Today's Chuckle...
 

True North wrote:
Justan Olphart
- show quoted text -
"Nomen of course is Harry. And Harry probably set Donnie up as Anon. I
can't imagine Donnie figuring it out on his own."


Man...y'all are about as dense as they come. I thought at least one of
your circle could figure out where posts were coming from.


He's a dim bulb.

--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 1:23 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:18:34 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 06:25:56 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/6/16 9:42 PM, wrote:

It was covered in the 8th grade. You dropped out too soon.

It wasn't in the DC or the Md curriculum unless you are talking about
a making you wear a jock to keep your nuts "safe".
We had to learn the old fashioned way, trial and error or just by
meeting an older woman.



The 8th grade really is too late, even back in the day.

Kids grow up faster than we did. In 1960 they couldn't even say
"pregnant" on TV. Ricky and Lucy slept in separate beds


I remember a 7th grade "health class" segregated by gender in which some
information about sex was discussed. A good number of "us guys" were
already aware of that information. In the 10th grade, we had a much more
detailed health class, not gender segregated, in which various aspects
of sexuality, birth control, and disease prevention were discussed.

I guess our school system assumed we had parents for that sort of
thing.
In high school, my "health" credit was a red cross first aid course
(9th grade) and the second year was advanced first aid, pretty much
what the firemen got. My PE credit in junior year was red cross senior
life saver and Water Safety Instructor in my senior year. (actually
taught at American University) DC only required one "health" course
but I wanted the red cross AFA ticket along with the other two.
That is the advantage of not going to a government school I guess. We
could bring in non union instructors from other places like the red
cross and get certified courses.
"Health" in the public school I went to (7th and 8th grade) was just
superficial stuff like eat your vegetables and don't smoke until you
grow up. (stunts your growth, ya know)



Your anti-union bias is laughable.

Our high school had a close affiliation with Yale University going back
many, many decades, and our classes were peppered with seminars and
lectures presented by tenured Yale faculty members. In fact, for many
years, our high school was across the street from the Yale campus. But
then Yale bought the land and the high school was demolished and then
rebuilt as a new school a few blocks away.

I remember two classes I had in particular, Russian and physics, in
which we had virtually weekly presentations by Yale faculty members to
our classes. Most of our high school's language classes had visitors
from the Yale School of Languages come in for seminars.

The problem with leaving it to the parents to teach their kids about sex
is that years of research has shown that it doesn't happen.

Too bad the other 99.99% of the schools in the country are not
affiliated with Yale and our kids get an education that puts us in the
#26 or 27 slot in world education. (in spite of spending far more than
any of them)
That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/7/16 9:26 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 1:23 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:18:34 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 06:25:56 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/6/16 9:42 PM, wrote:

It was covered in the 8th grade. You dropped out too soon.

It wasn't in the DC or the Md curriculum unless you are talking about
a making you wear a jock to keep your nuts "safe".
We had to learn the old fashioned way, trial and error or just by
meeting an older woman.



The 8th grade really is too late, even back in the day.

Kids grow up faster than we did. In 1960 they couldn't even say
"pregnant" on TV. Ricky and Lucy slept in separate beds


I remember a 7th grade "health class" segregated by gender in which some
information about sex was discussed. A good number of "us guys" were
already aware of that information. In the 10th grade, we had a much more
detailed health class, not gender segregated, in which various aspects
of sexuality, birth control, and disease prevention were discussed.

I guess our school system assumed we had parents for that sort of
thing.
In high school, my "health" credit was a red cross first aid course
(9th grade) and the second year was advanced first aid, pretty much
what the firemen got. My PE credit in junior year was red cross senior
life saver and Water Safety Instructor in my senior year. (actually
taught at American University) DC only required one "health" course
but I wanted the red cross AFA ticket along with the other two.
That is the advantage of not going to a government school I guess. We
could bring in non union instructors from other places like the red
cross and get certified courses.
"Health" in the public school I went to (7th and 8th grade) was just
superficial stuff like eat your vegetables and don't smoke until you
grow up. (stunts your growth, ya know)



Your anti-union bias is laughable.

Our high school had a close affiliation with Yale University going back
many, many decades, and our classes were peppered with seminars and
lectures presented by tenured Yale faculty members. In fact, for many
years, our high school was across the street from the Yale campus. But
then Yale bought the land and the high school was demolished and then
rebuilt as a new school a few blocks away.

