Public Schools

[btownmeggy]

Um Stopper, I think there talking about American public schools, or private schools to us. The ones that the Government fund.

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

And state (/public/normal) schools are cool here. The govt doesn't give as much for the money they take as in other countries (mostly north of here) but it's not a bad attempt.

Normal schools??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_schools

[muy_thaiguy]

My schools were all right, not the best or anything, but they were good.

[The1exile]

Um Stopper, I think there talking about American public schools, or private schools to us. The ones that the Government fund.

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

And state (/public/normal) schools are cool here. The govt doesn't give as much for the money they take as in other countries (mostly north of here) but it's not a bad attempt.

Normal schools??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_schools

Meh. What do expect from phrases that come from the french.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_School

[flashleg8]

Um Stopper, I think there talking about American public schools, or private schools to us. The ones that the Government fund.

I think the schools are great, I would prefer them over Grammar schools anyday, because the experiences that you get are invaluable, whilst at Grammar you only meet male people who have parents earning £80k+ and know the difference between a fish knife and a butter-spreading knife.

Argh! We're two nations divided by the same language...


I'm completely against public (meaning British private) schools and I would like to see them all abolished. I believe that the state schooling system is essential to break down social barriers and help to eradicate the class structure. People from all walks of life have the ability to mix and will experience similar education.
Britain has a legacy of the "old boy network" that graduates from the elite fee paying schools are fast tracked into positions of power (though conversely the fact that David Cameron went to Eton is considered a disadvantage to the Tory party, as its a vote loser with the general public). All education opportunities should be equal (including access to extra curriculum tuition) regardless of income or social position.

If the well off were forced to send their kids to the local school they would be more inclined to support a rise in funds for state education and we wouldn't see the most qualified teachers siphoned off to the fee paying schools.

I'm also against faith schools and single sex schools.

[Norse]

Argh! We're two nations divided by the same language...

Grease yourself up.

I'm completely against public (meaning British private) schools and I would like to see them all abolished. I believe that the state schooling system is essential to break down social barriers and help to eradicate the class structure. People from all walks of life have the ability to mix and will experience similar education.

You really are a special peice of work, aren't you eh?

So, you wish to plunge all children into our pathetic educational system, without giving the parents a choice to spend their hard-earned money on supplying their children with a better education?

Or let me guess, you will tax the parents even higher
and not give them the choice to give their kids the best of starts in life? How very quaint and utopian of you.

What worries me here, is that there would simply be no choice, in your grand scheme of thing.

You also want to abolish heirarchy? Well bugger me with a 10 foot barge-pole, but who in the hell would run this dismal country?

How far would this stretch? Would businesses and not be allowed management? (hahahaha! businesses in your utopia, I crease myself up) Would the police force not be allowed to have sergeants? Would the army not be allowed Leuitenants?

You are full of fail.

Britain has a legacy of the "old boy network" that graduates from the elite fee paying schools are fast tracked into positions of power (though conversely the fact that David Cameron went to Eton is considered a disadvantage to the Tory party, as its a vote loser with the general public). All education opportunities should be equal (including access to extra curriculum tuition) regardless of income or social position.

This is a true block.

But because of your own envy of the "higher-classes" you are going to penalise middle calsses by not giving their children the chance to get a better education?

Some middle classes prefer to spend their monies on holidays and entertainment..(suffice to say, in your world, entertainment would be "government messages", and you wouldnt be allowed to leave the country for a holiday), and some middle class paople may like to spend their cash on providing the best education for their kids...

So your own envy, jealousy and hatred would lead to the restrictment of others' choices?

Bah, you're all the bloody same, goddam bolsheviks.

If the well off were forced to send their kids to the local school they would be more inclined to support a rise in funds for state education and we wouldn't see the most qualified teachers siphoned off to the fee paying schools.

But hang on, wouldnt these "more qualified" teachers probably leave the country, should such an extreme measure be taken?

Assuming they didn't, what are your forever the magic words?

tax tax tax tax tax tax

I'm also against faith schools and single sex schools.

Bigot.

[mr. incrediball]

^^^^ Norse, private schools rarely provide a better education, a better lifestyle or even better friends. My Mum started smoking in a private school, perhaps she wouldn't if she'd gone to a state school, but the point is that state schools work their darndest to produce an improvement from their students, while most people private schools assume their students know everything anyway

(of course, what I just said could be completely wrong in the case of cities.)

[Norse]

Mr Incrediball


You're talking out of your crusty ring.

[mr. incrediball]

Mr Incrediball


You're talking out of your crusty ring.

oops, sorry

*takes onion ring out of mouth*

that better?

[Norse]

I hate public schools, and I hate public schoolboys even more. I mean, who wouldn't? Look at the picture! Abolish them all immediately. I long for the day Eton is turned into a School for the Disadvantaged, Needy and Otherwise-Tugging-On-Left-Wing-Heartstrings.

You, Stopper, are a typical cantankerous, bitter, scottish git.

Your Bitterness is shadowed only by your envious, green-eyed resentment towards people who have simply done better in life than you have.

I cant believe you are in your 30's, with these dope-smoking, che guevara t-shirt wearing, childish view points. For odin's sake, grow the f*ck up.

Maybe instead of trying to blame everybody else for (presumeably) your own short comings, why not get a proper job. Christ, You, with your despising grimace, casting your hatred onto a section of society, who are afforded the comfort of a decent education, are no better than a bloody nazi.

You make me sick, the fucking lot of you and your ilk.

[flashleg8]

So, you wish to plunge all children into our pathetic educational system, without giving the parents a choice to spend their hard-earned money on supplying their children with a better education?

Or let me guess, you will tax the parents even higher
and not give them the choice to give their kids the best of starts in life? How very quaint and utopian of you.

Yes I would increase tax. Massively for any earning over £50K per year (in the region of 70-80%-there's really no need for that kind of money) and generally increase it for all wages above the average income for a skilled worker. taxes would be used to increase performance in vital areas of our society (health/transport/education/housing).

What worries me here, is that there would simply be no choice, in your grand scheme of thing.

Choice? What choice does the average working class family have where they send their children? The local school. No other choice. It's only the wealthy middle and upper classes that have any choice.

You also want to abolish heirarchy? Well bugger me with a 10 foot barge-pole, but who in the hell would run this dismal country?

How far would this stretch? Would businesses and not be allowed management? (hahahaha! businesses in your utopia, I crease myself up) Would the police force not be allowed to have sergeants? Would the army not be allowed Leuitenants?

I'm not really an anarchist, but I believe in some of their principles. Workplaces would be run by the workers - they have more direct knowledge and experience of the job requirements and would be more motivated to ensure the production is optimum if they had a direct say in its manufacture (If you think this is incorrect that I would you look at your own job situation - would you prefer to have direct control over how it is run, surely you have ideas to make the business more efficient?). Revolutionary armies in Russia '17, Spain '36, Cuba '56 all existed and fought on the basis of democratically deciding on orders and action. American civil war armies used similar systems - it is possible and doesn't necessarily decrease the effectiveness.

But because of your own envy of the "higher-classes" you are going to penalise middle classes by not giving their children the chance to get a better education?

Not envy, disgust at the inequality. I'm not for penalising anyone, I would give all children the chance to get a better education.

If the well off were forced to send their kids to the local school they would be more inclined to support a rise in funds for state education and we wouldn't see the most qualified teachers siphoned off to the fee paying schools.

But hang on, wouldnt these "more qualified" teachers probably leave the country, should such an extreme measure be taken?

I wouldn't restrict the right of anyone to leave (or enter) the country (who would want to leave my socialist paradise? ), but obviously people leaving would need to repay in some way the money that was invested in their (state) education. The teacher would have a duty to the state (people) that provided for his/her education in the first place.

I'm also against faith schools and single sex schools.

Bigot.

I knew that would be controversial from a leftie, but I don't think religion has any place in a state education. Where I live (west coast of Scotland) the sectarian divide between Catholics and Protestants is (I believe) fueled by the apartheid system of faith schools. Similar problems exist in Northern Ireland - where they have tried to introduce schools sharing playgrounds to help integrate communities.

[mr. incrediball]

I hate public schools, and I hate public schoolboys even more. I mean, who wouldn't? Look at the picture! Abolish them all immediately. I long for the day Eton is turned into a School for the Disadvantaged, Needy and Otherwise-Tugging-On-Left-Wing-Heartstrings.

You, Stopper, are a typical cantankerous, bitter, scottish git.

Your Bitterness is shadowed only by your envious, green-eyed resentment towards people who have simply done better in life than you have.

I cant believe you are in your 30's, with these dope-smoking, che guevara t-shirt wearing, childish view points. For odin's sake, grow the f*ck up.

Maybe instead of trying to blame everybody else for (presumeably) your own short comings, why not get a proper job. Christ, You, with your despising grimace, casting your hatred onto a section of society, who are afforded the comfort of a decent education, are no better than a bloody nazi.

You make me sick, the fucking lot of you and your ilk.

dude, he was joking

[red bull]

coming from a home schooler here {with terrible spelling always have been bad at it } going back to what some one said about homeschoolers having problems comunicating with other people ... i would have to dissagree {from my personal dealings with people and my other home school friends with other non home schoolers }

i consider my self very easy to get along with/talk with and so on and so fourth in rl with any one.... but i think maybe the reason for that is beacuse as i was growing up my family was involved in a homeschool group where every week we would get together and just hang out. also during the week we as a group would go on field trips conserts factories ect ect


so really i my self and any one in a group i do not think have a disadvantage when it comes to "inable to comunicate with the out side world"
{that was said by some idiot teacher from a school around where i live said about homeschoolers after we beat them in a spelling bee }

but yes i would say though also that there are some cases where some one tought at home was shelterd waaaaayyyy to much by his or her parents and is unable to survive on his own but that is a rare case ... and besides they can make it to nasa always is looking for poeple to go under ground for research for 40 years




oh almost forgot this might have helped me to but i played baseball for 10 years as a kid for the local school so that might have helped to alot of home schoolers play sports all around the country for public schools

[Norse]

So, you wish to plunge all children into our pathetic educational system, without giving the parents a choice to spend their hard-earned money on supplying their children with a better education?

Or let me guess, you will tax the parents even higher
and not give them the choice to give their kids the best of starts in life? How very quaint and utopian of you.

Yes I would increase tax. Massively for any earning over £50K per year (in the region of 70-80%-there's really no need for that kind of money) and generally increase it for all wages above the average income for a skilled worker. taxes would be used to increase performance in vital areas of our society (health/transport/education/housing).

What worries me here, is that there would simply be no choice, in your grand scheme of thing.

Choice? What choice does the average working class family have where they send their children? The local school. No other choice. It's only the wealthy middle and upper classes that have any choice.

You also want to abolish heirarchy? Well bugger me with a 10 foot barge-pole, but who in the hell would run this dismal country?

How far would this stretch? Would businesses and not be allowed management? (hahahaha! businesses in your utopia, I crease myself up) Would the police force not be allowed to have sergeants? Would the army not be allowed Leuitenants?

I'm not really an anarchist, but I believe in some of their principles. Workplaces would be run by the workers - they have more direct knowledge and experience of the job requirements and would be more motivated to ensure the production is optimum if they had a direct say in its manufacture (If you think this is incorrect that I would you look at your own job situation - would you prefer to have direct control over how it is run, surely you have ideas to make the business more efficient?). Revolutionary armies in Russia '17, Spain '36, Cuba '56 all existed and fought on the basis of democratically deciding on orders and action. American civil war armies used similar systems - it is possible and doesn't necessarily decrease the effectiveness.

But because of your own envy of the "higher-classes" you are going to penalise middle classes by not giving their children the chance to get a better education?

Not envy, disgust at the inequality. I'm not for penalising anyone, I would give all children the chance to get a better education.

If the well off were forced to send their kids to the local school they would be more inclined to support a rise in funds for state education and we wouldn't see the most qualified teachers siphoned off to the fee paying schools.

But hang on, wouldnt these "more qualified" teachers probably leave the country, should such an extreme measure be taken?

I wouldn't restrict the right of anyone to leave (or enter) the country (who would want to leave my socialist paradise? ), but obviously people leaving would need to repay in some way the money that was invested in their (state) education. The teacher would have a duty to the state (people) that provided for his/her education in the first place.
.

If you had any kind of power, and implemented Any of these idea's, I can guarentee to you that the only members of your "socialist paradise" left in the country, would be the down-trodden, lazy-assed gits, who wouldnt be able to afford to get out of the country.

Therefore, you will have no rich people to tax, to fund your anti-darwanian hell-hole, and this would effectively end up with willfully murdering these people, who will not have anyone to leech benefits from.

Maybe this is a good thing, as then the decent, hard working middle classes can then return afterwards, and create the actual utopia, without having to subsidise the existence of parasites, less taxation, better education...and never the same mistakes again.

Excellent! you could be used as a pawn in my master plan....keep up the good work.

[The Weird One]

I live just outside of Detroit. I wouldn't send my theoretical kids to Detroit public schools because they aren't physically safe. But as a teacher I have to say public schools. There is no data to support that private schools produce better test scores after you compensate for income, privilege etc.

Why test scores?? Is that all we care about?? how well you can fill in some circles on a F*CKING standardized test!!!!!


Sorry, I won't go into my full rant here. . . yet.

[mr. incrediball]

I live just outside of Detroit. I wouldn't send my theoretical kids to Detroit public schools because they aren't physically safe. But as a teacher I have to say public schools. There is no data to support that private schools produce better test scores after you compensate for income, privilege etc.

Why test scores?? Is that all we care about?? how well you can fill in some circles on a F*CKING standardized test!!!!!


Sorry, I won't go into my full rant here. . . yet.

wait.. filling in circles?

*swells with pride* none of that in MY country

*deflates in torrent of flames*

[The Weird One]

well I live in the U.S. where all they care about is your score on a damn standardized test that the teachers prepare you for all year long (and in some case they prepare you for the same test for a few years running) [at least through 12th grade]

[btownmeggy]

I live just outside of Detroit. I wouldn't send my theoretical kids to Detroit public schools because they aren't physically safe. But as a teacher I have to say public schools. There is no data to support that private schools produce better test scores after you compensate for income, privilege etc.

Why test scores?? Is that all we care about?? how well you can fill in some circles on a F*CKING standardized test!!!!!


Sorry, I won't go into my full rant here. . . yet.

I guess you've done badly on standardized tests?

[static_ice]

my school isn't poor but underfunded, and they do anything to get money from anyone, esp. the students with all this overpriced shit they sell

[bryguy]

I like them, much better than home schooling I would assume.

compared to home schooling, public schooling sucks. Trust me I should know, i home school. here are some reasons

1. No chances of a school mate gunning u down
2. You get to stay at home most of the day
3. You can get help from your parents if you need help, otherwise if u need help u can (as my mom always says) look it up
4. (shoot i forgot the rest, will reply with the rest later)

[bryguy]

I live just outside of Detroit. I wouldn't send my theoretical kids to Detroit public schools because they aren't physically safe. But as a teacher I have to say public schools. There is no data to support that private schools produce better test scores after you compensate for income, privilege etc.

i agree, but still it has been proven that home schoolers are most of the time smarter than people who go to public school (and anyways i have to be for when i do my ACT test, my mom has a requirement that we have to pass it with a A or B) and my older sisters took the test twice each, and each and the second time the test was different and harder and they passed it with higher scores.

[static_ice]

I like them, much better than home schooling I would assume.

compared to home schooling, public schooling sucks. Trust me I should know, i home school. here are some reasons

1. No chances of a school mate gunning u down
2. You get to stay at home most of the day
3. You can get help from your parents if you need help, otherwise if u need help u can (as my mom always says) look it up
4. (shoot i forgot the rest, will reply with the rest later)

5. don't have to wake up early (which works with #2.)
6. little to no homework

the only cons I can think of happen when you want to play sports or join clubs, or when you need to take standardized tests/AP tests, where you have to go to some community center or local high school.

[bryguy]

4. There was an experiment once that proved that home schoolers are more likely to make friends (the experiment was that a bunch of home schoolers and public schoolers were put out in a playground area, various ages between 3 and 14 and the school kids stayed with people there ages, but the home schoolers played with any age group. And at the end they asked the kids how many friends they had made or something like that and the home schoolers had made alot more friends then the public schoolers)




i might have a few of these facts mixed up, for where they were put but i have the results right

[bryguy]

5. don't have to wake up early (which works with #2.)
6. little to no homework

the only cons I can think of happen when you want to play sports or join clubs, or when you need to take standardized tests/AP tests, where you have to go to some community center or local high school.

5. not true, u usually have to get up at seven am and start your homework at 8 am, and then keep going until three.
6. also not true, i know a lot of other home schoolers, and all of them have a WHOLE LOT of homework, and what public schoolers do in school and the homework they have to do afterward at home, the home schoolers have to do in one day from 8 am to sometimes 4 or 5 pm

[static_ice]

5. don't have to wake up early (which works with #2.)
6. little to no homework

the only cons I can think of happen when you want to play sports or join clubs, or when you need to take standardized tests/AP tests, where you have to go to some community center or local high school.

5. not true, u usually have to get up at seven am and start your homework at 8 am, and then keep going until three.
6. also not true, i know a lot of other home schoolers, and all of them have a WHOLE LOT of homework, and what public schoolers do in school and the homework they have to do afterward at home, the home schoolers have to do in one day from 8 am to sometimes 4 or 5 pm

wow they have to stay up as late as 5 PM!?!?!?!

[bryguy]

5. don't have to wake up early (which works with #2.)
6. little to no homework

the only cons I can think of happen when you want to play sports or join clubs, or when you need to take standardized tests/AP tests, where you have to go to some community center or local high school.

5. not true, u usually have to get up at seven am and start your homework at 8 am, and then keep going until three.
6. also not true, i know a lot of other home schoolers, and all of them have a WHOLE LOT of homework, and what public schoolers do in school and the homework they have to do afterward at home, the home schoolers have to do in one day from 8 am to sometimes 4 or 5 pm

wow they have to stay up as late as 5 PM!?!?!?!

yes