Thread: No Child Left Behind Is NOT Good.

I completely agree. Its really annoying to think that more money is being spent on a handicaped kid than there is being spent on me, just because i'm not handicaped! I know that they deserve and equal chance, but by doing this its not equal.

It will leave more children behind.

Originally Posted by Harrycombs

I completely agree. Its really annoying to think that more money is being spent on a handicaped kid than there is being spent on me, just because i'm not handicaped! I know that they deserve and equal chance, but by doing this its not equal.

It will leave more children behind.

Yeah, because again, what are they really going to use it on? I'd think that math skills and reading is all that you can really give them that they'll put to use. They're going to live a sheltered life, face it, and telling them they're not is only hurting them more.

While some people need more attention to do as well as others, and while I do believe they deserve that extra attention if there is a possibility, what I absolutely deplore is when they lower the bar. "I have a learning disorder, so it should take less to pass." No.

No child left behind act. Um...I didn't hear of it being mainly for mentally handicapped children. The standards are raised for everyone...I fail to see how mentally handicapped people are brought into the equation for this subject. It is the personal responsability of each individual to do what you can for yourself. This country was built on the idea that if you have a dream, and you work hard, you can accomplish it. I really wish you would take a second back and remember that those who CAN NOT do for themselves must be taken care of. So many people have got this idea that other people must take care of them, that is why so many people are dependent on well-fare and other types of government provided care. If you have the capability to be great, then it is your duty to get there on your own. I truly understand where your coming from though, it seems unfair that one is valued less than those who, in a very sad, and very real way, have less value in society. Although, take a moment to think of this example. You are a child. You and your sibling both want new shoes. You both got shoes at the same time last year. For whatever reason your parents can only afford to get one of you new shoes. Your shoes aren't all that fancy, but they are infact not that depreciated in value. However your sibling's shoes have holes in them, have shoelaces falling apart at their aglits(the plastic tip), and their feet are in far worse pain than yours. Who deserves to get new shoes?

However, you inadvertantly brought up a very important subject. Corruption in standards such as medical schools most importantly. In our universities of medical care, where we hone the skills of our valued doctors, if you have a handicap due to another group of people under a disabilities act, you have extra time to take tests, and do "in lab" activities. Since many of the people attending universities like this have family already in practice of medical fields, they can have them say they have certain disabilities that they do not have, which gives them an unfair advantage. Also, I can not help the cards that people are dealt, if you have a REAL handicap, then I suggest you stick to passive medical professions please, do not work in a situation where a persons life is on the "immediate" line.

While this is not the only case where over sensitivity is rather overbearing, it is the only case I can actually say that I have active experience with.

Originally Posted by Sandform

No child left behind act. Um...I didn't hear of it being mainly for mentally handicapped children. The standards are raised for everyone...I fail to see how mentally handicapped people are brought into the equation for this subject. It is the personal responsability of each individual to do what you can for yourself. This country was built on the idea that if you have a dream, and you work hard, you can accomplish it. I really wish you would take a second back and remember that those who CAN NOT do for themselves must be taken care of. So many people have got this idea that other people must take care of them, that is why so many people are dependent on well-fare and other types of government provided care. If you have the capability to be great, then it is your duty to get there on your own. I truly understand where your coming from though, it seems unfair that one is valued less than those who, in a very sad, and very real way, have less value in society. Although, take a moment to think of this example. You are a child. You and your sibling both want new shoes. You both got shoes at the same time last year. For whatever reason your parents can only afford to get one of you new shoes. Your shoes aren't all that fancy, but they are infact not that depreciated in value. However your sibling's shoes have holes in them, have shoelaces falling apart at their aglits(the plastic tip), and their feet are in far worse pain than yours. Who deserves to get new shoes?

However, you inadvertantly brought up a very important subject. Corruption in standards such as medical schools most importantly. In our universities of medical care, where we hone the skills of our valued doctors, if you have a handicap due to another group of people under a disabilities act, you have extra time to take tests, and do "in lab" activities. Since many of the people attending universities like this have family already in practice of medical fields, they can have them say they have certain disabilities that they do not have, which gives them an unfair advantage. Also, I can not help the cards that people are dealt, if you have a REAL handicap, then I suggest you stick to passive medical professions please, do not work in a situation where a persons life is on the "immediate" line.

While this is not the only case where over sensitivity is rather overbearing, it is the only case I can actually say that I have active experience with.

Like I said, I understand the good things, but I draw the line at a mental handicap that CANNOT be cured. They WILL be taken care of, naturally get welfare checks... His shoes might be riddled with holes, but he doesn't have to walk on the hot sand.

And yes, that's another thing, having more time to take tests and more room for error isn't proving that they are good for the job, it only proves that when given tons of time and more room for error that they can succeed.

It's bad because the federal government is involved. It's not their business. Schools should be administered locally. It's just more that they want to control.

If you want to understand why these laws are in place, you might have to look at it from a handicapped person's parents' perspective. They love their child very much and won't settle for anything less than the best they can give them, including education. They might be driven by some hope that their child can indeed learn to live a normal life, which is what all parents desperately want.

Having said that, there was a handicapped employee at our local Petsmart for many years. The only reason he got hired is because our high school had some agreenment with the store. This person could not do the job. Not only would he not assist customers, not do any of his assigned duties... but he would swear at and disrespect other employees in front of customers. He did things that would have gotten a "normal" person fired ages ago. But, because he was handicapped, no one had the balls to complain about him for fear of looking like the bad guy. Now that is just wrong. If you can't do the job, your ass is fired, like the rest of us.

The free market does better with just about every single thing you can possibly imagine. Every time the government gets involved in things you can count on things, not only NOT getting better but, actually getting worse, less efficient and more cumbersome.

I say get handicapped kids into the IT industry, you hardly ever have to move!!

But really, if you were handicapped, would you like to be considered, not part of the worlds future? Thats a pretty harsh statement.

Originally Posted by LordSturm

But really, if you were handicapped, would you like to be considered, not part of the worlds future? Thats a pretty harsh statement.

Every one has their place. That place isn't always where you want to be or where you think you should be.

The no child left behind act is, like all other things Bush puts out, heavily funded by corporations to help it pass. The fact is nothing goes through congress unless businesses are willing to put a lot of money into lobbying it. No Child Left Behind makes tests the absolute decider of how well a school is doing. Tests? That's so last century. A good teacher does not teach to the test, a bad teacher does, so No Child Left Behind has reverse effects. It teaches people to be schooled like the Chinese do, meanwhile the Chinese are trying to liberalize their system.

Originally Posted by LordSturm

I say get handicapped kids into the IT industry, you hardly ever have to move!!

But really, if you were handicapped, would you like to be considered, not part of the worlds future? Thats a pretty harsh statement.

If I was handicapped I wouldn't want to be lied to, to tell the truth. I'd rather, if possible, work my way, not be told 'YOU RULE AND WILL BE PRESIDENT'.

anyways I've always considered the reason why republicans don't seem to want a good education system is for votes. Conservatism is strongest where education is the weakest. they just want to get reelected.

Originally Posted by shark!

anyways I've always considered the reason why republicans don't seem to want a good education system is for votes. Conservatism is strongest where education is the weakest. they just want to get reelected.

Not only is that incorrect but it's completely opposite reality.

Originally Posted by shark!

anyways I've always considered the reason why republicans don't seem to want a good education system is for votes. Conservatism is strongest where education is the weakest. they just want to get reelected.

Republicans have the answer to education problem in the U.S. The schools need to be privatized but paid for with government money through vouchers. If the public schools were competing with each other for students, they would be run worlds better. As it is, too many school workers do a half ass job because the government gives the administrators flat, guaranteed salaries. Somebody at the top needs to be losing pocket money when his school sucks. That has a way of lighting fires under people's asses.

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

Not only is that incorrect but it's completely opposite reality.

?

Originally Posted by shark!

?

See Universal Mind's post for a good head start of where I'm coming from.

Conservatism is the exact opposite of what you portrayed it to be. Conservatives believe that the way to empower people is to encourage and expect them to improve themselves.

Conversely, the Liberal ideology thrives on the heels of keeping people dependant on government and the social programs.

Conservatism is based on the principals of independence and understands that private entities almost always handle almost everything far better and more efficiently than government ever dreamed of.

Conversely, Liberals get their power from dependence. Liberals believe that government is the answerer of all prayers and that people are NOT (edit) smart enough to handle their own destinies.

Conservatives believe that each individual has the potential to make something of himself.

Conversely, Liberalism is an ideology of victimisation. Every one is a victim in their eyes. Victim mentality is very self-destructive and does not allow the "victim" to make things better because, after all, "it's some one else's fault."

Conservatives believe that each person is responsible for their own actions and that this is what keeps order and causes people to strive to be their best

Conversely, Liberals believe that no one should be held accountable for the things they do because it's not their fault. It's the fault of society's woes and that to enforce rules and expect people to be responsible is wrong.