I remember two classes I had in particular, Russian and physics, in
which we had virtually weekly presentations by Yale faculty members to
our classes. Most of our high school's language classes had visitors
from the Yale School of Languages come in for seminars.

The problem with leaving it to the parents to teach their kids about sex
is that years of research has shown that it doesn't happen.

Too bad the other 99.99% of the schools in the country are not
affiliated with Yale and our kids get an education that puts us in the
#26 or 27 slot in world education. (in spite of spending far more than
any of them)
That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks




Simpleminded nonsense.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 06:21:49 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 9:26 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 1:23 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:18:34 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 06:25:56 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/6/16 9:42 PM, wrote:

It was covered in the 8th grade. You dropped out too soon.

It wasn't in the DC or the Md curriculum unless you are talking about
a making you wear a jock to keep your nuts "safe".
We had to learn the old fashioned way, trial and error or just by
meeting an older woman.



The 8th grade really is too late, even back in the day.

Kids grow up faster than we did. In 1960 they couldn't even say
"pregnant" on TV. Ricky and Lucy slept in separate beds


I remember a 7th grade "health class" segregated by gender in which some
information about sex was discussed. A good number of "us guys" were
already aware of that information. In the 10th grade, we had a much more
detailed health class, not gender segregated, in which various aspects
of sexuality, birth control, and disease prevention were discussed.

I guess our school system assumed we had parents for that sort of
thing.
In high school, my "health" credit was a red cross first aid course
(9th grade) and the second year was advanced first aid, pretty much
what the firemen got. My PE credit in junior year was red cross senior
life saver and Water Safety Instructor in my senior year. (actually
taught at American University) DC only required one "health" course
but I wanted the red cross AFA ticket along with the other two.
That is the advantage of not going to a government school I guess. We
could bring in non union instructors from other places like the red
cross and get certified courses.
"Health" in the public school I went to (7th and 8th grade) was just
superficial stuff like eat your vegetables and don't smoke until you
grow up. (stunts your growth, ya know)



Your anti-union bias is laughable.

Our high school had a close affiliation with Yale University going back
many, many decades, and our classes were peppered with seminars and
lectures presented by tenured Yale faculty members. In fact, for many
years, our high school was across the street from the Yale campus. But
then Yale bought the land and the high school was demolished and then
rebuilt as a new school a few blocks away.

I remember two classes I had in particular, Russian and physics, in
which we had virtually weekly presentations by Yale faculty members to
our classes. Most of our high school's language classes had visitors
from the Yale School of Languages come in for seminars.

The problem with leaving it to the parents to teach their kids about sex
is that years of research has shown that it doesn't happen.

Too bad the other 99.99% of the schools in the country are not
affiliated with Yale and our kids get an education that puts us in the
#26 or 27 slot in world education. (in spite of spending far more than
any of them)
That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks




Simpleminded nonsense.

Which part is wrong?
Are you saying there are any significant number of public high schools
affiliated with any college, much less an Ivy League school ... if
that was true in the first place.
Do you dispute our ranking in the developed world?
Do you dispute the money we spend?
Do you dispute the amount of money Randi makes?

We know, if you did it, it was "special" but you do sound like you
make **** up most of the time. Answering with your typical brain fart
is not indicative of the superior education you profess to have.

Today's Chuckle...
 

wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 06:21:49 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 9:26 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 1:23 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:18:34 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 06:25:56 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/6/16 9:42 PM, wrote:

It was covered in the 8th grade. You dropped out too soon.

It wasn't in the DC or the Md curriculum unless you are talking about
a making you wear a jock to keep your nuts "safe".
We had to learn the old fashioned way, trial and error or just by
meeting an older woman.



The 8th grade really is too late, even back in the day.

Kids grow up faster than we did. In 1960 they couldn't even say
"pregnant" on TV. Ricky and Lucy slept in separate beds


I remember a 7th grade "health class" segregated by gender in which some
information about sex was discussed. A good number of "us guys" were
already aware of that information. In the 10th grade, we had a much more
detailed health class, not gender segregated, in which various aspects
of sexuality, birth control, and disease prevention were discussed.

