely survived. Each winter the colonist would go hungry being reduced to rations of a quarter pound of bread at times. Governor Bradford relates his experiences concerning the socialist state he had helped to create:
"The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tired sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; --that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontente, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and service did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in divission of victails and cloaths, than he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victuals, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and younger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to doe service for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brooke it. "
Finally, in 1623, Governor Bradford called a meeting to discuss how to have a more productive growing season and be better prepared for the next winter. Governor Bradford writes:
"All this while no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expecte any. So they [the pilgims] begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a beter crope than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in miserie. At length after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advise of the cheefest amongest them) gave way that they should set downe every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves... And so assigned to every family a parceel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Gov. or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave farr better contente. The women now wente willingly into the feild, and tooke their litle-ons with them to set corne, which before would aledge weakness, and inabilitie; whom to have compelled would have bene thought great tiranie and opression."
It was at this meeting between Governor Bradford and the chief members of the colony that the American free enterprise system was born. Governor Bradford writes about the results of this system:
"By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plentie, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoysing of the harts of many, for which they blessed God. And in the effect of their perticular planting was well seene, for all had, one way and other, pretty well to bring the year aboute, and some of the abler sorte and more industrious had to spare, and sell to others, 50 as any generall wante of famine hath not been amongest them since to this day."
This little known failed experiment in American socialism isn't taught in today's schools. If it was, our children might grow up to doubt governmental programs that redistribute wealth "from each according to his ability - too each according to his need."
....
You want to post another soundbyte again?
< Message edited by TomTurn -- 5/2/2008 9:37:35 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 9:27:42 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 394
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TomTurn
And your thought would be, why am I being __________ (rewarded, evaluated, punished) ?
How is it right now?
"Mike, this is your Uncle Sam-- I know that this past year you have been working real hard, putting in the overtime, and you and the spouse are trying to pay off the house. But, in fact, you worked so hard and accomplished so much that you now owe me a lot more taxes. In fact, you are in a higher tax bracket altogether. Congratulations! Now cough it up . . ."
quote:
Am going to have to say that this is about the worst gobbeldy gook I have seen in a long time. You have got to be a public school administrator
You still haven't said anything by way of response . . .
quote:
earn - To acquire or deserve as a result of effort or action
I know what "earn" means; again, you don't earn grades any more than you earn your body temperature, bloodpressure, or weight.
quote:
The person in the example was "punished" (in the sick mind of socialistic ideals)
Actually, everyone was punished in the example. Grades should accurately reflect their level of understanding no matter what the level.
quote:
See gobbeldy gook and school administrator mentioned above
Again no answer? Do have anything to say at all, TomTurn? You bring up interesting issues, but then you utterly fail to discuss them.
quote:
I pointed out that they will continue together in the community (next school) where she will be forced to carry him again, thereby holding her back more.
I didn't see that in your post. Nonetheless, you still haven't addressed the point about the student whose grades were boosted. They get hurt as much if not more in your scenario, do they not?
quote:
Am equating it to anything
Could you put this in the form of a sentence, please?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 9:48:02 AM
|
|
|
TomTurn
Posts: 640
Joined: 3/13/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
You still haven't said anything by way of response . . .
How does one respond to gobbeldy gook?
quote:
I know what "earn" means; again, you don't earn grades any more than you earn your body temperature, bloodpressure, or weight.
It seems you do not. I posted a definition/use of the word, right out of the American Heritage Dictionary. "To acquire or deserve as a result of effort"
Here it is from Wester's;
Earn - to receive as return for effort. to come to be duly worthy of or entitled to.
Yet you continue to say one does not earn a grade. Without a doubt you are a public education administrator.
quote:
Actually, everyone was punished in the example. Grades should accurately reflect their level of understanding no matter what the level.
WELCOME TO SOCIALISM!
