|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 15 new of 64 responses total. |
rcurl
|
|
response 50 of 64:
| 
Nov 19 18:14 UTC 2003 |
The graduates of the parochial schools are probably, on the average,
better prepared for university studies, because parochial schools can
select their students and exclude those that are disruptive or have
serious learning difficulties.
In response to mcnally in #43, a person with much greater experience with
the issue than mcnally has this to say:
"In the mayor's experiment, parents who opt to use the parochiaid vouchers
will tend to be those who are more supportive of their child's education,
and those students in the experiment who don't shape up will be shipped
back to public school. Thus, the group in the parochial schools is skewed
in favor of motivated and well-behaved students, while the comparison
group in the public schools, constrained by the legal requirements of
compulsory education and constitutional safeguards, gets increasingly
loaded in the opposite direction. The "choice" in the proposed experiment
is self-fulfilling selectivity, and the results are pre-ordained."
(This is from a discussion of a voucher program proposed by then Mayor
Giuliani of New York City: http://luna.cc.lehigh.edu/MEDIA%3AFRAME%3A2790)
|
klg
|
|
response 51 of 64:
|
Nov 19 18:46 UTC 2003 |
Precisely! And you continue to ignore the fact that much - if not
most - of the corrupting influence upon public schools is the fault of
government itself. Which demonstrates my position on whatever it was
that we were debating in the first place.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 52 of 64:
|
Nov 19 19:32 UTC 2003 |
re #50: I'm sure whoever wrote that probably does have a great deal
more insight into the issue than I do, however the quote you selected
neither contradicts what I wrote in #43 nor supports your unsupported
claim in #41 that "Parochial schools don't keep the 'difficult' students,
public schools must."
It's possible, even likely, that parochial schools don't wind up with
as many "problem students" to start with, either because of self-selection
or economic issues, but what you write in #41 implies that parochial
schools prosper by forcing their rejects back into the public school
systems. I suspect your conclusion is more influenced by your well-known
antipathy towards religious belief than by any evidence you've seen
that shows that parochial schools make a practice of this policy.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 53 of 64:
|
Nov 19 20:05 UTC 2003 |
"in the mayor's experiment, those who opt.... _will_tend_to_be_
This is not data, this is a prediction about one possible outcome of an
experiment.
|
gull
|
|
response 54 of 64:
|
Nov 19 20:30 UTC 2003 |
Seeing as charter schools, which aren't subject to most of the
government regulations that public schools are, don't seem to produce
students who perform any better than public schools, I'm skeptical about
the claim that government regulation is the main problem here.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 55 of 64:
|
Nov 19 21:24 UTC 2003 |
Te #53: that was an "authority" speaking, and "will tend to be" would
reflect statistical information to that effect. But you can take it or
leave it, as you wish (or your prejucides dictate).
I agree with gull that government regulation is not the problem. The
problem is universal public education colliding with significant parent
indifference.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 56 of 64:
|
Nov 20 02:02 UTC 2003 |
yep, that and that most educational monies end up boeing
*administrative* in nature.
/yawns and goes back to reading Gatto
|
tsty
|
|
response 57 of 64:
|
Nov 21 09:32 UTC 2003 |
'tending' towards success -vs- 'tending' towards failure i choose success,
emphirical, annecdotal ro whatever
and you can 'tend' to yuor problem yoruself
/
|
happyboy
|
|
response 58 of 64:
|
Nov 21 18:49 UTC 2003 |
/sends you to rehab
|
i
|
|
response 59 of 64:
|
Nov 23 23:18 UTC 2003 |
Are parochial schools able to educate the "non-problem" students at a
much lower per-student cost than the public schools (educating those
same exact same students)? My impression is that they can...so why
not save a fortune by sending "all" of the non-problem students to
parochial-type schools instead?
Are there more groups of students who can get an as-good-or-better
education elsewhere, at an as-much-or-less cost (compared to public
schools)? If so, ship them out, too.
In the end, would there be anything left of the public school except
a bunch of self-serving scum administrators & union officials? But
if let go, they'd go turn some other good thing into a mega-money-
wasting hell. Somewhere in America, there's work so filthy, degrading,
and underpaid that even desperate illegals don't want it. Ship the
scum off, in chains, to do that work.
:)
|
happyboy
|
|
response 60 of 64:
|
Nov 24 01:53 UTC 2003 |
you know, now that i think of it, the idea of a nun
spanking my bare bottom with a ruler for being a
bad boy kind of gives me a chub.
i wish i had gone to catholick school instead.
*sigh*
|
tsty
|
|
response 61 of 64:
|
Nov 25 05:20 UTC 2003 |
re #53 ... mymymy, such selective critcismn....
#167.50 Rane Curl (rcurl) Wed, Nov 19, 2003 (13:14):
The graduates of the parochial schools are probably, on the average,
"probably .. on avearage" ....
"This is not data, this is a prediction about one possible outcome of an
experiment"
i support the experiment - i am a victim of the experiment!
|
happyboy
|
|
response 62 of 64:
|
Nov 25 05:43 UTC 2003 |
you were molested by nuns?
|
tsty
|
|
response 63 of 64:
|
Nov 25 18:06 UTC 2003 |
(well, i did have some dreams ya know .... <g>.)
|
willcome
|
|
response 64 of 64:
|
Nov 27 09:36 UTC 2003 |
i dreamd about whore.////./.s, last night
|