| Blogs > micronesia |
micronesia
United States24753 Posts
I'm just curious to know who exactly buys into this... Poll: The policy linked to above is: (Vote): Bullshit (Vote): Perfectly Reasonable (Vote): Not too good not too bad (Vote): I am not sure (Vote): I didn't read it Any explanations/criticisms/etc are welcome.  | ||
|
kpcrew
Korea (South)1071 Posts
parents are just going to choose all the good schools, meaning that the bad schools will have few students and the good students will get swamped with too many kids, becoming "bad" with unruly kids does this policy include magnet schools as well? i dont think it said | ||
|
micronesia
United States24753 Posts
On August 10 2008 12:20 kpcrew(Gg) wrote: does this policy include magnet schools as well? i dont think it said I could be wrong, but I think the Magnet program operates independently for the most part. | ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
To be fair, it doesn't really change anything. Parents are already living at places where they will be able to allow their child better education, should they be able to afford it, and in some cases even when it is above their means. If he fleshes this out some more, we would be able to make better judgments. EDIT - I guess if I have to say something, in comparison to what Obama has suggested, this feels much more reasonable even if I don't know what the heck McCain plans to do. I guess it is a case where something I don't know the exact contents of turning out to be more appealing than something I know has some aspects that I dislike. Not particularly sound logic, but can't be avoided. It won't do for McCain to flesh out a ton of plans that will ultimately be creating a larger federal government, and it seems rather that the responsibilities will diffuse down to the lower state level for the most part. | ||
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
| ||
|
ShadowDrgn
United States2497 Posts
1. Move 2. Pay for a private school This isn't much of a policy, especially considering that it contains absolutely no details on how it would be implemented. | ||
|
kpcrew
Korea (South)1071 Posts
1. earn money 2. marry 3. buy house | ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
How people can call a policy that doesn't contain any statement specific enough in execution to be bullshit is rather odd to me, anyone care to explain? | ||
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
Sounds more like "John McCain's empty promise on education policy" | ||
|
kpcrew
Korea (South)1071 Posts
| ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
| ||
|
micronesia
United States24753 Posts
On August 10 2008 12:35 Ecael wrote: How people can call a policy that doesn't contain any statement specific enough in execution to be bullshit is rather odd to me, anyone care to explain? Let me clarify. I don't mean his entire policy is bullshit (since it isn't clear what it is). I mean, the information on that page (henceforth referred to as his policy on education) is bullshit. Edit: Then again, I'll probably label anything pro-NCLB as bullshit at this point without even reading it because of how charged that term is for me  | ||
|
Kwidowmaker
Canada978 Posts
Bullshit over here. | ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
On August 10 2008 12:50 micronesia wrote: Let me clarify. I don't mean his entire policy is bullshit (since it isn't clear what it is). I mean, the information on that page (henceforth referred to as his policy on education) is bullshit. Edit: Then again, I'll probably label anything pro-NCLB as bullshit at this point without even reading it because of how charged that term is for me If memory serves, you teach Physics right? Must be tough working with that. That said, far as I can tell, he isn't pro-NCLB per se, but took a stance to "draw upon the lessons of NCLB". What does that mean? Who knows. The press release linked at the bottom provided better information, I guess the first page was closer to a mission statement than a policy. That said, that press release was still fairly vague, and avoided much of the details. Odd though, the site focused way more on the parental power than the press release, which glossed over it in like two paragraphs max. | ||
|
talismania
United States2364 Posts
| ||
|
micronesia
United States24753 Posts
On August 10 2008 12:59 Ecael wrote: If memory serves, you teach Physics right? Must be tough working with that. That said, far as I can tell, he isn't pro-NCLB per se, but took a stance to "draw upon the lessons of NCLB". What does that mean? Who knows. The press release linked at the bottom provided better information, I guess the first page was closer to a mission statement than a policy. That said, that press release was still fairly vague, and avoided much of the details. Odd though, the site focused way more on the parental power than the press release, which glossed over it in like two paragraphs max. Note bolded segment above. I agree with what you are saying for the most part. My issue is the assumptions and conclusions regarding NCLB that are implied. Generally what I've observed is politicians and bureaucrats make claims about education that are completely wrong, and then preach this to the general public. But this only works to an extent since there are many teachers and students in the USA. Most of what NCLB has done is find excuses to place blame (where it isn't even due). | ||
|
micronesia
United States24753 Posts
On August 10 2008 13:01 talismania wrote: I'm still not convinced there's a framework in place for government at the federal level to really really really significantly impact the quality of education in the US. So much of the money for our schools and teachers comes from local property taxes, the school boards are all locally elected, etc. Maybe if the US dumped a shit-ton of cash into incentives for teachers and pell grants and stuff like that, but I can't see that happening either. You are right that it's very difficult for the federal government to improve education, given its constitutional role in education. However, it's very easy for the federal government to screw up education, as has been occurring for several years (on a wide scale) | ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
As for NCLB, well, I don't know. It has been used as a method of shifting blame around rather than something that actually mattered. Neither candidate were willing to make much of anything of this, it just got glossed over. An initiative like NCLB is going to be around for a while, and I highly doubt that either candidates will be able to do anything on the matter before more [un]favorable results come to light. | ||
|
kpcrew
Korea (South)1071 Posts
its simple supply and demand, speculators have little to do with higher food prices demand for oil up, food costs more to transport, higher prices etc. but then again barack obama acting like a real politician himself, unlike the image he presented before the dnc | ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
EDIT - Besides, he can't feasibly blame it on anything else, lol. Any politician would take the free scapegoat offered to them in speculators, and financial regulators are only too happy to join in the ass covering. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
LiuLi Cup
Reynor vs Creator
Maru vs Lambo
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
LiuLi Cup
Clem vs Rogue
SHIN vs Cyan
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
