User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: Indiana and Common Core

  1. #21
    BANNED FOREVER Forum Donor Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsYour first Group1 year registered
    Overall activity: 74.0%

    Max Rockatansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,984
    Thanks
    2,332
    Thanked: 3,150
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Perianne View Post
    Are you saying we should start with the Muslims?
    No. I believe in equal opportunity starvation, murder and mayhem although an argument could be made against those who are not productive such as the old, infirm and very young. Obviously those with a bad attitude would be thrown over the wall first.

  2. #22
    BANNED FOREVER Forum Donor Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsYour first Group1 year registered
    Overall activity: 74.0%

    Max Rockatansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,984
    Thanks
    2,332
    Thanked: 3,150
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Kuhlman View Post
    Max, I think the states should be fully responsible for education. If someone like New York thinks standardized tests are the answer, fine. If someone like Indiana decides guidelines and goals (i.e. we would like you to do A in order to achieve a literacy rate of 80% or graduation rate of 90%, etc.), fine. Let each state fund and develop on their own. Within a few very short years, the ones that are successful would become models for those that are dismal failures. And the Department of Education doesn't have to be shut down (as this is nearly impossible). Instead, they can do the same thing the state-level does in my Indiana example. Set some guidelines (not actual enforceable rules) directly attached to goals. They can also be nothing more than statistical analysis and tracking of progress within the states, thus creating a centralized location for every state and citizen to go and see who has what system set up, how well it is working, and an overall scheme to education. I believe home schoolers should be included in the tracking as well as the program they use and average number of students in the home school.
    I firmly believe state participation in Federal guidelines should be voluntary as well as in other programs. Conversely, the Feds have the right to deny funding support for those who choose not to comply. As to what that compliance should be should be up to Congress, not some political appointee in the DoEd.

    As a businessman, I'm sure you recognize the financial advantage of a co-op, mass production and volume buying. Schools recognize this too. Instead of spending money developing their own text books, standards, testing criteria and other tools/equipment necessary in education, many states combine forces to share costs. This too should be voluntary but with taxpayers screaming about lower taxes, it is almost inevitable states will do this. Textbooks are very expensive and even more costly to develop.

    States influence textbook developers and Texas is one of the more influential states due to size. This has caused controversy a few times. This is a case of a state, in effect, dictating what goes in textbooks used in other states, not the Feds.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...031700560.html
    Historians on Tuesday criticized proposed revisions to the Texas social studies curriculum, saying that many of the changes are historically inaccurate and that they would affect textbooks and classrooms far beyond the state's borders.

    The changes, which were preliminarily approved last week by the Texas board of education and are expected to be given final approval in May, will reach deeply into Texas history classrooms, defining what textbooks must include and what teachers must cover. The curriculum plays down the role of Thomas Jefferson among the founding fathers, questions the separation of church and state, and claims that the U.S. government was infiltrated by Communists during the Cold War.

    Because the Texas textbook market is so large, books assigned to the state's 4.7 million students often rocket to the top of the market, decreasing costs for other school districts and leading them to buy the same materials.

    "The books that are altered to fit the standards become the bestselling books, and therefore within the next two years they'll end up in other classrooms," said Fritz Fischer, chairman of the National Council for History Education, a group devoted to history teaching at the pre-college level. "It's not a partisan issue, it's a good history issue."
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/ed...exas.html?_r=0
    After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education on Friday approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economicstextbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.

    The vote was 10 to 5 along party lines, with all the Republicans on the board voting for it.

    The board, whose members are elected, has influence beyond Texas because the state is one of the largest buyers of textbooks. In the digital age, however, that influence has diminished as technological advances have made it possible for publishers to tailor books to individual states.

    In recent years, board members have been locked in an ideological battle between a bloc of conservatives who question Darwin’s theory of evolution and believe the Founding Fathers were guided by Christian principles, and a handful of Democrats and moderate Republicans who have fought to preserve the teaching of Darwinism and the separation of church and state.

    Since January, Republicans on the board have passed more than 100 amendments to the 120-page curriculum standards affecting history, sociology and economics courses from elementary to high school. The standards were proposed by a panel of teachers.

    “We are adding balance,” said Dr. Don McLeroy, the leader of the conservative faction on the board, after the vote. “History has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left.”

    Battles over what to put in science and history books have taken place for years in the 20 states where state boards must adopt textbooks, most notably in California and Texas. But rarely in recent history has a group of conservative board members left such a mark on a social studies curriculum.

    Efforts by Hispanic board members to include more Latino figures as role models for the state’s large Hispanic population were consistently defeated, prompting one member,Mary Helen Berlanga, to storm out of a meeting late Thursday night, saying, “They can just pretend this is a white America and Hispanics don’t exist.”

    “They are going overboard, they are not experts, they are not historians,” she said. “They are rewriting history, not only of Texas but of the United States and the world.”

    The curriculum standards will now be published in a state register, opening them up for 30 days of public comment. A final vote will be taken in May, but given the
    Republican dominance of the board, it is unlikely that many changes will be made.

  3. #23
    President Peanut Achievements:
    Your first GroupSocialCreated Album picturesTagger First Class50000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Overall activity: 0%

    President Peanut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,405
    Thanks
    428
    Thanked: 451
    Rep Power
    39244
    Quote Originally Posted by Max Rockatansky View Post
    I firmly believe state participation in Federal guidelines should be voluntary as well as in other programs. Conversely, the Feds have the right to deny funding support for those who choose not to comply. As to what that compliance should be should be up to Congress, not some political appointee in the DoEd.

    As a businessman, I'm sure you recognize the financial advantage of a co-op, mass production and volume buying. Schools recognize this too. Instead of spending money developing their own text books, standards, testing criteria and other tools/equipment necessary in education, many states combine forces to share costs. This too should be voluntary but with taxpayers screaming about lower taxes, it is almost inevitable states will do this. Textbooks are very expensive and even more costly to develop.

    States influence textbook developers and Texas is one of the more influential states due to size. This has caused controversy a few times. This is a case of a state, in effect, dictating what goes in textbooks used in other states, not the Feds.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...031700560.html


    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/ed...exas.html?_r=0
    I agree. What I meant was that the DoE only put out guidelines and tied directly to goals that are 110% voluntary. I also don't agree with federal tax dollars supporting ANY school. That is what local property taxes are for. In Indiana, we have to pay the taxes to the county auditor, who tallies and sends that to the state auditor, who tallies and then re-distributes (i.e. sends money from rural areas to city schools) back down. Personally, I say we take the state out of the equation and let the tax dollars stay at their local level. Reporting costs little; sending the money cost a great deal in terms of the personnel being paid to do all this tallying and distribution.

    There are some programs I think states would have some issues with. First, free and reduced lunches are federally backed as well as free and reduced text rentals. (I know some states, such as Kentucky, do not--again that is do NOT--pay for book rental because they have taken the funds from the lottery.) So, how the state(s) will pay for this is something to be addressed both short term (which is going to be the most painful) and long term. Frankly, I believe every state should do as Kentucky in terms of funding education with proceeds from the lottery, at the very least lunches and books. This greatly reduces costs to the individual parent and we might actually be able to afford new books.
    "The government can't give you anything that it hasn't stolen from someone else first."
    "Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid."
    "If you've got them by the balls, their heart and mind will follow."
    - John Wayne

  4. #24
    BANNED FOREVER Forum Donor Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsYour first Group1 year registered
    Overall activity: 74.0%

    Max Rockatansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,984
    Thanks
    2,332
    Thanked: 3,150
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Kuhlman View Post
    I agree. What I meant was that the DoE only put out guidelines and tied directly to goals that are 110% voluntary. I also don't agree with federal tax dollars supporting ANY school. That is what local property taxes are for.
    My thought in this is that, as a nation, we are better off with an educated, healthy and gainfully employed citizenry. Using Indiana microcosm, is it better for the State as a whole for each county and/or city to fund their own schools thereby creating a vast disparity between quality of instruction or is it better for Indiana to have a bottom standard but allow counties and/or cities who are able to do so exceed that standard? If the latter, doesn't this entail diverting some tax money away from the wealthier counties/cities to the less well off ones? I'm not talking handouts here, just trying to better the state of Indiana through a minimum level of education for all of its citizens.

    If this true for the State of Indiana, then why shouldn't the same logic apply to the nation of the United States of America?

  5. #25
    President Peanut Achievements:
    Your first GroupSocialCreated Album picturesTagger First Class50000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Overall activity: 0%

    President Peanut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,405
    Thanks
    428
    Thanked: 451
    Rep Power
    39244
    Quote Originally Posted by Max Rockatansky View Post
    My thought in this is that, as a nation, we are better off with an educated, healthy and gainfully employed citizenry. Using Indiana microcosm, is it better for the State as a whole for each county and/or city to fund their own schools thereby creating a vast disparity between quality of instruction or is it better for Indiana to have a bottom standard but allow counties and/or cities who are able to do so exceed that standard? If the latter, doesn't this entail diverting some tax money away from the wealthier counties/cities to the less well off ones? I'm not talking handouts here, just trying to better the state of Indiana through a minimum level of education for all of its citizens.

    If this true for the State of Indiana, then why shouldn't the same logic apply to the nation of the United States of America?
    I see your logic, however, Indianapolis is arguably far wealthier than all of Putnam county schools. However, we lose 25% of our taxes to Indianapolis Public Schools. Why? Why is it that a wealthier area needs more than just what they produce, to include the smaller rural schools? It is part of the reason why I am freaking sick of it. In addition, IPS has some of the worst grades (school and students) as well as the worst drop out rates in the state, yet they take more money from schools like mine and it is squandered.
    "The government can't give you anything that it hasn't stolen from someone else first."
    "Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid."
    "If you've got them by the balls, their heart and mind will follow."
    - John Wayne

  6. #26
    BANNED FOREVER Forum Donor Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsYour first Group1 year registered
    Overall activity: 74.0%

    Max Rockatansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,984
    Thanks
    2,332
    Thanked: 3,150
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Kuhlman View Post
    I see your logic, however, Indianapolis is arguably far wealthier than all of Putnam county schools. However, we lose 25% of our taxes to Indianapolis Public Schools. Why? Why is it that a wealthier area needs more than just what they produce, to include the smaller rural schools? It is part of the reason why I am freaking sick of it. In addition, IPS has some of the worst grades (school and students) as well as the worst drop out rates in the state, yet they take more money from schools like mine and it is squandered.
    So is the problem taking a bit of money from the wealthier counties and trying to bring the poorer ones up to speed or is the problem how the money is spent?

    If the latter, what are the specifics on how the money is "squandered"? If you are going to represent the state of Indiana, I expect most citizens will expect you to represent the entire state, not just Putnam county.

  7. #27
    President Peanut Achievements:
    Your first GroupSocialCreated Album picturesTagger First Class50000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Overall activity: 0%

    President Peanut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,405
    Thanks
    428
    Thanked: 451
    Rep Power
    39244
    Quote Originally Posted by Max Rockatansky View Post
    So is the problem taking a bit of money from the wealthier counties and trying to bring the poorer ones up to speed or is the problem how the money is spent?

    If the latter, what are the specifics on how the money is "squandered"? If you are going to represent the state of Indiana, I expect most citizens will expect you to represent the entire state, not just Putnam county.

