American kids get dumber every year, as class sizes get bigger. It's no wonder we have to import Physicists, engineers, and doctors from other countries.
There sure are a lot of people working on creating TV shows and new video games for our kids though.
2007-07-14
15:17:48
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
The U.S. uses over 80% of the nations Ritalin to create zombie kids because teachers don't have the recources for individual learning in the classroom.
2007-07-14
15:21:19 ·
update #1
I am not talking about improving the physical attractiveness of the schools you idiot.
2007-07-14
15:32:15 ·
update #2
Sorry I didn't read your whole answer, oops!
2007-07-14
15:33:19 ·
update #3
Barry B: Exactly, there should be federal funding for schools. I'm not paying taxes for other countries like Israel to buy weapons. We helped get them their country, now let's leave them to help themselves.
2007-07-14
15:35:31 ·
update #4
Jfra47229: You are a perfect example of how our schools are failing us.Thanks for the helping prove my point.
2007-07-14
15:37:53 ·
update #5
Everyone get off YA and write to your congressmen. Now before you forget.
2007-07-14
15:40:28 ·
update #6
chris: all the testing is the problem. kids can't be expected to learn if they are constantly being tested. NCLB has messing things up more. Teachers are not all to blame, they are frusterated at the lack of resources, and are under paid.
2007-07-14
15:59:21 ·
update #7
Jeeper Peeper: I guess you don't know that the number of students has increased, as the population increases. Also, inflation and gas prices have brought up the prices on essentials. You should allow email in your profile.
2007-07-15
06:55:16 ·
update #8
Regan started to dismantle public education and putting college out of reach for the middle class in the early 80s. The main reason was to avoid a shift in social class. After the 70s, they realized that as people became more educated, they demanded more rights, and they wanted their voices to be heard. The less educated a person is, the more likely they'll stay in the same class, and the more likely they won't question the administration. Dick Cheney travels to schools all over the states giving power-point presentations on how to turn out young republicans...and the No Child Left Behind act turned a $3 million a year testing copmany into a $4 billion a year...and the schools that don't perform as well get the least amount of money...
2007-07-14 20:58:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by jerseygyrrl 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
What is a school for ?
At first it was to bring book learning to a population that was more or less deprived of it - They knew how to farm they knew which plants they could and could not eat - They could skin an animal and butcher it safely - They could ride a horse and a lot of them could break one for themselves
In short they were self sufficient and if you threw them out into the wilderness they could survive
This was a mere 100 130 (1857 1907 and years ago roughly 4 or 5 generations ago -
Reading was not a common ability and the knowledge of books was a prized thing - The educated could read - they could read in English and or Latin they were taught about Athenian law makers they were taught about ancient gods and history - They were taught to read the bible - etc etc
Somewhere along the lines we moved into city's and populations became dense - We could all read but we as a group lost the natural knowledge slowly --
We are now to the point where fish comes in a can milk from a bag and no one has seen a crooked carrot in years - no one seems to remember a time when a chicken's skin was pink - not the white bleached skin we see today but pink - this goes for turkey as well as most if not all other poultry
As we lost those bit of knowledge school changed from providing somthing few had to providing somthing everyone expected And then it changed again
School today despite the public relations (propaganda) does not nor is it supposed to teach kids to think
School today teaches a kid to perform a task and how to relatate to a hierachal structure and how to line up and the disadvantages of questioning either the text book or the teacher (authority figure)
Kids are being trained - trained to perform - not to think -
They are not being taught to think because that would dispturb most of the illusions of our society -
Why is there no money for children's schools and yet there is all the money in the world for war ?
Because the school system serves it's basic ends
The kids don't ask questions - Just go to any grade 1 class - they are full and I mean FULL of questions Now go to the grade 8 and then the grade 12 class -
No one has any questions - The ones who recite the book don't ask and accept the authorities versions of history - get an "A" trained
Those who don't do those things - Not trained "D" or worse
10 years of school and you have a kid who won't ask or challenge and will repeat the "offical" version despite the fact we know that Chris Columbus did not discover America that what he was told thats what he put down on the test and thats what he believes
"Mission Acomplished"
Since it in priciple turns out kids who won't question can't think and would never be able to survive without being dependant on rampant consumerisim and thus end up performing a task in exchange for the things he/she wants and so on they have been made a know nothing willing slave
Works well Why change it - They don't need more money to do the job they are already doing with such skill
So we spent our money on killing the surplus population in order to keep the wealthy who own us happy
2007-07-14 23:24:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Good question. Hows about because the present admin thinks that the war is more important then our kids education. In fact, the budget submitted this last time was well below what educators wanted, along with VA Benefits, senior care, health care, child care Etc Etc. The war has taken all the money we need here at home and I hope that more repubs are getting the message. Oh, and the teachers union has not a damn thing to do with money for books, materials and the dilapidated condition that a lot of schools are in. Here at our schools, teachers have dug into their own pockets for needed supplies. Teachers are one of the most under paid professions in this day an time. They deserve every dime they get for putting up with rowdy brats and rowdy parents. Just a damn shame they took away the right for a teacher to smack the crap out of Johnny Be Bad. Of course, we all know that it starts at home with allowing Johnny to get by with all the Bull he can. Not all, but a lot of parents think that their little sweet kid can't do no wrong. Ha Ha. What a joke.
2007-07-14 22:35:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
The problem with the school system in this counrty has nothing to do with funding. It has to do with standards, the federal standards are not that great. Most school districts do the minimium just to get the funding, and never try to improve. Bad teachers are also to blame, they only keep thier job because we have a teacher shortage. If the teachers were held accountable for thier students test scores then maybe the system itself would get better.
2007-07-14 22:49:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Christof 1
·
1⤊
1⤋
improve our schools? do you know how much money has been invested into making schools look physically attractive? I think the money should be used instead on updating textbooks and start putting in REAL subjects in school.
what is the point of a beautiful looking school if the students still are not learning anything? and you are right. we need to have more competitive students than war. that is what is making them so easy to come over here and attack us, by all the doctors and like coming over here and filling jobs that our students should be filling.
2007-07-14 22:28:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Random Black Woman 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
As much as I agree with you, please know this:
1. The war in Iraq is paid for with federal funds (on the country-level).
2. Education is paid for with funds at the state and local levels.
The "No Child Left Behind" law is a federally mandated law that is not funded by the national (federal) government, but rather by the states, cities, and towns.
Money to improve schools must come from higher taxes, lotteries, and over-rides.
2007-07-14 22:29:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Barry B 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's called priorities!
They may be totally screwed up priorities but the dumbing down of our societies has been a process over at least the last 20 years & the blame can be sheeted home to Governments , their advisors & those who stand to gain by it !
I wouldn't presume to be critical of your country but over here the people responsible for curriculum in schools should hang their collective heads in shame for what they have done to at least one generation....their wilful neglect to equip these kids with the basics of an education ie a thorough understanding of our language , maths & history is scandalous!
Is it any wonder that we now have " graduates " from tertiary institutions without the fundamentals of the basics with which to fulfil their core functions ! We have people who are totally reliant on computers , calculators & spellcheck but without the knowledge of grammar to be able to formalise any meaningful documentation !
I hope my grammar & spelling are correct or I'm in big trouble !
2007-07-14 23:34:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Why? This is an easy one -
The rich don't get richer by giving money to improve schools. They get richer from wars - selling items, providing protection, etc. And they get rich off of the deaths of our soldiers and others.
It is sad. . . I don't think anyone realizes that with the money already spent on the war, the government could have built over 700 state-of-the-art schools, complete with all of the most current items for educating students, and hiring the teachers to staff them. But who is going to get rich off of spending like that?
2007-07-14 22:52:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well I guess you don't know, that Bush has increased Federal Education Funding more than any previous President has.
Or that only one nation spends more per student on education than America does.
Bush has increased federal education funding 60% since he has been President.
Thats twice the rate that Clinton increased federal education funding.
Bush increases Federal Education funding 60%
Clinton increases Federal Education funding 29%
Bush increases Pell Grant funding 56%
Clinton increases Pell Grant funding 35%
1993 federal education budget - 32.4 billion
2001 federal education budget - 42 billion
2007 federal education budget - 67.3 billion
1993 federal pell grant budget - 6.4 billion
2001 federal pell grant budget - 8.7 billion
2007 federal pell grant budget - 13.6 billion
2007-07-15 00:34:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by jeeper_peeper321 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well, we increase education spending every year, education gets worse. My local taxes keep going up to pay for it. So since we are not getting what we are paying for why should we reward them with more money. You cannot spend a problem right. When the teachers do a better job then they can ask for more money.
2007-07-14 22:33:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by JFra472449 6
·
1⤊
1⤋