You state:
if in any way, as seems self-evident, you are making a case the sorry state of our education system is in any way based upon the fact there is still not enough money being spent
How is it evident? I clearly state:
Throwing money at the problem won't help
You ask:
In whose hands do you believe the primary responsibility for the education of our children rests? Their parents? Or the State?
I ask, Does the country, does society, have an interest in the education of its children?
The home has the most powerful influence on a child. Hence, my statement:
"Correlation with wealth/race is quite high."
How can you disagree? The children of richer people get better educations. That's a fact. Should society care? Should we care?
I think schools are one place where society can level the field a bit. But that won't happen under the current system. Teachers have to be better, smarter. They have to be accountable for outcomes. Today they are not.
I'll make a final point. I trace the decline in education to an act of Congress in 1975 that mandated disabled children need to be accommodated in mainstream classrooms. As time passed the mandate grew to include prohibitions against removing children who were behavior problems. The law is ridiculous. A child has to have a gun, or carry drugs to school to get a temporary suspension. Instead of uplifting the disabled, this law depresses the achievement of the everyone.
I know of one mainstream class where more than 50% of the children have IEPs. There is no way the class can achieve high academic success in that environment.
Throwing money at the problem won't help" You are correct. You clearly stated it.I appreciate your response, @agmoore. And I thank you generally for it being civil and respectful. And I thank you specifically for pointing out my error in not catching what you had stated, "
If you will permit, to my reading of it, there is a logical inconsistency that led me to respond the way I did. Let me address that more broadly, instead of focusing on the word "money." How would I do that? Substitute a broader reference to something like, "socioeconomic status" or similar?
While we can agree, perhaps, that has a bearing on the topic, I do not agree that is the primary problem. While stated far too simply, attempting to state it succinctly, I believe the roots of the problem are far more philosophical than they are economical. Which addresses all of your questions, without specific point-by-point detailed responses to each of them.
Based on what you have said thus far, then, it would appear we have a rather fundamental disagreement. Which is, of course, just fine, as I would hope we can at least agree we could still peacefully coexist, nonetheless.
Beyond that, I could go on. I am peacefully and productively retired. I have plenty to do, to keep me busy, but I don't mind discussing this further, if it is of any interest. However, I won't presume that to be the case. Long an advocate for interpersonal relations of any kind (personal / professional / ?...?) being mutually beneficial, I'll leave it here, until next time.
It has been a pleasure to have this exchange with you. Age has taught me that I am wrong, often...or at least that I'm not exactly right. I recognize that philosophically we may have disagreements about the role of government.
Of course I'm civil, as you have been. Each of us has lived a long time and each has come to our views after a lifetime of experience. I am perhaps less committed to my perspective on government than you may believe.
It can be (usually is) rotten and corrupt. It can be, (and often is) intrusive. It is certainly wasteful. I remember reading about bureaucracy in imperial Russia. It was a cesspool. It swallowed people up--their time, their money, even their freedom.
Sometimes it feels as though we have reached that level of bureaucracy in this country. I'm all for cleaning that out.
However...government is necessary. Government can be good. I believe it can help to guarantee liberty in our country if we follow that wonderful document drafted by our founders, the Constitution. I oppose autocracy, one-man rule. The only way to avoid one-man rule is to hold whoever leads us to the law. To the Constitution.
I think you and I may agree on values. I think we both love our country very much. And yet I'm certain there is a wide gulf between how each of us believes we can support those values and our country through political action.
Wishing you the very best. Happy to know you are retired peacefully. I guess I'm retired, but have significant family obligations at this time in my life.
Yes, thank you kindly @agmoore:
Ditto. What is always nice is to find someone with whom you can have a reasonable conversation. Although I can say I would much prefer to happily sit down, buy you a cup of coffee (or something similar), and share from our experiences.
What I would imagine we can both agree on is this. With good intentions on both sides, that conversation would be beneficial to us both, in seeing through the eyes of another, and we would almost certainly leave with the gap being closed down. Not all the way. But, at least some ...
Perhaps our paths will cross again. As we both watch what unfolds, for the sake of those near and dear to us, in the next generations. With both of us hopeful the wisdom of our Founders, so well documented in the Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution, will prevail.
All the best to you, for a better tomorrow!
⭐️🌟✨