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?