I guess our school system assumed we had parents for that sort of
thing.
In high school, my "health" credit was a red cross first aid course
(9th grade) and the second year was advanced first aid, pretty much
what the firemen got. My PE credit in junior year was red cross senior
life saver and Water Safety Instructor in my senior year. (actually
taught at American University) DC only required one "health" course
but I wanted the red cross AFA ticket along with the other two.
That is the advantage of not going to a government school I guess. We
could bring in non union instructors from other places like the red
cross and get certified courses.
"Health" in the public school I went to (7th and 8th grade) was just
superficial stuff like eat your vegetables and don't smoke until you
grow up. (stunts your growth, ya know)



Your anti-union bias is laughable.

Our high school had a close affiliation with Yale University going back
many, many decades, and our classes were peppered with seminars and
lectures presented by tenured Yale faculty members. In fact, for many
years, our high school was across the street from the Yale campus. But
then Yale bought the land and the high school was demolished and then
rebuilt as a new school a few blocks away.

I remember two classes I had in particular, Russian and physics, in
which we had virtually weekly presentations by Yale faculty members to
our classes. Most of our high school's language classes had visitors
from the Yale School of Languages come in for seminars.

The problem with leaving it to the parents to teach their kids about sex
is that years of research has shown that it doesn't happen.

Too bad the other 99.99% of the schools in the country are not
affiliated with Yale and our kids get an education that puts us in the
#26 or 27 slot in world education. (in spite of spending far more than
any of them)
That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks




Simpleminded nonsense.

Which part is wrong?
Are you saying there are any significant number of public high schools
affiliated with any college, much less an Ivy League school ... if
that was true in the first place.
Do you dispute our ranking in the developed world?
Do you dispute the money we spend?
Do you dispute the amount of money Randi makes?

We know, if you did it, it was "special" but you do sound like youp
make **** up most of the ti. Answering with your typical brain farther
is not indicative of the superior educational system you profess to have.


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

Today's Chuckle...
 

6:14 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
We know, if you did it, it was "special" but you do sound like youp
make **** up most of the time. Answering with your typical brain farther
is not indicative of the superior educational system you profess to have.


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.
-----

Huh? Harry, your reply made little if any sense at all. Good grief, man....

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/16 7:19 AM, Tim wrote:
6:14 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
We know, if you did it, it was "special" but you do sound like youp
make **** up most of the time. Answering with your typical brain farther
is not indicative of the superior educational system you profess to have.


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.
-----

Huh? Harry, your reply made little if any sense at all. Good grief, man...



I don't buy into Fretwell's attempts to blame classroom teachers and
their unions for the ills that plague our public schools or, in fact,
Fretwell's never-ending attempts to blame "government" for everything.

My response was to his query.

Today's Chuckle...
 

7:08 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I don't buy into Fretwell's attempts to blame classroom teachers and
their unions for the ills that plague our public schools or, in fact,
Fretwell's never-ending attempts to blame "government" for everything.

My response was to his query.
-----

Your response had nothing to do with his quote you used...

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/16 8:32 AM, Tim wrote:

7:08 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I don't buy into Fretwell's attempts to blame classroom teachers and
their unions for the ills that plague our public schools or, in fact,
Fretwell's never-ending attempts to blame "government" for everything.

My response was to his query.
-----

Your response had nothing to do with his quote you used...



Fretwell:

"That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks"

That's ignorant nonsense, probably caused by an overdose of silly
libertarianism.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.

Today's Chuckle...
 

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.

"Good teachers." Who says they're good? What measure are you using?

Today's Chuckle...
 

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.

"Good teachers." Who says they're good? What measure are you using?


Good grief. I guess you use the same argument in any job category.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/16 10:52 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.


Parents are the big and biggest part of it. Teachers are handed their
kids, along with all the problems the kids have, all the problems the
kids have in their home life, all the pressures society put on kids, the
financial problems of both parents, assuming both are at home, having to
work a job or jobs outside of the home, et cetera.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Tue, 07 Jun 2016 21:26:50 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 1:23 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:18:34 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 06:25:56 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/6/16 9:42 PM, wrote:

It was covered in the 8th grade. You dropped out too soon.

It wasn't in the DC or the Md curriculum unless you are talking about
a making you wear a jock to keep your nuts "safe".
We had to learn the old fashioned way, trial and error or just by
meeting an older woman.



The 8th grade really is too late, even back in the day.

Kids grow up faster than we did. In 1960 they couldn't even say
"pregnant" on TV. Ricky and Lucy slept in separate beds


I remember a 7th grade "health class" segregated by gender in which some
information about sex was discussed. A good number of "us guys" were
already aware of that information. In the 10th grade, we had a much more
detailed health class, not gender segregated, in which various aspects
of sexuality, birth control, and disease prevention were discussed.

I guess our school system assumed we had parents for that sort of
thing.
In high school, my "health" credit was a red cross first aid course
(9th grade) and the second year was advanced first aid, pretty much
what the firemen got. My PE credit in junior year was red cross senior
life saver and Water Safety Instructor in my senior year. (actually
taught at American University) DC only required one "health" course
but I wanted the red cross AFA ticket along with the other two.
That is the advantage of not going to a government school I guess. We
could bring in non union instructors from other places like the red
cross and get certified courses.
"Health" in the public school I went to (7th and 8th grade) was just
superficial stuff like eat your vegetables and don't smoke until you
grow up. (stunts your growth, ya know)



Your anti-union bias is laughable.

Our high school had a close affiliation with Yale University going back
many, many decades, and our classes were peppered with seminars and
lectures presented by tenured Yale faculty members. In fact, for many
years, our high school was across the street from the Yale campus. But
then Yale bought the land and the high school was demolished and then
rebuilt as a new school a few blocks away.

I remember two classes I had in particular, Russian and physics, in
which we had virtually weekly presentations by Yale faculty members to
our classes. Most of our high school's language classes had visitors
from the Yale School of Languages come in for seminars.

The problem with leaving it to the parents to teach their kids about sex
is that years of research has shown that it doesn't happen.

Too bad the other 99.99% of the schools in the country are not
affiliated with Yale and our kids get an education that puts us in the
#26 or 27 slot in world education. (in spite of spending far more than
any of them)
That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks



Been there...seen that...and well said.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 06:59:17 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 06:21:49 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 9:26 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 1:23 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 12:18:34 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/7/16 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 06:25:56 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/6/16 9:42 PM, wrote:

It was covered in the 8th grade. You dropped out too soon.

It wasn't in the DC or the Md curriculum unless you are talking about
a making you wear a jock to keep your nuts "safe".
We had to learn the old fashioned way, trial and error or just by
meeting an older woman.



The 8th grade really is too late, even back in the day.

Kids grow up faster than we did. In 1960 they couldn't even say
"pregnant" on TV. Ricky and Lucy slept in separate beds


I remember a 7th grade "health class" segregated by gender in which some
information about sex was discussed. A good number of "us guys" were
already aware of that information. In the 10th grade, we had a much more
detailed health class, not gender segregated, in which various aspects
of sexuality, birth control, and disease prevention were discussed.

I guess our school system assumed we had parents for that sort of
thing.
In high school, my "health" credit was a red cross first aid course
(9th grade) and the second year was advanced first aid, pretty much
what the firemen got. My PE credit in junior year was red cross senior
life saver and Water Safety Instructor in my senior year. (actually
taught at American University) DC only required one "health" course
but I wanted the red cross AFA ticket along with the other two.
That is the advantage of not going to a government school I guess. We
could bring in non union instructors from other places like the red
cross and get certified courses.
"Health" in the public school I went to (7th and 8th grade) was just
superficial stuff like eat your vegetables and don't smoke until you
grow up. (stunts your growth, ya know)



Your anti-union bias is laughable.

Our high school had a close affiliation with Yale University going back
many, many decades, and our classes were peppered with seminars and
lectures presented by tenured Yale faculty members. In fact, for many
years, our high school was across the street from the Yale campus. But
then Yale bought the land and the high school was demolished and then
rebuilt as a new school a few blocks away.

I remember two classes I had in particular, Russian and physics, in
which we had virtually weekly presentations by Yale faculty members to
our classes. Most of our high school's language classes had visitors
from the Yale School of Languages come in for seminars.

The problem with leaving it to the parents to teach their kids about sex
is that years of research has shown that it doesn't happen.

Too bad the other 99.99% of the schools in the country are not
affiliated with Yale and our kids get an education that puts us in the
#26 or 27 slot in world education. (in spite of spending far more than
any of them)
That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks




Simpleminded nonsense.

