In response to Wayne Olson's comments. I accept the fact the not everything can be afforded and I certainly agree that we should cut the unnecessary spending. We could start with our defense spending; like we spend more than the total of the next 5 or so countries. Bottom-line, given that the U.S. is the richest nation on Planet Earth, we have the wealth to provide the richest education on Planet Earth. The reason we don't is greed, not the cost of providing an education for the children of illegal immigrants.
The purpose of public education is to maintain, and hopefully enhance the quality of life (QOF) for the individual and for the society as a whole. Is the QOF of an American child more important than the child that was brought to the US illegally by his or her parents. Does that mean that we shouldn't provide public education for any American child whose parents are criminals? Is an American child more deserving of decent education than a Mexican or Iranian or Syrian child? Note that a child doesn't choose it's parents, it's citizenship; nor is a child responsible for the actions of it's parents, it's country, etc., etc.
Finally, our focus should be on providing a sound education for all of the children, rather then attempting to NOT provide an education for a selected group, just to save a few bucks.
Dave, in your first paragraph your description of what you like about Facebook fits how I see and use Facebook. Then you go into a rant about Zuckerberg and attack his character because Facebook is in business to make a buck. That's capitalism and entrepreneurism, from which we, at least most of us humans, have greatly benefited. Facebook is less than perfect, but what would be perfect for you, would not necessarily be perfect for me. To totally personalize Facebook would require a very complex algorithm, probably not worth the cost to develop. I don't have problem with Facebook as it is, particularly since it's free and optional, i.e., not required viewing. And if one anticipates propaganda and misinformation, and deals with it accordingly, what's problem.
Regarding "Biggest waste of time on this planet is Facebook", no, vacuuming the carpet is the biggest waste of time; it just gets dirty again.
Computer selected breeding partners is the way to go. Push the left side of the Bell curve to the right.
I support public child setting, i.e., preschool, but I do wonder how my generation made it. My mother didn't teach me how to use scissors or color inside the lines or how to count, and there was no kindergarten. But my generation took us to the moon, developed the digital computer, etc., etc. Maybe we're involved in attempting to optimize a system that doesn't need to be optimized?
" One loosened hiring requirements for veterans who wanted to work for the Border Patrol, while another allowed WWII-era servicewomen to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery." Wowee! And consequently the quality-of-life of McSally's constituents has improved immeasurably. Let's hear it from the family's of the WWII-era sevicewomen [great grandmothers] that live in McSally's district. I'm a veteran and only 82, maybe I should consider applying for a job with the Border Patrol. And we pay her salary?
Is this AzMerit Testing all about nothing very much. Back in the old days, I attended a small country school in Southeastern Ohio. There were 27 in my graduating class. We had the same old maid English teacher for five years. Yeah, same ole, same ole. Baldy, our math teacher, was also the superintendent and bus driver for away BB games, had been a floor walker for a department store. One of classmates, who barely made it through Algebra I, was the first multimillionaire from our class. My best friend who had to take bone-head math and English when he entered college; became a Vice President for the Bank of America. I eventually got a PhD and taught at ASU for a while. Now that was back in the good ole days and I know the situation has changed. But is the emphasis being placed on AzMERIT tests justified? The goal as I see it, is a good quality-of-life for the individual, the student, now and then in the future. Will a 10% increase in the AzMERIT test scores produce a 10% increase in the quality-of-life of the individual? Bottom line: we don't have a clue.
What would happen if the state decided that there was a need for an AzMERIT test for jumping, like whats the highest the student can touch. There of course needs to be a pass-fail height. What criteria do we use? Like if one is going for career in the NBA jumping is more important than for career as a checkout clerk. But in any case, some expert might arbitrarily set the pass fail height at 9.
As one would expect, there will be a lot of short students who wont get close to touching 9. It is possible, that through extensive training, to increase one's jumping height. So bring on the best coaches. Of course jumping training takes time, so it would necessary to cut back on other courses. Even with the training, a large percentage, if not all, of short kids would fail. Some schools have a greater number of short kids, so the failure rate would be higher for those schools. Very interesting, and the public needs to know. Along the way, some graduate student would conduct a study, and their finding would be that short kids had short parents; its in the DNA. Another variable is race, and the study would show that Asian-American kids failure rate was much higher than Finnish-American kids, and yes, the Finnish-American parents were taller. So what is this AZMerit testing intended to accomplish? Is it kind of like an IQ test? It shows that some human children are smarter than others, just like some are taller than others. And, that smart parents tend to have smart kids. Biology 101?
bslap, I don't think you get IT, grades k-12 are all a taxpayer-funded "Youth-Sitting Service"; the age of the students attending school is not really the issue. A primary reason for public schools, and schools in general, is to provide a safe, secure place for our youth to be. Can you image what our society would be like if there were thousands of children (5 to 18) just hanging out around the house, the streets, parks, etc? Chaos. And yes, schools are also set up for learning.
Back to preschool education, baby sitting, the needs of our society have changed drastically during the past 80 years, as the result of the pill and equal opportunity for women, and technological advances, e.g.,dishwashers, frozen food, etc. Public schools reflect the needs of society. Society has changed and so will schools, and like or not, taxpayer supported preschool education will become part of change and our society will be better for IT.
Recent Comments
The purpose of public education is to maintain, and hopefully enhance the quality of life (QOF) for the individual and for the society as a whole. Is the QOF of an American child more important than the child that was brought to the US illegally by his or her parents. Does that mean that we shouldn't provide public education for any American child whose parents are criminals? Is an American child more deserving of decent education than a Mexican or Iranian or Syrian child? Note that a child doesn't choose it's parents, it's citizenship; nor is a child responsible for the actions of it's parents, it's country, etc., etc.
Finally, our focus should be on providing a sound education for all of the children, rather then attempting to NOT provide an education for a selected group, just to save a few bucks.
Regarding "Biggest waste of time on this planet is Facebook", no, vacuuming the carpet is the biggest waste of time; it just gets dirty again.
I support public child setting, i.e., preschool, but I do wonder how my generation made it. My mother didn't teach me how to use scissors or color inside the lines or how to count, and there was no kindergarten. But my generation took us to the moon, developed the digital computer, etc., etc. Maybe we're involved in attempting to optimize a system that doesn't need to be optimized?
As one would expect, there will be a lot of short students who wont get close to touching 9. It is possible, that through extensive training, to increase one's jumping height. So bring on the best coaches. Of course jumping training takes time, so it would necessary to cut back on other courses. Even with the training, a large percentage, if not all, of short kids would fail. Some schools have a greater number of short kids, so the failure rate would be higher for those schools. Very interesting, and the public needs to know. Along the way, some graduate student would conduct a study, and their finding would be that short kids had short parents; its in the DNA. Another variable is race, and the study would show that Asian-American kids failure rate was much higher than Finnish-American kids, and yes, the Finnish-American parents were taller. So what is this AZMerit testing intended to accomplish? Is it kind of like an IQ test? It shows that some human children are smarter than others, just like some are taller than others. And, that smart parents tend to have smart kids. Biology 101?
Back to preschool education, baby sitting, the needs of our society have changed drastically during the past 80 years, as the result of the pill and equal opportunity for women, and technological advances, e.g.,dishwashers, frozen food, etc. Public schools reflect the needs of society. Society has changed and so will schools, and like or not, taxpayer supported preschool education will become part of change and our society will be better for IT.