    Good question. I believe it to be the latter. I cannot tell you what the whole problem is in IPS, but I do know a great deal of monies are going into union coffers (yes, I mean tax dollars). I believe that it is "squandered" in my district from the school board buying needless things. For instance, the football team received two buses just for them. No, not used for routes, only for the team. The football team hasn't won a freaking championship in years. Now the softball team? they have been champs for three years running. And how much tax dollars go to them you figure? Zero. The parents pay for uniforms, equipment, pay for the use of the bus and driver to events, etc. etc. I find this more than appalling, it is wrong. Frankly, sports are considered "extra-curricular" and as such, it should be on the team and parents to figure out how to pay for them. Education is just that--EDUCATING. Sure sports "teach" teamwork and leadership, as they board claims as justification for this, but the point of taxing citizens is to provide an education to the area's children. When not every child plays sports, or band, or anything else other than just attend school, using tax dollars for those programs, of which do not guarantee a scholarship or help with the SATS and ACT exams for college, is wrong.

    I have no problem representing Indiana. However, on the state level, I have a huge issue with watching rural counties be taxed and robbed to continue throwing money at failing inner-city schools. It is wrong and robs the rural schools from proper education. However, the position I am considering a run for is federal. As such, I have to consider my decisions and policies based on that level. Thanks for the reply Max!
    "The government can't give you anything that it hasn't stolen from someone else first."
    "Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid."
    "If you've got them by the balls, their heart and mind will follow."
    - John Wayne

  8. #28
    BANNED FOREVER Forum Donor Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsYour first Group1 year registered
    Overall activity: 74.0%

    Max Rockatansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,984
    Thanks
    2,332
    Thanked: 3,150
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Kuhlman View Post
    Good question. I believe it to be the latter. I cannot tell you what the whole problem is in IPS, but I do know a great deal of monies are going into union coffers (yes, I mean tax dollars). I believe that it is "squandered" in my district from the school board buying needless things. For instance, the football team received two buses just for them. No, not used for routes, only for the team. The football team hasn't won a freaking championship in years. Now the softball team? they have been champs for three years running. And how much tax dollars go to them you figure? Zero. The parents pay for uniforms, equipment, pay for the use of the bus and driver to events, etc. etc. I find this more than appalling, it is wrong. Frankly, sports are considered "extra-curricular" and as such, it should be on the team and parents to figure out how to pay for them. Education is just that--EDUCATING. Sure sports "teach" teamwork and leadership, as they board claims as justification for this, but the point of taxing citizens is to provide an education to the area's children. When not every child plays sports, or band, or anything else other than just attend school, using tax dollars for those programs, of which do not guarantee a scholarship or help with the SATS and ACT exams for college, is wrong.

    I have no problem representing Indiana. However, on the state level, I have a huge issue with watching rural counties be taxed and robbed to continue throwing money at failing inner-city schools. It is wrong and robs the rural schools from proper education. However, the position I am considering a run for is federal. As such, I have to consider my decisions and policies based on that level. Thanks for the reply Max!
    While I agree with you, telling that to football parents and fans might prove problematic. Football is very big in Texas. Like you, I consider it unfair to other sports, especially teams which are excelling in their sport.

  9. #29
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteran
    Overall activity: 86.0%

    RMNIXON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    37,185
    Thanks
    23,799
    Thanked: 46,857
    Rep Power
    21474879
    Quote Originally Posted by Max Rockatansky View Post

    I firmly believe state participation in Federal guidelines should be voluntary as well as in other programs. Conversely, the Feds have the right to deny funding support for those who choose not to comply. As to what that compliance should be should be up to Congress, not some political appointee in the DoEd.

    Why should the Feds be involved at all?

    Why not my local taxes and my school district where I can participate as a parent?

    By what standard do Federal Officials is an unconstitutional bureaucracy (far removed from any classroom) become so wise, and the local people involved in the school system so dense?

    You know damn well they are being held hostage by Federal funding taken by force from local citizens. That is not voluntary!

  10. #30
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteran
    Overall activity: 86.0%

    RMNIXON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    37,185
    Thanks
    23,799
    Thanked: 46,857
    Rep Power
    21474879

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •