Loyalty to the State
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Monday, March 31, 2008 03:34
VIEWED: 19263
PAGE 20 of 27
Frem,
I'd like your thoughts on this one. Since Finn and Sig have refused to answer my question, WHY IS THAT, I thought I'd take a stab at it myself.
You're good with history. Lemme know what you think.
1. Vigilance. Lawmakers can't get away with routine monitoring of child-rearing. So it mandates only the one aspect it can persuade parents to comply with. Then it piggy backs on this one area to collect intelligence on all the other aspects--for the good of the children of course. Compulsory education is less about education, and more about a logistical and convenient platform from which to spy on families.
History is replete with the govt doing one thing while calling it another. War on Iraq is supposed to be about fighting terrorists, but it really is about fighting to secure oil interests for our corporations. I call it sleight-of-mind.
2. Loyalty to the State. Compulsory education was started with encouragement by industry to train more obedient factory workers. Apparently, the same educational system instituted then is still in use today. Education is the only regulated aspect of child rearing because it is the only part where, if done correctly, can present serious challenges to state authority. Train them to be loyal to the hive when they are young, and nip any ideas of sovereignty at the bud.
I'm reading John Taylor Gatto's book right now --An Underground History of American Education.
http://mhkeehn.tripod.com/ughoae.pdf
Very eye-opening.
The judge got it exactly right. A primary purpose of education IS loyalty to the state.
--------------------------
Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming where everyone is interdependent.
--John Dewey, Father of American education
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It is indeed a serious question. Please be so kind as to explain it to me. Thank you.
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Is that really a serious question? If so you have absolutely no sense of proportion.
--------------------------
Je participe
Tu participes
Il participe
Nous participons
Vous participez
Ils profitent
--From a Wall in Paris
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Having the house re-piped this week. (Just one too many galvanized pipe leaks!
Also, doing taxes.
Blech!
This topic is now a lower on my priority list.
Back with you later. Maybe.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Rich people have choices. Public schools get the sort of teachers I was talking about.
It's not only rich people (here) who send their kids to something other than the public school. And on the subject of cost, it would cost me significantly less to send my child to the 'best' private school in the state than homeschool him, which would effectively mean that one of us would do without an income for 12 years.
Quote:
That's right. My problem with teachers vs. parents is twofold.
1. Parents have to have special skills/resources to offer, such as the time to learn with the child, the ability to support a child-led and spontaneous education, and/or an intense passion about the child's welfare. Teachers in schools either don't have those skills, or don't have those types of resources. So they SHOULD have something else to offer, like subject expertise, but they don't. So what DO they have to offer, besides a glorified babysitting service?
you don't think that its possible that teachers can equip children to explore, self learn, and find their own resources?
If you honestly think that the only way that teaching happens is by imparting expertise then your knowledge of what is possible in public education is limited.
Quote:
2. Teachers are the first to criticize homeschoolers are insufficiently qualified to teach. My point was defensive, pointing out that teachers living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. If they actually had any qualifications themselves, I would take their criticisms more seriously.
well teachers are degree qualified here, so I can only speak for here. I guess teachers do see themselves as both qualified and experienced. I don't know what their stance is generally on homeschooling, I suppose it might not be a 'group' mentality (they are individuals after all) maybe they all have different views.
Quote:
Do you have children of your own? When your child has problems at school because of the teachers, do you tell your kid to just suck it up and "cope with existing in an imperfect world where every single thing wasn't specially tailored to their individual needs?" Do you solve your kid's educational problems by saying, "Kid, you don't fit in? Get used to it. You can't expect the world to revolve around you."
er, yes I do, as a matter of fact, kind of anyway. I listen to anything that he says about school and make up my own mind about how serious it is. He has complaints and he has things that he likes. If he was being bullied or persecuted by a teacher or another student, I'd step in, but other than that, yeah I do tell him the world doesn't revolve around him.
Quote:
And to set things straight, homeschooling parents aren't asking teachers to tailor every single little thing to their kids' needs. They understand the school system has limitations, so they are solving the problem by withdrawing their children from a limited system to find a better fit.
I wasn't just talking about homeschoolers, but a pervasive philosophy of 'the world revolves around my childs needs'. I'm sure there are many reasons why people homeschool, both worthy and not so.
Quote:
I had a great time at school. Straight A student, valecdictorian, teacher's pet and all. My daughter, however, begged me every day of her one month in a private school to PLEASE don't send her back. It was torture for her. So yes, I am aware that my child's experience may not actually be mine.
From your other quotes, you sound pretty down on what school can offer, so I feel a little skeptical of your claim to a fantastic time at school.
As for me, I had a mixed bag of school experience. Nothing very bad happened, but I wasn't happy every single day. But I made some lifelong friends and had a couple of inspirational teachers along the way.
In my family situation, thankfully I wasn't homeschooled.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You pinned it there yourself - don’t blame that on me. Earlier you stated that you felt that legislation was a threat with no explanation given when you believed the point of that legislation was to provide protection for homeschooled children, but later you were prepared to accept legislation when you felt that it was only to provide a legal recourse to the parents. Legislation wasn’t such a threat in that case - so we can conclude that it is not actually legislation that you find threatening, but legislation that might protect children. There is actually an unsympathetic attitude towards the rights of children coming through in your point of view.
Originally posted by canttakesky:
But don't try to pin that on *my* personal values.