That's a quick overview to illustrate that you are uninformed about what Conservatism is all about. In fact, as I said, you are completely inverted in your impressions. Liberalism is the seed-planter of poor education, lax learning and teaching, and cookie-cutter mistakes by local and national governments/school boards in the form of allowing the quality and expectation imposed upon students and teachers to fall lower and lower.

After all, if we expect little Tommy to actually pass his classes then it may make him feel bad about himself when he fails. So, rather than push him to be his best, we'll just excuse not trying. See the fallacy of that kind of thinking? That's Liberalism for you: enjoy being pampered into failure.

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

See Universal Mind's post for a good head start of where I'm coming from.

Conservatism is the exact opposite of what you portrayed it to be. Conservatives believe that the way to empower people is to encourage and expect them to improve themselves.

Conversely, the Liberal ideology thrives on the heels of keeping people dependant on government and the social programs.

Conservatism is based on the principals of independence and understands that private entities almost always handle almost everything far better and more efficiently than government ever dreamed of.

Conversely, Liberals get their power from dependence. Liberals believe that government is the answerer of all prayers and that people are smart enough to handle their own destinies.

Conservatives believe that each individual has the potential to make something of himself.

Conversely, Liberalism is an ideology of victimisation. Every one is a victim in their eyes. Victim mentality is very self-destructive and does not allow the "victim" to make things better because, after all, "it's some one else's fault."

Conservatives believe that each person is responsible for their own actions and that this is what keeps order and causes people to strive to be their best

Conversely, Liberals believe that no one should be held accountable for the things they do because it's not their fault. It's the fault of society's woes and that to enforce rules and expect people to be responsible is wrong.

That's a quick overview to illustrate that you are uninformed about what Conservatism is all about. In fact, as I said, you are completely inverted in your impressions. Liberalism is the seed-planter of poor education, lax learning and teaching, and cookie-cutter mistakes by local and national governments/school boards in the form of allowing the quality and expectation imposed upon students and teachers to fall lower and lower.

After all, if we expect little Tommy to actually pass his classes then it may make him feel bad about himself when he fails. So, rather than push him to be his best, we'll just excuse not trying. See the fallacy of that kind of thinking? That's Liberalism for you: enjoy being pampered into failure.

This may be the best explaination of liberalism i have ever read. These beliefs they hold extend to far more than just education, too.

Its because of these ideologies, especially victimization, that has and will continue to dilude American culture. Everything in your explaination shows how liberals are forcing us away from Individualism and leading us toward Socialism. Trying to make everbody happy will only have disasterous effects, and feeling sorry for people will only make them soft.

I also wonder if liberals really care about other people, or if they just try to appeal to everybody to get more votes. The best way to get people on your side is to portray them as victims and then say you are going to help them.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

This may be the best explaination of liberalism i have ever read. These beliefs they hold extend to far more than just education, too.

Its because of these ideologies, especially victimization, that has and will continue to dilude American culture. Everything in your explaination shows how liberals are forcing us away from Individualism and leading us toward Socialism. Trying to make everbody happy will only have disasterous effects, and feeling sorry for people will only make them soft.

I also wonder if liberals really care about other people, or if they just try to appeal to everybody to get more votes. The best way to get people on your side is to portray them as victims and then say you are going to help them.

Thank you, it's nice to be in good company. You know, the masses think Liberalism is all about good-hearted, feel-good, let-me-prop-up, I-really-care "-ness". But if you look past the surface you start to learn that Liberalism is really another name for "defeatism".

That defeatism spill over into the every pore of Liberal philosophy. Look at the war we're fighting in Iran/Iraq. The United States has far more power than necessary to squelch the enemy. We don't because we're engaged in an even larger battle with our own frickin' people. The Liberals think that we can solve the world's problems by simply sitting down and playing footsies with those who've explicitly said - repeatedly - that they won't rest until we're all either dead of under their oppression.

Alright, I'm off topic here. But, yeah, don't fall for the deceptive allure of Liberalism; it's not what it appears to be on the surface. Trust me, I've been an observer of this for a long time.

Originally Posted by DoomedOne

The no child left behind act is, like all other things Bush puts out, heavily funded by corporations to help it pass. The fact is nothing goes through congress unless businesses are willing to put a lot of money into lobbying it. No Child Left Behind makes tests the absolute decider of how well a school is doing.

I must agree with this sentiment. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of NCLB, but I am absolutely against the idea that getting more students to pass tests should be the end goal of our education system.

If higher test scores is the number one goal, lowering the tests' standards is the easiest way to acheive it. It's much simpler (and cheaper) to move the passing score lower than to actually teach. Carry this to the extreme, and eventually we'll just be telling children they all pass and stop bothering to make them actually attend class at all. Think of all the money we'll save!

