Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (9922)	1/29/2002 1:54:48 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Oh. Well. At the the time Federal Aid to Education was started, the states were assured there would be no strings. The Feds would just collect the money because it was easier for them; ie., they are less responsive to the voters. Then they would generously return the money to the local school systems. Of course, it didn't work that way in the long run. What happened to the question I asked on what % of the school budget is federal funds? The "strings" argument is superficial. They are related to education. Curriculums are generated State wide; the feds don't control the curriculum based on busing. Which is going to change shortly with the introduction of national tests. In an indirect manner you appear to agree that the States have controlled the curriculum. Maybe it's up to the Feds to control the border. That is a Federal job. Texas has what it has. They know it. It's up to Texas to deal with it. And there is nothing that prohibits Texas from controlling it's borders...If they thought it was important enough, they can line up State Troopers on the south Texas border. Bush on the Federal side now would like to give a blanket grant of legal status. California schools suck. They run about 48 or 49. I think that's incorrect. On the link I provided you California ranks a bit higher than Texas. Although the NEA does itas best to convince parents of what they want to believe anyway- -that it can do the entire job if only it is given enough $$$$. What BS, I can remember back in the 70's the NEA promoting the importance of parental involvement [I was a teacher way back then] and they still do. Is the grading done on a scale or curve? If a curve, well, SOMEBODY is going to be at the bottom. If it's a scale someone isn't at the bottom?!!!! How do you do your scales? It doesn't seem that you bothered to look at the math proficiency scores that I pointed to. jttmab

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (9922)	1/29/2002 3:19:42 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Re: Parental involvement.. Back when I was a kid [Isn't it great to be able to say that as a parent <s>] My parents "involvement" was narrowly focused. It was my job to learn; I had books. Mom took care of the house; Dad was a machinist and the both of them worked damn hard [they made that point perfectly clear]. If I didn't learn, it was my own fault. My parents didn't do my projects for me; that was my job. Learning math was my problem. If I didn't get good grades, there was hell to pay [that was their job, dishing out hell, and they were quite good at it]. I've heard a more than few parents with children talk about science projects/fairs. They'll say something like..."there is NO WAY that a 12 year old did that project!" On the positive side, you can say that the parents of that 12-year old were involved....I'd be inclined to be a bit tougher...give the parents the grade for the project and give the kid an F for plagerism. I'm a hard-a$$ liberal. jttmab