Quote:There’s nothing serious about it. It’s an attempt to muddy the water. Essentially what you are trying to do is drag the discussion down into arguing the ridiculous details of irrelevant regulation to distract from the real issue of homeschooling, but no one is talking about that degree of regulation - so your question is just completely irrelevant.
Originally posted by canttakesky:Quote:It is indeed a serious question. Please be so kind as to explain it to me. Thank you.
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Is that really a serious question? If so you have absolutely no sense of proportion.
Nonetheless it is worth noticing that there is implicit regulation even here as a direct result of the regulation of the food industry. Food purchased by parents either at restaurants or grocery stores for their children has already been inspected for quality. Not even that much regulation exists in homeschooling for the most part.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
well teachers are degree qualified here, so I can only speak for here. I guess teachers do see themselves as both qualified and experienced. I don't know what their stance is generally on homeschooling, I suppose it might not be a 'group' mentality (they are individuals after all) maybe they all have different views.
My mom homeschooled my sister and I for about 7 years. A couple years ago she started going to college again for a teaching degree.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If parents can, teachers can. But not with the kind of teacher-student ratio that exists in American public schools. The school system is simply not set up for individual attention or a tailored education. Sometimes it tries, but it is very limited.
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
you don't think that its possible that teachers can equip children to explore, self learn, and find their own resources?
Quote:No, I LOVED school. I loved my teachers, I loved my classes, I loved my books, I loved my school library. You really couldn't have found a kid who loved school more than me. Really.
From your other quotes, you sound pretty down on what school can offer, so I feel a little skeptical of your claim to a fantastic time at school.
I wish I could have had better, but I am grateful to have had the education I had. (I went to private schools that hired teachers who majored in the subjects they taught, rather than majored in education.) That doesn't mean that I can't step back and realize that my experience was an exception, that most kids dislike school for good reason, and that there are some serious systemic flaws in the American educational system. My husband used to teach education majors at a university. So some of my poor opinion of American teacher training comes from that.
--------------------------
You can sue a doctor for malpractice, not a schoolteacher... You can’t sue a priest, minister, or rabbi either; that should be a clue.
--John Taylor Gatto, An Underground History of American Education
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:What the hell are you talking about? Now you are making shit up about me. I did no such thing. And if you interpreted that I did, you are wrong.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Earlier you stated that you felt that legislation was a threat with no explanation given when you believed the point of that legislation was to provide protection for homeschooled children, but later you were prepared to accept legislation when you felt that it was only to provide a legal recourse to the parents.
Quit lying about me. I really am done with you now. I don't tolerate libel well.
---------------
Edited to add for the record.
What I said precisely was:
Quote:
In my view, all legislation is a threat.
Quote:
I don't have a problem with making homeschool "legal" (if in fact it needs to be made "legal"). It is your assertion that part of this "legality" requires some minimum standard and monitoring for homeschooling abuses that I have a problem with.
Legislation is the process of making something illegal. I meant it when I said making something illegal is always a threat. To make something legal is the OPPOSITE of legislation. It is to to take out, or modify, the existing law that made it illegal to begin with.
What Finn doesn't understand is that making homeschooling "legal" does not require legislation. He is under the mistaken impression that the law specifies what is allowed and what isn't allowed. So in his view, you have to write a law that says homeschooling is allowed. How could I support that law, but oppose a law that purports to protect children?
If indeed the law says homeschooling is not allowed, all you need to do is take out that part of the prohibition. To make homeschooling "legal," there is no special "law" to support; there are only laws to oppose. I oppose the law that makes homeschooling illegal, and I oppose the laws that make not assessing children's knowledge illegal.
--------------------------
It is the great triumph of compulsory, government monopoly mass-schooling that among even the best of my fellow teachers, and among even the best of my students' parents, only a small number can imagine a different way to do things
-- John Taylor Gatto
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The only reason you’re throwing this big of a fit is because you know I’m right. You did in fact claim that you felt legislation was a threat, but you were fine with that “threat“ so long as it was only being used to make home schooling legal for parents, but not okay with it when it was suggested that part of that legality would require protection for children. It was the principle point of your argument over the last few days - you can’t now claim not to have said it.
Originally posted by canttakesky:
What the hell are you talking about? Now you are making shit up about me. I did no such thing. And if you interpreted that I did, you are wrong.
Quit lying about me. I really am done with you now. I don't tolerate libel well.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
If parents can, teachers can. But not with the kind of teacher-student ratio that exists in American public schools. The school system is simply not set up for individual attention or a tailored education. Sometimes it tries, but it is very limited.
Funding schools enough to offer better teacher/pupil ratios is really important. However, the basic philosophy of child focused learning can still exist in groups.
I think that there is a degree of evidence that children work well with a mix of teaching styles (child focused/learning by rote/ exploration)hence the focus on education method rather than knowledge. You teach children how to learn rather than what to learn. That can be done quite well in a school environment.
Different people respond to flaws (or perceived flaws) in the education system in different ways. For you, it has been to opt out of formal schooling, for us, it was to involve ourselves in the school, including school policies and direction and we are involved politically as well. Having a good education system is more than just whats good for us, its what's good for us all as a country, society. That's important to us as a family.
If I was unhappy with my sons school, I would pay to send him to another type of school. Homeschooling is last on my list of options. We (as a family) all enjoy the 'community' that schools offer to iscolate ourselves like that.
but different strokes etc
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME