Dismantle Public Education

Hey Bardan...Bummer that flatty left here...I liked her way of thinking...

She's still reading over my shoulder though.

That school sounds really amazing and I think my young cousin just started going there. Shame it has taken them so many years to be allowed to do what they're doing but that ties back to our subject at hand which is that the State jellously guards its own monopoly on primary teaching.

Last night I called up some of my buddies in ACT to see if anybody knew what schools were like in NZ before the state took over. After all, both of our local schools predate the 1876 school seizure act. I've yet to find out, but it turns out the guru of NZ home schooling lives around the block from me! In other news, the Associate Minister of Education will be in Christchurch this Sunday to discuss these very ideas. Maybe I'll see you there?

Bardan wrote:Flat Tack has left the forum over this.

I'm sad to hear that.

Bardan wrote:Hey Bardan...Bummer that flatty left here...I liked her way of thinking...

She's still reading over my shoulder though.

That school sounds really amazing and I think my young cousin just started going there. Shame it has taken them so many years to be allowed to do what they're doing but that ties back to our subject at hand which is that the State jellously guards its own monopoly on primary teaching.

Last night I called up some of my buddies in ACT to see if anybody knew what schools were like in NZ before the state took over. After all, both of our local schools predate the 1876 school seizure act. I've yet to find out, but it turns out the guru of NZ home schooling lives around the block from me! In other news, the Associate Minister of Education will be in Christchurch this Sunday to discuss these very ideas. Maybe I'll see you there?

I live in Whakatane, so you won't see me in Christchurch on Sunday..

I'm sad to hear that.

Like I said the other day, if you're in an abusive marriage the sad part is not the divorce. Anological, I say.

I live in Whakatane, so you won't see me in Christchurch on Sunday..

Wups.

Anyway Bardan, thanks for making this place interesting for a change..

Bardan wrote:I'm sad to hear that.

Like I said the other day, if you're in an abusive marriage the sad part is not the divorce. Anological, I say.

I'm sad to hear that she will no longer grace us with her presence.

I've never abused her, so your response is irrelevant to mine.

Like I said the other day, if you're in an abusive marriage the sad part is not the divorce. Anological, I say.

I'm sad to hear that she will no longer grace us with her presence.

Whereas, I'm glad she got out and sad for the failed relationship.

I've never abused her, so your response is irrelevant to mine.

I didn't mean to imply you encouraged her into an abusive relationship nor that you wished her to remain in one. That would be just aweful, of course.

Bardan wrote:Like I said the other day, if you're in an abusive marriage the sad part is not the divorce. Anological, I say.

I'm sad to hear that she will no longer grace us with her presence.

Whereas, I'm glad she got out and sad for the failed relationship.

I've never abused her, so your response is irrelevant to mine.

I didn't mean to imply you encouraged her into an abusive relationship nor that you wished her to remain in one. That would be just aweful, of course.

Aweful... Julie (sorry Bardan, SC reference)

My son is at discovery one in CH CH great school....Introduction of a new curriculm for teachers in mainstream schools has similarities to the discovery principals of self directed learning....there is concern now that the National Standards have been introduced that they will negate the new curriculum as teachers will teach to the standrds as opposed to the children enjoying the journey along the way.

Knew there had to be a Cantabrian about!

there is concern now that the National Standards have been introduced that they will negate the new curriculum as teachers will teach to the standrds as opposed to the children enjoying the journey along the way

That would fit the pattern identified by the youtube clip I used to generate this thread.

This school reminds me a bit of a clip of an old TV show called "Yes Prime Minister." So Flat Tack and I watched the episode 'The National Education Service' on youtube. Here is the second best scene from that episode...


I encourage you to buy the DVD if you like that episode.

I'm sorry, I'm still not clear. Aren't I supposed to be finding a societal shift that's as big as the IR? The bigger the better the example, because you wont be satisfied with the (many) examples of individual people who are counter-factual to your beliefs.

You want to see social reproduction overturned but wont let my examples be too big or too small, but somewhere inbetween? But if we agree to do that are we not already admitting that social reproduction has been historically assulted in large ways and small ways already?

You are meant to be finding a situation where everything is equal (or roughly equal) to society as it is now, sans public education. Social revolutions like mass-migration, the industrial revolution, the french revolution, the Russian revolution etc. cannot count because the class mobility is not sustained, it is a one-off shift.

Well then surely you are following double standards. If I'm doing something to offend you let's talk about that.

