Public Funding of Private Religious Schools, redux

[SmoothedShredder]

Scholarships help people in the public education system all the time. They go to public school, get a scholarship, and go to University with it, and don't pay all or part of your tuition.

[SmoothedShredder]

businesses wouldn't be setting up endowments for free...

AD

Individuals who work for successful buisness and have money can donate their endowments, that where most of the endowments come from now n'est pas? You can't give what you don't have... or you can buy 12 BMW's, seems to me there's the BMW thing going on cause of all the resentment of public schools.

[SmoothedShredder]

It's obvious a new and fresh and out of the box alternative needs to be sought after.

A LIBERTARIAN alternative! How's that for fresh!?

It certainly is fresh and out of the box. ARMED REVOLUTION is so last week.

[AD]

Scholarships help people in the public education system all the time. They go to public school, get a scholarship, and go to University with it, and don't pay all or part of your tuition.

yeah, scholarships help those who want to go beyond public education... they do nothing for the other what 60% that don't. that's the problem. if there's gonna be more incentives to help people in public schools, it should be in the present tense, not for 'what's next.'

(post-secondary scholarships are great, i'm just saying if you want to add to the incentive system you've gotta cater to everyone)

ad

[SmoothedShredder]

(post-secondary scholarships are great, i'm just saying if you want to add to the incentive system you've gotta cater to everyone)

ad

Fine. Individuals who work for successful buisnesses pay more tax, public schools lone source of revenue outside of bake sales.

[AD]

Fine. Individuals who work for successful buisnesses pay more tax, public schools lone source of revenue outside of bake sales.

right, but what i'm saying is that's irrelevant to a 4th-grader, or a 12th-grader.

i benefitted from a scholarship, it was great. but only because i chose to go on to university. there needs to be a way to keep the kids who don't make the same choice interested. i don't think it's money, but lots of others do.

i don't think the goal of the public education system is to groom kids to work for successful businesses.

complete curriculum overhaul and new funding formula with TONS of money is needed. although the curriculum we have now isn't bad, it's just the grading systems etc that dr evil mouse talked about earlier.

ad

[Birdy]

how can you not think it's money AD? especially considering every few years teachers across the board come to strike over the bloody stuff (amongst other things). they're overworked- we need more teachers, and MONEY to pay them.

if we had a system that was able to afford to hire the amount of teachers that are needed to keep one particular teacher sane in their job that would be one thing, but we don't.

it boils down to money, it really does. money would make a happier teacher which in turn would make a happier student- and that there is the incentive.

in all of my education i can count on one hand the number of teachers who i truly believe were passionate about their subject and about teaching in general. f'ing sad that is.

[SmoothedShredder]

Fine. Individuals who work for successful buisnesses pay more tax' date=' public schools lone source of revenue outside of bake sales.[/quote']

right, but what i'm saying is that's irrelevant to a 4th-grader, or a 12th-grader.

i benefitted from a scholarship, it was great. but only because i chose to go on to university. there needs to be a way to keep the kids who don't make the same choice interested. i don't think it's money, but lots of others do.

i don't think the goal of the public education system is to groom kids to work for successful businesses.

complete curriculum overhaul and new funding formula with TONS of money is needed. although the curriculum we have now isn't bad, it's just the grading systems etc that dr evil mouse talked about earlier.

ad

what did you think of my proposed revolution posted above?... I wouldn't of suggested we have a problem without having a solution ready to go. I believe what I proposed would allow kids to get interested in school. In the present tense... and I don't know/think i ought to cost a premium on our current system... we already have the buildings and walls... seems to me the problem is the attitude, and shrinking the 60% or so that don't want to go to a higher/costlier form of education. I think the only way to fairly do that is to increase an individuals thirst for learning, and specificily a thirst for learning through schools as opposed to TV, the streets, whatever you wanna call it that's leading us down our 'current' path.

[AD]

it boils down to money, it really does. money would make a happier teacher which in turn would make a happier student- and that there is the incentive.

in all of my education i can count on one hand the number of teachers who i truly believe were passionate about their subject and about teaching in general. f'ing sad that is.

i agree with your first paragraph, but what i quoted above is bullshit / irrelevant to my point. of course it's money, but i was talking about direct incentives to students in the forms of scholarships, bonuses, etc.. as smoothedshredder was talking about. of course we need more money for teachers, OF COURSE. i was discussing giving money directly to students.

as for the second point you made about teachers being passionate etc.... without the teachers you wouldn't even know how to count on your fingers. i had plenty of awesome teachers, maybe you weren't paying attention or maybe it was a tough school board for the teachers with administration or whatever. but i don't think you can cast all teachers with the same brush like that.

ad

[SmoothedShredder]

how can you not think it's money AD? especially considering every few years teachers across the board come to strike over the bloody stuff (amongst other things). they're overworked- we need more teachers, and MONEY to pay them.

if we had a system that was able to afford to hire the amount of teachers that are needed to keep one particular teacher sane in their job that would be one thing, but we don't.

it boils down to money, it really does. money would make a happier teacher which in turn would make a happier student- and that there is the incentive.

in all of my education i can count on one hand the number of teachers who i truly believe were passionate about their subject and about teaching in general. f'ing sad that is.