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

Thank you, it's nice to be in good company. You know, the masses think Liberalism is all about good-hearted, feel-good, let-me-prop-up, I-really-care "-ness". But if you look past the surface you start to learn that Liberalism is really another name for "defeatism".

That defeatism spill over into the every pore of Liberal philosophy. Look at the war we're fighting in Iran/Iraq. The United States has far more power than necessary to squelch the enemy. We don't because we're engaged in an even larger battle with our own frickin' people. The Liberals think that we can solve the world's problems by simply sitting down and playing footsies with those who've explicitly said - repeatedly - that they won't rest until we're all either dead of under their oppression.

Alright, I'm off topic here. But, yeah, don't fall for the deceptive allure of Liberalism; it's not what it appears to be on the surface. Trust me, I've been an observer of this for a long time.

In a recent conversation with my old man, he told me I hated liberalism since I was a child. I would always get worked up when people "got offended". In those days, it was political correctness that got to me, and it still gets to me. I almost threw a hissy fit when England was up in arms because South Park offended the Queen. Some "African Americans" get pissed when i call them "black", when "white" and "cracker" are basically perfectly acceptable words. Now I'm getting off topic.

Along with being defetist, the liberal movement seems evasive as well. Problems are avoided rather than confronted. It just complicates everything. I would also like to add that the right not to be offended doesnt exist. The right not to be offended is currently favored over free speech.

Anyway, NCLB was still a disaster. I struggle with it really. I mean, should those schools who do a bad job be punished? I really dont think they should, but they definately shouldnt be rewarded. God, its such a complicated problem.

Originally Posted by skysaw

I must agree with this sentiment. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of NCLB, but I am absolutely against the idea that getting more students to pass tests should be the end goal of our education system.

If higher test scores is the number one goal, lowering the tests' standards is the easiest way to acheive it. It's much simpler (and cheaper) to move the passing score lower than to actually teach. Carry this to the extreme, and eventually we'll just be telling children they all pass and stop bothering to make them actually attend class at all. Think of all the money we'll save!

I believe that was sarcasm. If so then bravo. It really does demonstrate just how foolish it is to try to improve people by lowering standards. It simply does not work.

I love it, it's so pathetic and pitiful but you can't help but laugh at the squabblings of political radicals. I'll admit I used to think that Republicans were selfish and Democrats actually believed in helping people, but now I know really, they're all just deuche-bags using their platform to unite people that hate the other platform so people feel like they're picking the better of two filthy rats and they make their own money and their contributors money at our expense.

All this arguing is fueling that purpose. It's like none of you realize that they have different platforms but do the exact same thing once they get into office.

So here, to set the record straight, the democrats do NOT want us to be dependent on social programs, they just don't want us to be dependent on greedy pigs. The conservatives do NOT want to sell off our education to greedy pigs, they just don't want us to rely on social programs that will be end up as a badly managed tax problem.

Schools need to remain socialized because otherwise we're just going to get our healthcare fiasco delivered back to us as an education fiasco. We cannot sell our education off to men who care only about money, or they will work their asses off to manipulate the system to fuck people over so they can keep getting rich. Fuck the industry, it's the root of all evil.

Originally Posted by DoomedOne

I love it, it's so pathetic and pitiful but you can't help but laugh at the squabblings of political radicals. I'll admit I used to think that Republicans were selfish and Democrats actually believed in helping people, but now I know really, they're all just deuche-bags using their platform to unite people that hate the other platform so people feel like they're picking the better of two filthy rats and they make their own money and their contributors money at our expense.

All this arguing is fueling that purpose. It's like none of you realize that they have different platforms but do the exact same thing once they get into office.

So here, to set the record straight, the democrats do NOT want us to be dependent on social programs, they just don't want us to be dependent on greedy pigs. The conservatives do NOT want to sell off our education to greedy pigs, they just don't want us to rely on social programs that will be end up as a badly managed tax problem.

Schools need to remain socialized because otherwise we're just going to get our healthcare fiasco delivered back to us as an education fiasco. We cannot sell our education off to men who care only about money, or they will work their asses off to manipulate the system to fuck people over so they can keep getting rich. Fuck the industry, it's the root of all evil.

The privatization of school would be nothing like our healthcare problem. The problem with helthcare stems from how expensive it is. Privatized schools would solve a lot of the problems with our education system. I mean, private schools in the US are incredible. I know its not the same, but the privatization of all schools could be accomplished.

Rich people arent as evil as you think. They will not jepordize the education of an entire country to put pennies in their pockets.