Do Public Schools Turn Out Stupid Students?

[tomspug]

For some of us, yes.
Kids learning abstinance-only sex-ed and that gay people are unnatural...

Teaching abstinence used to be mandatory in school because abstinence is the best way to protect yourself against STDs. Apparently this offends people, so schools need to be more "open-minded".

 

[Reverend Rick]

For some of us, yes.

So people cannot raise their children as they see fit, the government has another agenda for them? Nanda, you don't have to go to religious school if you don't want to.

Kids learning abstinance-only sex-ed and that gay people are unnatural...

People have a right to raise their children the way they like. By the way, it's spelled "abstinence". Were you raised in government run schools?

 

[Magic Man]

The poll is a little bit loaded. I voted the second one before I realized that you say in the others "can produce". Also, it's not up to the school to produce intelligent students; it's up to them to produce educated students. Teaching someone math, reading and history isn't going to increase their intelligence, only their amount of knowledge.

Of course any school can produce smart students. I don't know the numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that a larger percentage of private-school students come out with more knowledge than public-school students. On average, public school students aren't any dumber than private school students. The difference is the environment. Private schools can have bad environments just like public schools, but I'm pretty sure a higher percentage of private schools have an environment conducive to learning.

If the question is "Are all public-school kids stupid?" , then the answer is, of course, no. If the question is simply "Can public schools produce intelligent, informed kids?", then the answer is yes. If the question is "Do public schools do a worse job of educating our kids?", then the answer, I believe, is yes.

 

[Izdaari]

I cannot vote because some people who go to public schools get a good education in spite of the system. If you want to speak in terms of the majority, public schools are deficiant in science and math which is what students need to be proficient in to be competitive scholastically.

I'm sure this thread will not address the majority of students and will be a parade of exceptions.

While you tell me about how wonderful your local public government run school is, just remember the disadvantaged inner city youth that is being robbed of an education because the voucher system does not exist.

Turning your head away from the reality of so many wasted minds and unsuccessful lives really gives you something in common with the "other party" you rail against.

Ignoring the most needy among us while bragging about "your school" is unethical. The price we all pay is more people on welfare and in prison.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste and vouchers would give EVERY CHILD a fighting chance at receiving a good education.

In principle I agree. But I'm afraid of the corrupting influence on private schools of having to comply with federal standards in order to receive the vouchers. Something where that influence was removed, but still accomplished the same purpose would be far preferable. Tuition tax credits perhaps?

So just to clarify, any person who is a product of public schools is stupid?

Not even. But public schools place third in achievement, behind both home schooling and private schools.

All the more reason to put more tax money into public education.

There is no correlation between funding and results. It would be so much simpler if there were. All too often extra funding goes to fancier buildings or more layers of unnecessary and even counterproductive administration, instead of to things that actually could make a difference.

You sound like President Bush, Dopp. Just change education for the war in Iraq.

Vouchers would give disadvantaged kids hope. They need structure, special help and personalised attention, not more good money throw out to failed systems.

And it would give them that possibility. I think I'd means test vouchers, reserve them for families who wouldn't be able to take advantage of tuition tax credits as an alternative. That would still accomplish the purpose, but using tuition tax credits instead would keep Uncle Sugar from having so much potential control over private schools.

 

[Nanda]

Teaching abstinence used to be mandatory in school because abstinence is the best way to protect yourself against STDs. Apparently this offends people, so schools need to be more "open-minded".

No, just more realistic. Statistics show that it doesn't work.

 

[tomspug]

I think we could use a little less emotion in this thread. Let's not make personal attacks at each other, OK?

 

[Reverend Rick]

I would even be for the private schools to not be religious to receive the vouchers. I would like to see us break the cycle of third and fourth generation welfare recipients.

 

[Nanda]

So people cannot raise their children as they see fit, the government has another agenda for them? Nanda, you don't have to go to religious school if you don't want to.

You were asking what is wrong with religious schools. I was stating two things that I find to be wrong with them. I'm not against religious schools, I'm just pointing out that they're not right for everybody.

People have a right to raise their children the way they like. By the way, it's spelled "abstinence". Were you raised in government run schools?

Need I remind you that up until very recently, you were incapable of spelling my name correctly, even after it was pointed out to you repeatedly? You can throw stones from your glass house and call my intelligence into question over a typo, but if you're going to act like a child the fragile truce we've managed to establish is going right out the window.

 

[Izdaari]

The poll is a little bit loaded. I voted the second one before I realized that you say in the others "can produce". Also, it's not up to the school to produce intelligent students; it's up to them to produce educated students. Teaching someone math, reading and history isn't going to increase their intelligence, only their amount of knowledge.

Of course any school can produce smart students. I don't know the numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that a larger percentage of private-school students come out with more knowledge than public-school students. On average, public school students aren't any dumber than private school students. The difference is the environment. Private schools can have bad environments just like public schools, but I'm pretty sure a higher percentage of private schools have an environment conducive to learning.

If the question is "Are all public-school kids stupid?" , then the answer is, of course, no. If the question is simply "Can public schools produce intelligent, informed kids?", then the answer is yes. If the question is "Do public schools do a worse job of educating our kids?", then the answer, I believe, is yes.

Very well put! :yes:

:clap

 

[Reverend Rick]

No, just more realistic. Statistics show that it doesn't work.

Your child should not have the opportunity to have sex at school if they were watched correctly. Teen pregnancy is more of a parenting problem than a birth control problem.

When Children start driving cars and working part time jobs, I agree with you about birth control. Kids in Junior high school should not have the opportunity to have sex, that means to me they are left unsupervised and that is child abuse.

 

[Nanda]

Your child should not have the opportunity to have sex at school if they were watched correctly. Teen pregnancy is more of a parenting problem than a birth control problem.

When Children start driving cars and working part time jobs, I agree with you about birth control. Kids in Junior high school should not have the opportunity to have sex, that means to me they are left unsupervised and that is child abuse.

I agree with you - they should not be left alone. But I also think that teaching a foundation of birth control practices early is a good idea. This is another discussion entirely, however.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

i think the American and british education systems are very different. Yours is bad and ours is disgusting.

 

[Smoke]

Yours is bad and ours is disgusting.

I thought it was just your fellow students who were disgusting.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

You really have no clue. We come in idiots and leave as idiots.

 

[Draka]

When Children start driving cars and working part time jobs, I agree with you about birth control. Kids in Junior high school should not have the opportunity to have sex, that means to me they are left unsupervised and that is child abuse.

Some kids can't be entirely supervised at all times. Especially up through the age where they are driving and working. At certain ages kids are quite capable of taking care of themselves at home for a couple hours until mom or dad come home from work. Just because kids are alone at home doesn't mean that is child abuse.

At some point you should have enough faith in yourself in what you have taught your children, and how you have raised them, to be able to trust them to not only be unsupervised, but to make the right decisions while they are. If you feel that you must hover over your children and know every little move they are making then I submit: you are not doing something right.

 

[ChristineES]

Children do need some freedom. I would have resented it if my parents didn't trust me, since I never did anything to betray their trust. Little kids can't be left alone.

 

[blackout]

School systems in general produce students.
Often they produce very good students.

However they rarely produce thinkers and individuals.
People become thinkers and individuals IN SPITE OF their "schooling".

(there was no option for "school sucks", so I did not vote.)
(Intelligence has little to do with schooling.
Stupidity just a bit more.)

 

[Reverend Rick]

Some kids can't be entirely supervised at all times. Especially up through the age where they are driving and working. At certain ages kids are quite capable of taking care of themselves at home for a couple hours until mom or dad come home from work. Just because kids are alone at home doesn't mean that is child abuse.

OK, we are on the same page so far.

At some point you should have enough faith in yourself in what you have taught your children, and how you have raised them, to be able to trust them to not only be unsupervised, but to make the right decisions while they are. If you feel that you must hover over your children and know every little move they are making then I submit: you are not doing something right.

So where does the need for birth control for junior high students come in here? If you trust them and have faith in yourself in what you have taught your children, would not abstinence work here in this situation?

 

[Draka]

Children do need some freedom. I would have resented it if my parents didn't trust me, since I never did anything to betray their trust. Little kids can't be left alone.

Granted you don't leave the little ones alone at home, but Rev was talking as if they shouldn't be alone until they have cars and jobs. I was a latch-key-kid when I was around 10-12 or so up until I was about 15. Both my parents had to work to make ends meet and they couldn't exactly afford daycare of any kind. So coming straight home from school and taking care of my younger brother became part of my responsibility. I was trusted with him and the home. I don't believe there was ever any worry about my having sex either.

 

[Draka]

So where does the need for birth control for junior high students come in here? If you trust them and have faith in yourself in what you have taught your children, would not abstinence work here in this situation?

You can have all the faith in the world in your child, but that doesn't mean that you have faith in everyone else's children. Also, they should always be educated for the "just in cases". Just because you teach them precautions doesn't mean that you are condoning anything. You are just equipping them with knowledge should they ever find themselves in a situation that neither of you planned for.