I don't think it's inherantly about money, money's like an oil to a machine, but the oil doesn't tell the machine what to do (well atleast it shouldn't number one traded commodity in the world>). Teachers are incredibly idealistic, but in a social system when it's them against the class for however long, and you have so many kids who may not nescecarily mesh, to me it's just not a healthy environment. It's amazing it's not worse than it is, but over-time, our teachers who are on the front lines in dealing with kids, are worn down. Perhaps more salary would make the situation better? Perhaps less time worked? All of these solutions are the 'throw more money at it'... what I suggested above, will hopefully put kids in situations where the subject will help lead kids in to situation where they would be more likely to work as a team, and all the good things that come along from working as a team...

As it stands now we have semi-random groupings of 30 kids, for any random subject matter you're bound to have possibly 1 or 2 'sabatours', 20 people who don't have enough knowledge or desire to want to stand out and compete against the 10 or so people who may actually grasp the subject at hand and play out their competition, content they got an edge on the other 2/3rds.

In a specialized/comprehensive program ideally you'd have closer to all 30 people willing to engage in the classroom debate, and the flavour and scope of the debate will be much better/enriched IMO.

[SmoothedShredder]

For what its worth, I believe the teachers really do care about their jobs, and are passionate about their subjects. Kids (in lots of 30) wear them down. If we can get them to not wear down the teachers then that's the solution.

[Alexis]

wow, so much to say.

i'm really REALLY surprised that no one here has yet mentioned the parents. you all talk about teachers and boards and everyone else passing the buck. how about parents? if parents don't take an active role in their childrens education, make sure they can read, read their papers and homework, how can they then fault the teachers? yeah it's the teachers job to teach your children, but at the end of the day, all responsibility for the child falls on it's parents. if you're kid is 17 and can't read past a grade 8 or 9 level, that's your fault, not the teachers, or the systems or whatever.

as for the grading practices that DEM spoke of earlier....i can kinda see the point in them. if you can produce a 70% or a 95% on a paper, it is expected that you are capable of doing that on all of your work. a lot of kids are bored, and find better things to do than school work. that doesn't mean the work shouldn't be done. you could take advantage of that grading practice...don't understand a section of work? don't hand in the paper, get the same mark as always. i think if a marking policy like that MUST be instituted it should be with advanced/enriched programs, where kids aren't going to take advantage as much. i can see that policy being taken advantage by anyone with enough brains to understand it in a regular streaming program.

I can think of a good example of this. in my OAC economics class, the first day, the teacher said "if you miss more than 10 classes for the entire course, and get over 80% i'll give you $100, this is a class you need to attend to understand" that wasn't true. 26 missed classes and a 98% final mark later...i had my $100. not everyone learns the same way, and the problem public schools have now is that they don't cater enough to individuals educational needs. some kids should be held back, some should be out sooner. some need real life experience to learn, some might not need to be held back if they had more perspective style learning, something like what shredder said above. but at the same time, when you're a kid, you don't know the employment possibilities that are out there. if you take a poll of 1st grade males, you'd probably get fireman, doctor, lawyer, astronaut, sports hero and a few others. i don't think streaming kids and not allowing them a full scope education is neccessarily the right thing, but i think it's a better method than what we have right now.

As for funding, i'm not really sure how it goes, cause i don't have kids, and haven't really paid THAT much attention to it. as far as i understand, the private tax refund means that if your kid goes to private school (whether religious or not) you get a tax break because some of your taxes goes towards public education. If that's what's going on....damn straight, that's the way it should be. why the hell should i pay for my kids education, and make a contribution to public schools? would any of you like to pay for something twice? how about making all of our roads toll roads, and still have a portion of our taxes going to road creation and maintenance? sound fair?

if public schools offered what parents saught out in private schools, then there wouldn't be a need for them, but they don't. they offer sub par education for the most part, and don't offer diverse religious content. i didn't learn one thing about any religion at my public school. and there wasn't a religion class offered either.

and if you don't like or agree with all of the "seperatist/segregational" private schools based on religious content....make a change in canada. we let people come here and keep their culture, and language. immigrants can move into a localized mini version of where they came from and not really have to learn english and choose not to participate in normalized north american culture. if we allow that, why shouldn't we allow people born here or not to raise their children, and educate their children in the same manner? Acoording to their own personal values. i'm not saying this works, or that i agree or disagree with it, but you can't have one without the other.

if you want to take away the private school tax break, than you've got to stop funding the RC BofE. As the country becomes more culturally and religiously diverse, i see that stopping anyways. We've got to be fair, and equal to all.

And parents who home school SHOULD get a tax break too. not only are they not using the space in the public system they pay for with taxes, i would imagine that they are paying for all teaching supplies and associated costs out of pocket.

education shouldn't be determined with a budget, but in the capitalist world we live in, everything comes down to dollars and cents. i'm sure a lot of people are unhappy with the education their children receive wherever that is, and would like to change, but simply can't afford it.

i watched this "education in america" special with 20/20's john stossel...and i'll take it with a grain of salt, but one thing he talked about was how some schools are privatized in the US. And how that's working out really really well. if a school doesn't have a certain average GPA, they're shut down and another one is opened. I think that privatizing schools with government regulated requirements might be a good idea. but that would be very very very hard, because privtiation lives under the "evil" blanket, and we have unions and lobbyists that decide what we get to do, not us, the individuals affected.

edit to add: so much more to say, but thought i'd stop there

Edited February 22, 2006 by Guest

[Birdy]

i agree with your first paragraph, but what i quoted above is bullshit / irrelevant to my point. of course it's money, but i was talking about direct incentives to students in the forms of scholarships, bonuses, etc.. as smoothedshredder was talking about. of course we need more money for teachers, OF COURSE. i was discussing giving money directly to students.

thanks for the bullshit remark.

i didn't know incentive had to strictly come in the form of a cheque.

as for the second point you made about teachers being passionate etc.... without the teachers you wouldn't even know how to count on your fingers. i had plenty of awesome teachers, maybe you weren't paying attention or maybe it was a tough school board for the teachers with administration or whatever. but i don't think you can cast all teachers with the same brush like that.

i'd say without my parents i wouldn't know how to count on my fingers. i've had plenty of good teachers, i didn't say that i hadn't. i said i can count on my one hand how many teachers were PASSIONATE about teaching their subjects and about the concept of learning. the system deflates passion, and that is what i referred to as sad.

SS - the money i referred to doesn't necessarily have to come in the form of salary. hiring additional teachers to lessen work loads would make the world a rosier place.

but then we're trapped in this perpetual circle that puts us closer to where we started from with every step we take.

Edited February 22, 2006 by Guest

[guigsy]

SS - the money i referred to doesn't necessarily have to come in the form of salary.

see, and i get so confused when you say something like this:

it boils down to money, it really does. money would make a happier teacher

which insinuates money directly for the teacher, ie: salary.

and i dont agree that more money (in any profession, really) is the only thing that makes people happy. call me naive, but i dont believe it.

[Birdy]

i didn't say:

"it boiils down to money, it really does. higher salary would make a happier teacher".

i think all of us can agree that teachers are the hardest worked and most underappreciated public service employees out there, or at least are right up there.

money cushions and i think teachers could use a little cushioning.

[Birdy]

haha i need to make solid attempt to disclaimer and clarify my posts.. sometimes maybe i'm toooo ambiguous. gets me into trouble.

[guigsy]

honestly, sometimes you're too ambiguous for me to get what you're sayin'.

just say what you mean.

[Birdy]

it's not like i don't try guigsy.

i guess it's kinda hard over the internet, when you don't have a person in front of you to see if they're smiling or if they're pissed off or to read their body language. that and if you don't know a person, makes it harder too.

not used to having to be so specific about everything i say. but i'll work on it. might end up with some thread killers from time to time, but at least i won't be saying "that's NOT what i'm saying!!".

but in my defense, i think that's really the essence of the human relationship.. floating around trying to understand each other.

[Birdy]

A system with money and what it might look like:

- small classes – one on one time between teacher and students; teachers will actually have the time to ‘teach’ and not simply pass the time babysitting with their hands tied until the bell rings; students will have a greater chance to gain a lasting impression from their teachers; students might enjoy learning because the person teaching them isn’t stressed out, overworked and underpaid; maybe, even maybe a greater number of students will go onto post secondary education; troubled students will have a greater chance at succeeding as teachers can actually pay attention to them; the current phenomenon of high school graduates not being able to differentiate between a noun and a verb will *hopefully* cease.

- higher paid salaries to those who actually deserve to earn more – maybe incentive can be given to teachers who engage in extra-curricular activities with their students. ie, coaching teams, forming clubs, becoming involved in community orientated activities, which in turn gives kids a chance not to sit at home and play xbox and rot into their couches and actually gain some positive social skills. those teachers who do float by and use the union as their sword (and they do exist) will be inspired to do more for their buck and take an active role as a teacher.

- this one’s for you AD – incentive given to students who don’t go on to post-secondary education by the form of co-op opportunities within the community. more emphasis given to trade opportunities and making students employable upon graduation. workshops with skilled tradesmen – how to apprentice, etc. co-ops that actually pay a student to attend school.

- greater access to books & computers – the two greatest learning instruments of all time. more dynamic reading lists (even though i’m a shakespeare fan, we could mix it up) and computer classes that specialize in ‘cool’ stuff-- spurring kids to do more with technology. music classes that have a multitude of instruments and encourage improvisation and not just simply play the funeral march or the michigan fight song over and over again.

- brighter, sunnier classrooms with decorations on the wall and maps of the world and class accomplishments and pictures, artwork, photos – not your standard institutional green that seems to numb the mind more than anything else. a classroom that is inviting.

- a board that has money to spend and isn’t continuously looking at ways to cut costs.

- a province that has money to spend and isn’t continuously looking at ways to cut costs.

- communities who take an active involvement in their local schools – “hometown†pride that kind of thing.

- a student who enjoys going to school in the morning, who is active in his community, who is a social and independent being, who enjoys learning in order to become a productive member of society.

- parents who instead of watching their kid float by in apparently non-caring system, start to care about their kid.

We’re obviously a long way off from these kind of things, but they’re possible. We need to stop relying on taxation and school boards to fix the system as it is beyond repair. At this point, instead of a re-work, I would suggest starting over. It would probably be easier.

[d_rawk]

not used to having to be so specific about everything i say. but i'll work on it. might end up with some thread killers from time to time, but at least i won't be saying "that's NOT what i'm saying!!".

Yeah, that part of it can be difficult. I've found that I tend to overcompensate with hyperbole and over-emphasis of a point, but that really isn't desirable either. Either way, you misrepresent yourself.

i think that's really the essence of the human relationship.. floating around trying to understand each other.

"In a frictionless universe, where're all just floating here without any contact at all"

Or as Burroughs put it:

Consider the impasse of a one God universe: he is all-knowing and all-powerful. He can't go anywhere because he is already everywhere. He can't do anything since the act of doing presupposes opposition. His universe is irrevocably thermodynamic having no friction by definition. So he has to create friction: war, fear, sickness, death to keep this dying show on the road. Sooner or later: "look boss, we don't have enough energy left to fry an elderly woman in a fleabag hotel fire".

"Well, we'll have to start faking it."

Joe looks after him sourly and mixes a bicarbonated soda. "Sure, start faking it - and leave the details to Joe."

Haven't been following the thread. Just passing through

[Birdy]

d_rawk, thank you.

for a split second today i thought about PMing you and asking if you thought i too ambiguous, as over the past two days i kind have started to gain a complex about it all. then i got over it and friggin' x'ed out of this thing and regained my sanity.

now i read your william burroughs reference above and pat myself on the back for thinking to PM you in the first place.

[AD]

- this one’s for you AD – incentive given to students who don’t go on to post-secondary education by the form of co-op opportunities within the community. more emphasis given to trade opportunities and making students employable upon graduation. workshops with skilled tradesmen – how to apprentice, etc. co-ops that actually pay a student to attend school.

sounds like a good idea to me! community / hands-on involvement is an excellent place to go with the public education system.

ad

[AD]

i think all of us can agree that teachers are the hardest worked and most underappreciated public service employees out there, or at least are right up there.

Agreed 100%. And not only underappreciated, VASTLY underappreciated. Someone taught those doctors how to add, someone taught those firefighters how to read... etc.

ad

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I love the poster in that Bill Maher book, modelled on those WWI/II propaganda pieces, with a cop, a firefighter, a soldier, and a teacher standing in the front of a classroom, captioned, "We say they're our heroes... but we pay them like like chumps."

[SevenSeasJim]

greater access to books & computers – the two greatest learning instruments of all time. more dynamic reading lists (even though i’m a shakespeare fan, we could mix it up) and computer classes that specialize in ‘cool’ stuff-- spurring kids to do more with technology. music classes that have a multitude of instruments and encourage improvisation and not just simply play the funeral march or the michigan fight song over and over again.

From an IT point of view (that's what I do for a school board) I find that having the technology (and we do) is great except that so many teachers don't have a clue what to do with it. My wife is a teacher and finished Teacher's College 5 years ago. She learned nothing about technology while in Teacher's College (except the odd small thing). For me this is the most frustrating part. I see kids as young as 5 having to show the teacher what to do or how to do it. And since the teacher doesn't know what to do with them the kids end up just surfing to kill their time. ahhhhhhh