This is all I have time for for the remainder of today. Got to go to work and earn my pay.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 10:26:19 AM
|
|
|
mcp
Posts: 109
Joined: 4/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: TomTurn
quote:
quote:
I'd bet that the public schools would never teach this socialistic quote:
All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.
The all important, context? You brought it up, you explain it.
Apparently the disciples were socialists. I wonder Who they got that from?
This misses socialism (as argued by the OP) on a few points. First, the Christians were not forced by a high level or secular gov't to perform this act. They did this electively; also the church (govt) at that time was localized and the leaders could know intimately who was "in need" and what ministries were appropriate.
Also, the big difference is the ownership question. If the state owns everything, then there is no sense of ownership (and hence personal responsibility for that which is owned). In a Christian society that shares (or if Mom tells the kids to share), there is a since of ownership/responsibility and the concept of "rights to" has clear boundaries, even for the recipient (who also has biblical/social mandates). Sharing is definitely good and indeed a mandate for obedient christians, but "non-socialist" Christians believe we give of that which is bestowed to us by God's providence (a private decision).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 10:36:03 AM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 1622
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
20% of the people will always accomplish 80% of the work regardless of the system.
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 4:56:52 PM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 394
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TomTurn
How does one respond to gobbeldy gook?
"Happy Thankgiving?"
quote:
It seems you do not.
No, I do. The problem isn't with the definition of the word; the problem is that the word is inappropriate to describe the relationship between grades and learning.
You learn, not earn, knowledge.
quote:
Yet you continue to say one does not earn a grade.
Of course not. How do you earn a grade? Hard work? Long hours? A good work ethic? One can apply all of these and still not learn. A grade relects learning, not earning.
quote:
Without a doubt you are a public education administrator.
"Without a doubt?" Hmm . . . actually, I have my doubts.
quote:
WELCOME TO SOCIALISM!
Thank you! Where can I buy a postcard to send back to America?
quote:
This is all I have time for for the remainder of today. Got to go to work and earn my pay.
Now, that you can earn.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 7:38:33 PM
|
|
|
mapachito13
Posts: 1006
Joined: 10/1/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Boofhead
I admit, the public education now at least recognises learning difficulties, even better then most private schools. However, their 'ideal' of helping the children now who are disadvantaged is to dumb everything down by lowering the literacy and numeracy thresholds. Remember, every child is suppose to be equal and by doing this every child will be equal. When a child has a special need, their impractical ideals become unstuck. In the long term it is doing nothing for the children who are disadvantaged or any other child for that matter. It only dumbs down the education system and in Australia we are starting to see the effects of this stupidity.
In California, the teachers use a process called "differentiated instruction." This is teaching the same curriculum to all the students with varying levels of difficulty and support. This keeps the smart kids from getting bored and feeling unchallenged and it allows the slower kids to master the curriculum and still experience success. The older teachers are having a hard time getting into this since they just want to teach everything one way.
BTW, if you don't mind me asking. What's a boofhead? Is that slang down under?
_____________________________
Three Nails to protect us!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/2/2008 7:45:06 PM
|
|
|
colliefan
Posts: 1771
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Raleigh, NC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: upNORTder
I'd bet that the public schools would never teach this socialistic quote:
All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.
Let's add another one: he who doesn't work, doesn't eat
_____________________________
One hundred religious persons knit into a unity by careful organization do not constitute a church any more than eleven dead men make a football team.
A. W. Tozer (1897–1963
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/3/2008 6:25:08 AM
|
|
|
Annie64
Posts: 314
Joined: 6/4/2007
Status: offline
|
Under socialism, sharing is forced, and no one is allowed to own anything. In the book of Acts, no one was made to share his property, each of them did it on his/her own, and only with other believers. There is a big difference between what was going on there and socialism.
TomTurn wasn't trying to offer a serious suggestion about what should be taught. His suggestion was only meant to illustrate how unfair socialism actually is. It is no more fair to take money from someone who works hard and give it to someone who doesn't than it is to take a good grade from someone who worked hard for it and give it to someone who goofed off. I think it was also meant to point out that since we don't do this, then deep down, we really know that socialism is unfair and demoralizing. If it were really fair like people like to say it is, we'd be doing it more often, in different kinds of scenarios.
Am I understanding you right, TomTurn?
_____________________________
On Christ the solid rock I stand
ALL other ground is sinking sand.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/3/2008 10:28:17 AM
|
|
|
TomTurn
Posts: 640
Joined: 3/13/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
No, I do. The problem isn't with the definition of the word; the problem is that the word is inappropriate to describe the relationship between grades and learning. You learn, not earn, knowledge.
Know exactly what you have been trying to say and or saying which is why I believe you work in today's public edcuation system. What do you do in it?
Yes you learn knowledge and by working hard (studying more) you can learn more and earn higher grades. Earn - to receive as return (a grade) for effort (more study).
quote:
How do you earn a grade? Hard work?
Yes
quote:
Long hours?
Yes, long hours of study will earn you a higher grade.
quote:
A good work ethic?
Yes, good study habits.
quote:
One can apply all of these and still not learn.
Tell me who would not learn if applying the 3 principals laid above AND tell me who would be ok with grade points removed from them to be given to another who did not do the same as much, since the one losing the points did not actually earn the grade points but they did learn and that is all that matters?
quote:
A grade relects learning, not earning.
Once again, tell me what student would be ok with having grade points removed since they did not earn them but they did learn?
And yes you can equate a student earning grades to earning money. Grades are a students pay and the best way you can prove me wrong is to start taking their grades (their pay) away as I laid out and give it to another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/3/2008 10:29:28 AM
|
|
|
TomTurn
Posts: 640
Joined: 3/13/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
Under socialism, sharing is forced, and no one is allowed to own anything. In the book of Acts, no one was made to share his property, each of them did it on his/her own, and only with other believers. There is a big difference between what was going on there and socialism.
TomTurn wasn't trying to offer a serious suggestion about what should be taught. His suggestion was only meant to illustrate how unfair socialism actually is. It is no more fair to take money from someone who works hard and give it to someone who doesn't than it is to take a good grade from someone who worked hard for it and give it to someone who goofed off. I think it was also meant to point out that since we don't do this, then deep down, we really know that socialism is unfair and demoralizing. If it were really fair like people like to say it is, we'd be doing it more often, in different kinds of scenarios.
Am I understanding you right, TomTurn?
You got it
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/3/2008 11:34:03 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 394
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TomTurn
Yes you learn knowledge and by working hard (studying more)
We'll see in a moment why this isn't necessarily so.
quote:
you can learn more and earn higher grades.
No, when you learn the material, the grades follow. There's no way that someone who knows the material can get a bad grade unless they deliberately try to get a bad grade. It has nothing to do with earning a reward.
quote:
Earn - to receive as return (a grade) for effort (more study).
No. Grades measure a degree of learning, not effort.
Grades are not rewards for a good work ethic.
quote:
quote:
How do you earn a grade? Hard work?
Yes
No. There are C students who word very hard just to get a C. In that same class may be an A student who gets their A with very little effort at all. Why? Because they are smarter.
Ever hear of the adage, "Work smarter, not harder?"
quote:
quote:
Long hours?
Yes, long hours of study will earn you a higher grade.
No. Long hours do not guarantee a higher grade. A better level of understanding will.
quote:
quote:
A good work ethic?
Yes, good study habits.
Good study habits do help. But a student should have good study habits; that's what they are supposed to do. They shouldn't be rewarded for doing what is right as if it were some extraordinary effort on their part.
quote:
Tell me who would not learn if applying the 3 principals laid above
Anyone. If they think a grade is a reward for good behavior, then they are missing the whole idea of what being learning means. No wonder why some students cheat if they buy into your bunk philosophy of education.
quote:
AND tell me who would be ok with grade points removed from them to be given to another who did not do the same as much, since the one losing the points did not actually earn the grade points but they did learn and that is all that matters?
No one. That is why it is not done, even in socialist countries.
quote:
And yes you can equate a student earning grades to earning money. Grades are a students pay
Maybe this is why our schools are turning out such dullards . . .
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/4/2008 9:15:33 AM
|
|
|
mikeman2
Posts: 315
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: stellaluna
Actually...
when my friend's kid started first grade, he kept getting in trouble at school and being little and new at the whole thing, couldn't explain why except to say he "didn't do anything." After a month or so of this, my friend asked for a teacher conference and discovered the problem: the kids were placed into groups and the entire group was responsible for the behavior of each individual child. In other words, if Tommy gets in trouble for talking, Susie and Anna and John and Michael all get punished alongside. If Susie can't sit still and gets in trouble for running around, the entire group gets punished alongside. Of course, my friend was dumbfounded and asked about getting him switched to another class, but it turns out the whole school was doing it "to see if it would work."
Parents threw back their heads and howled over this experiment, so it was abandoned pretty quickly, but my dad was getting his teacher certification at the time and said this sort of "group thought" was being taught as part of his college theory classes. Sort of the same thing.
LOL
Well thats socialism for ya. We are all one great big sociological experiment. Just keep trying different things and kick your feet up and see how the masses react. Its all really just fun and games.
_____________________________
Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on.
-Winston Churchill.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/4/2008 10:52:43 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 394
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mikeman2
Well thats socialism for ya.
No, that was an example of a group psychology experiment. Blame the psychologists, not the socialists.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/4/2008 11:05:16 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 394
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TomTurn
quote:
TomTurn wasn't trying to offer a serious suggestion about what should be taught. His suggestion was only meant to illustrate how unfair socialism actually is . . .
Am I understanding you right, TomTurn?
You got it
This being the case, stop and think about what "fair" means. One of the definitions of fair suits the Judeo-Christian God: impartial. While impartiality seems like a virtue on the surface, it can also be a kind of injustice in human terms.
Think about it. God is not a respecter of persons; He makes the rain to fall on the righteous and the unrighteous. He does not treat sinners as their sins deserve, nor does He ultimately reward those who do good. Salvation is by faith in Jesus, not by good works, correct? He does not see us as good people and worse people, He just sees us all as a mass of sinners in equal need of salvation to one another.
To not distinguish the condition of one individual from another is collectivism, and collectivism is the heart of socialistic ideals.
Now, get this: collectivism is fair and impartial. However, that which is truly fair and impartial does automatically make something desirable. Therefore, it is a bit contradictory to say that socialism is bad because it is unfair when, if fact, it is fair in many ways.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/6/2008 10:40:00 AM
|
|
|
radiorobert
Posts: 17
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
This being the case, stop and think about what "fair" means. One of the definitions of fair suits the Judeo-Christian God: impartial. While impartiality seems like a virtue on the surface, it can also be a kind of injustice in human terms.
Think about it. God is not a respecter of persons; He makes the rain to fall on the righteous and the unrighteous. He does not treat sinners as their sins deserve, nor does He ultimately reward those who do good. Salvation is by faith in Jesus, not by good works, correct? He does not see us as good people and worse people, He just sees us all as a mass of sinners in equal need of salvation to one another.
To not distinguish the condition of one individual from another is collectivism, and collectivism is the heart of socialistic ideals.
Now, get this: collectivism is fair and impartial. However, that which is truly fair and impartial does automatically make something desirable. Therefore, it is a bit contradictory to say that socialism is bad because it is unfair when, if fact, it is fair in many ways
And there you have it. What you have stated above is the very crux of HUMANISM.
Man wanting to dispense his own form of justice. not God's.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Socialism should be taught in school at a greater l... - 5/6/2008 10:59:24 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 394
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
| | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
I guess I went to the Jeff Spicolli school of spelling! 
Like dude, thanks man, like, you're da bomb! 