No, these are not double standards... school is school... y'know, with students and all. An online forum is an online forum (go figure) and we are two adults (I assume) discussing (barely) an adult issue. If you do not see the difference, then there is a serious problem there.

Doing something to offend me? You offend me with your selective debating method, your inability (unwillingness?) to grasp the topic that you started, and your patronising.

So, because you fail to grasp the topic, lets break it down for you.

Schools are at the agents of social change (Carpenter, 2008), education is a tool of empowerment capable of promoting wealth and prestige mobility (Lee and Lee, 1999). In order that society does not fall into social class entrenchment, education availability should be as close to equal as possible as education is not equally valued by all sections of society (Thrup, 2007).

Seeing as you don't wish to read the few articles and authors I have provided for you, there is the general message paraphrased and condensed.

Now, your education experts please?

Bardan wrote:Knew there had to be a Cantabrian about!

That would fit the pattern identified by the youtube clip I used to generate this thread.

This school reminds me a bit of a clip of an old TV show called "Yes Prime Minister." So Flat Tack and I watched the episode 'The National Education Service' on youtube. Here is the second best scene from that episode...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e9gq9sYIuA

I encourage you to buy the DVD if you like that episode.

So you started this whole discussion initially based on a UK comedy TV episode?

facepalm.jpg

So you started this whole discussion initially based on a UK comedy TV episode?

facepalm.jpg

You read his post wrong M5o1... facepalm.jpg

I don't know that you can call it a discussion when one party refuses steadfastly to read or listen to the other.

____ wrote:I don't know that you can call it a discussion when one party refuses steadfastly to read or listen to the other.

I was being optimistic.

You are meant to be finding a situation where everything is equal (or roughly equal) to society as it is now, sans public education. Social revolutions like mass-migration, the industrial revolution, the french revolution, the Russian revolution etc. cannot count because the class mobility is not sustained, it is a one-off shift.

I'm not going to shirk your challange.

But the way you talk it sounds like there were quite a few good examples we cannot use. It sounds like there wasn't much 'social reproduction' going on back then before the nationalisations and yet you're putting up public education as if it were the last defender of man against a new dark ages?

The more you restrict my answers, the more social mobility you admit to.

No, these are not double standards... school is school... y'know

Do you treat your students with respect because that's what is effective? Why not here? Do you treat me with disrespect because that's how you view humanity? Why not do that on school grounds? I don't appreciate the difference.

Doing something to offend me? You offend me with your selective debating method, your inability

Let's bring that out in the open. Flesh that out into a discussion. Maybe one of us needs to change. Don't signal these complex difficulties to me through insults, please.

Schools are at the agents of social change (Carpenter, 2008),

Agree.

education is a tool of empowerment capable of promoting wealth and prestige mobility (Lee and Lee, 1999)

Agree.

In order that society does not fall into social class entrenchment, education availability should be as close to equal as possible as education is not equally valued by all sections of society (Thrup, 2007).

What's the argument? Even if Thrup were the Queen of England it wouldn't carry weight with me. Do you mean it to, or are there some facts?

Now, your education experts please?

It's not that I don't have experts to spare, it's that I don't argue that way. If you want literature that's different. Name-droppings are wise men's counters, but they are the money of fools.

What of my tutors examples? If there was something unsatisfactory about it please tell me. Do I assume too much to say that they are of more benefit to society and that you would tell me so if you didn't already agree?

Bardan wrote:

What's the argument? Even if Thrup were the Queen of England it wouldn't carry weight with me. Do you mean it to, or are there some facts?

The argument is that public school provides a minimum standard of education available to everybody. The argument is that making education a commodity rather than a right means those unable to afford a good education become worse off than those who are able. The argument is that this leads to class entrenchment, a widening of the rich/poor divide. The argument is that this purely market driven education system is discriminatory.


Can't you infer anything? Do you need every single detail spelled out for you?

All this edicational "debate" aside .....now that I know flat tack and barden are partners .........flat tacks "Definition of stupid" seems ................well WTF? to me now.

I know! What's that crap about me hitting the keyboard hard? It's slander.

How surprising.

I only just got here but I think anybody "sensitive" either never came here to start with or has long since moved on.

I'm still here, and I'm sure everyone here would agree that I am 'sensitive'. I still come here because I am open to learning and new ideas.

Other than that, after reading through the whole thread.............anyone got any Panadol handy???