Which part is wrong?
Are you saying there are any significant number of public high schools
affiliated with any college, much less an Ivy League school ... if
that was true in the first place.
Do you dispute our ranking in the developed world?
Do you dispute the money we spend?
Do you dispute the amount of money Randi makes?

We know, if you did it, it was "special" but you do sound like you
make **** up most of the time. Answering with your typical brain fart
is not indicative of the superior education you profess to have.

Key word...'profess'.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 08:40:19 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 8:32 AM, Tim wrote:

7:08 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I don't buy into Fretwell's attempts to blame classroom teachers and
their unions for the ills that plague our public schools or, in fact,
Fretwell's never-ending attempts to blame "government" for everything.

My response was to his query.
-----

Your response had nothing to do with his quote you used...



Fretwell:

"That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks"

That's ignorant nonsense, probably caused by an overdose of silly
libertarianism.

When have you ever taught in a public high school, Harry?

Oh, you haven't. That explains your lack of pertinent knowledge.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 10:18:53 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.

"Good teachers." Who says they're good? What measure are you using?

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 12:09:16 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 10:52 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.


Parents are the big and biggest part of it. Teachers are handed their
kids, along with all the problems the kids have, all the problems the
kids have in their home life, all the pressures society put on kids, the
financial problems of both parents, assuming both are at home, having to
work a job or jobs outside of the home, et cetera.


The school system is not allowed to address that in the curriculum
because the result would be racist. Montgomery County tried and that
is exactly what happened to them.
When they tried to give the "at risk" students extra attention, the
racial mix was unacceptable.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 12:46:03 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:


When have you ever taught in a public high school, Harry?

Oh, you haven't. That explains your lack of pertinent knowledge.

He represented the union, as I recall.

Today's Chuckle...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/8/16 10:52 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.


Parents are the big and biggest part of it. Teachers are handed their
kids, along with all the problems the kids have, all the problems the
kids have in their home life, all the pressures society put on kids, the
financial problems of both parents, assuming both are at home, having to
work a job or jobs outside of the home, et cetera.


So, how come some t archers can teach those kids and others cannot?

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/16 1:52 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 10:18:53 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.

"Good teachers." Who says they're good? What measure are you using?

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.


All you can try to demonstrate is that you properly taught the material.
The "receivers" have to do their part, too, for learning to take place.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:38:39 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 1:52 PM, wrote:

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.


All you can try to demonstrate is that you properly taught the material.
The "receivers" have to do their part, too, for learning to take place.

Now you are the one saying there is nothing we can do.
If the system was truly color blind, they could rate the students and
the teachers. Unfortunately when they actually identify those "at
risk" students, there is a racial/economic component and that is taboo
to even talk about. If you single out students for extra attention, it
still has to reflect the racial makeup of the total school population
or you are profiling in the eyes of the left.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/16 3:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:38:39 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 1:52 PM, wrote:

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.


All you can try to demonstrate is that you properly taught the material.
The "receivers" have to do their part, too, for learning to take place.

Now you are the one saying there is nothing we can do.
If the system was truly color blind, they could rate the students and
the teachers. Unfortunately when they actually identify those "at
risk" students, there is a racial/economic component and that is taboo
to even talk about. If you single out students for extra attention, it
still has to reflect the racial makeup of the total school population
or you are profiling in the eyes of the left.


I am saying you can't isolate teachers as a major cause.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:29:12 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 3:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:38:39 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 1:52 PM, wrote:

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.


All you can try to demonstrate is that you properly taught the material.
The "receivers" have to do their part, too, for learning to take place.

Now you are the one saying there is nothing we can do.
If the system was truly color blind, they could rate the students and
the teachers. Unfortunately when they actually identify those "at
risk" students, there is a racial/economic component and that is taboo
to even talk about. If you single out students for extra attention, it
still has to reflect the racial makeup of the total school population
or you are profiling in the eyes of the left.


I am saying you can't isolate teachers as a major cause.

Bull****. ****ty teachers are ****ty teachers. ****ty union teachers are kept on the job, or at
least getting paid, simply because of the unions.

Amen.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/2016 10:52 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.


The teachers are just union pawns. Harry is trying to include the
teachers in the union shenanigans. IT"S ALL ABOUT THE UNIONS. THEY ARE
AMONG THE BIGGEST CONTRIBUTORS TO THE OFFSHORING EPIDEMIC AND THE HIGH
COST AND NON COMPETITIVENESS OF UNION SHOPS. **** EM ALL!

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/2016 12:09 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/8/16 10:52 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:14:46 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the
problems
in our schools.

It is certainly a big part of it. When you have a structure that is
totally vertically integrated and incompetent people are kicked
upstairs only based on time in grade, it is a problem.
Good teachers are the first to say, the union makes it impossible to
get rid of bad teachers and that pay is not based on performance,
simply on time in grade and diplomas.


Parents are the big and biggest part of it. Teachers are handed their
kids, along with all the problems the kids have, all the problems the
kids have in their home life, all the pressures society put on kids, the
financial problems of both parents, assuming both are at home, having to
work a job or jobs outside of the home, et cetera.

Throw the unions out. Get rid of underperforming and bad teachers. Hire
competent and productive teachers and pay them accordingly.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/2016 12:46 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 08:40:19 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 8:32 AM, Tim wrote:

7:08 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I don't buy into Fretwell's attempts to blame classroom teachers and
their unions for the ills that plague our public schools or, in fact,
Fretwell's never-ending attempts to blame "government" for everything.

My response was to his query.
-----

Your response had nothing to do with his quote you used...



Fretwell:

"That union you support blindly is one thing that assures incompetent
teachers can never be fired. It is hard enough to get rid of the
drunks and the ones screwing their students in the biblical sense.
Simply screwing them academically is perfectly OK with the AFT and
NEA. Meanwhile Randi is sucking down about a half million a year plus
expenses and perks"

That's ignorant nonsense, probably caused by an overdose of silly
libertarianism.

When have you ever taught in a public high school, Harry?

Oh, you haven't. That explains your lack of pertinent knowledge.

Harry's teaching experience was teaching the dumbest of the dumb
"bonehead English"

Today's Chuckle...
 

On 6/8/2016 3:29 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/8/16 3:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:38:39 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 1:52 PM, wrote:

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.


All you can try to demonstrate is that you properly taught the material.
The "receivers" have to do their part, too, for learning to take place.

Now you are the one saying there is nothing we can do.
If the system was truly color blind, they could rate the students and
the teachers. Unfortunately when they actually identify those "at
risk" students, there is a racial/economic component and that is taboo
to even talk about. If you single out students for extra attention, it
still has to reflect the racial makeup of the total school population
or you are profiling in the eyes of the left.


I am saying you can't isolate teachers as a major cause.

You betcha. But The unions are a different story. They are mixed up in
almost everything amiss in educational system.

Today's Chuckle...
 

Tim wrote:
7:08 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I don't buy into Fretwell's attempts to blame classroom teachers and
their unions for the ills that plague our public schools or, in fact,
Fretwell's never-ending attempts to blame "government" for everything.

My response was to his query.
-----

Your response had nothing to do with his quote you used...

And the "professional writer" failed to post a complete sentence.

"Your attempts to blame unionized teachers and their unions for the problems
in our schools."

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:29:12 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 3:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:38:39 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 1:52 PM, wrote:

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.


All you can try to demonstrate is that you properly taught the material.
The "receivers" have to do their part, too, for learning to take place.

Now you are the one saying there is nothing we can do.
If the system was truly color blind, they could rate the students and
the teachers. Unfortunately when they actually identify those "at
risk" students, there is a racial/economic component and that is taboo
to even talk about. If you single out students for extra attention, it
still has to reflect the racial makeup of the total school population
or you are profiling in the eyes of the left.


I am saying you can't isolate teachers as a major cause.

I agree. It is part of the problem but not the only problem by a long
shot. The government school model is the biggest problem along with
the huge bureaucracy that drags along.
Things that may work perfectly in Calvert County may not work at all
in Anacostia yet the government says they must be the same.
When you start tailoring the curriculum to the students,
discrimination is the first thing we hear, even when it is the poor
student that is getting the most resources.
The simple fact that only about 43% of the school budget actually
trickles down to the classroom is a problem too.

There is a new concept that is catching in that looks promising. They
now have "home school" or "virtual school" where the kid stays at home
and the teacher comes in from the cloud. If nothing else, it
eliminates huge amounts of infrastructure (buses, food service and the
buildings themselves with everything that entails). That makes more
money available for teachers and they can have smaller class sizes.
Two of my grand kids have been doing that for a few years.
Palm Beach County had virtual school and it is real big in rural
Michigan where they are now.
It does only work where there is a home tho. Kids of crack heads are
not going to be able to do this.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 02:04:55 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:29:12 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 3:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:38:39 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 6/8/16 1:52 PM, wrote:

I suppose you could start with the ones who actually demonstrate that
their students learned the year's course material ... You know, the
dreaded "T" word.


All you can try to demonstrate is that you properly taught the material.
The "receivers" have to do their part, too, for learning to take place.

Now you are the one saying there is nothing we can do.
If the system was truly color blind, they could rate the students and
the teachers. Unfortunately when they actually identify those "at
risk" students, there is a racial/economic component and that is taboo
to even talk about. If you single out students for extra attention, it
still has to reflect the racial makeup of the total school population
or you are profiling in the eyes of the left.


I am saying you can't isolate teachers as a major cause.

I agree. It is part of the problem but not the only problem by a long
shot. The government school model is the biggest problem along with
the huge bureaucracy that drags along.
Things that may work perfectly in Calvert County may not work at all
in Anacostia yet the government says they must be the same.
When you start tailoring the curriculum to the students,
discrimination is the first thing we hear, even when it is the poor
student that is getting the most resources.
The simple fact that only about 43% of the school budget actually
trickles down to the classroom is a problem too.

There is a new concept that is catching in that looks promising. They
now have "home school" or "virtual school" where the kid stays at home
and the teacher comes in from the cloud. If nothing else, it
eliminates huge amounts of infrastructure (buses, food service and the
buildings themselves with everything that entails). That makes more
money available for teachers and they can have smaller class sizes.
Two of my grand kids have been doing that for a few years.
Palm Beach County had virtual school and it is real big in rural
Michigan where they are now.
It does only work where there is a home tho. Kids of crack heads are
not going to be able to do this.

When I was teaching, and that was over 15 years ago, we had two seniors taking Advanced Calculus by
computer from George Mason University. They would go to a teacher's office, log in, and listen to
the lecture. They had the same books as the 'in-house' students, did the same homework, and had to
take the same tests (by driving to GMU). They got the college credits for the course.

Today's Chuckle...
 

On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 07:37:22 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:


When I was teaching, and that was over 15 years ago, we had two seniors taking Advanced Calculus by
computer from George Mason University. They would go to a teacher's office, log in, and listen to
the lecture. They had the same books as the 'in-house' students, did the same homework, and had to
take the same tests (by driving to GMU). They got the college credits for the course.

I was so bored in 6th grade that I "home schooled" myself. I was about
3 weeks ahead of the class in my books so I just went home for lunch
and did not come back, almost every day. The school didn't care since,
as long as you show up, you are "enrolled" so they got their money and
my grades were good. I didn't get caught until I had missed 30 whole
days (not showing up for morning roll call). When they had the
mandatory conference with my parents, it came out that "not being
there", I was still in the top 25 percentile of the class. I was bored
to death in 7th and 8th grade too but my folks said I needed to go. By
9th grade, they decided to get me out of public school and put me some
place that would challenge me.

Today's Chuckle...
 

wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 07:37:22 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:


When I was teaching, and that was over 15 years ago, we had two seniors
taking Advanced Calculus by
computer from George Mason University. They would go to a teacher's
office, log in, and listen to
the lecture. They had the same books as the 'in-house' students, did the
same homework, and had to
take the same tests (by driving to GMU). They got the college credits for the course.

I was so bored in 6th grade that I "home schooled" myself. I was about
3 weeks ahead of the class in my books so I just went home for lunch
and did not come back, almost every day. The school didn't care since,
as long as you show up, you are "enrolled" so they got their money and
my grades were good. I didn't get caught until I had missed 30 whole
days (not showing up for morning roll call). When they had the
mandatory conference with my parents, it came out that "not being
there", I was still in the top 25 percentile of the class. I was bored
to death in 7th and 8th grade too but my folks said I needed to go. By
9th grade, they decided to get me out of public school and put me some
place that would challenge me.


I was in one of the top public schools, and I was bored also. Problem,
high IQ, and teachers who thought that smart kids should go in to
government, or some public service job. Did not understand the kid who
wanted to build fast airplanes, cars and rocket ships. My high school had
the highest average grades of any feeder school to UC Berkeley. But a big
percentage of the professors kids went to my HS. Including the chancellor
's.