Total Posts:177|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Excessive resources devoted to special-ed

dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:20:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.

Yeah, that's utter insanity. Ugh, humanity is such an insufferable irrational bunch.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:20:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:20:06 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.

Yeah, that's utter insanity. Ugh, humanity is such an insufferable irrational bunch.

insufferably *
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:21:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:20:06 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.

Yeah, that's utter insanity. Ugh, humanity is such an insufferable irrational bunch.

I looked on see through NY.com and just those 3 teachers for one student is $250000. I don't know what transportation and materials costs though.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:24:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:21:50 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:20:06 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.

Yeah, that's utter insanity. Ugh, humanity is such an insufferable irrational bunch.

I looked on see through NY.com and just those 3 teachers for one student is $250000. I don't know what transportation and materials costs though.

I can't see how someone could think that's rational; spending as much as 20 students who would benefit MORE from education on 1 student who won't benefit himself nor anyone else.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:26:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:24:29 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:21:50 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:20:06 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.

Yeah, that's utter insanity. Ugh, humanity is such an insufferable irrational bunch.

I looked on see through NY.com and just those 3 teachers for one student is $250000. I don't know what transportation and materials costs though.

I can't see how someone could think that's rational; spending as much as 20 students who would benefit MORE from education on 1 student who won't benefit himself nor anyone else.

Silly person, logic and rationality have no place in education!
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:30:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:26:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:24:29 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:21:50 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:20:06 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.

Yeah, that's utter insanity. Ugh, humanity is such an insufferable irrational bunch.

I looked on see through NY.com and just those 3 teachers for one student is $250000. I don't know what transportation and materials costs though.

I can't see how someone could think that's rational; spending as much as 20 students who would benefit MORE from education on 1 student who won't benefit himself nor anyone else.

Silly person, logic and rationality have no place in education!

Besides educating one's self of that fact :)
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 10:33:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think the practice is a manifestation of faulty morality, more specifically, the tenet that everyone is equal, and thus everyone should be treated as if they were equal. By "equal" I don't mean equal in the sense of being a human, rather literally equal in ability.
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 3:36:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.

And in what way would 'equalizing funding' lead you to conclude that we should cut funding entirely for some students and not others? Your conclusion does not follow from your argument.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 3:41:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.

So, if for area A property taxes can pay for 90% of a school and in area B property taxes pay for 50% of a school, because we're in an age of equality and fairness the government should only give 10% to both, since giving anymore funding to B based on mitigating circumstances is unfair?

You do know that equality of opportunity isn't the same as equality of outcome, right?
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 5:00:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

Um this is rather blatantly offensive and insensitive. Those who are mentally deficient can definitely learn and we owe it to them to put in the extra effort to help them be the most successful human beings we can. We shouldn't treat students differently based on how intelligent they are, and it is very hard to tell how actually intelligent a student is since there are so many types of intelligence. Not to mention that often "special-ed" kids are those with aspergers and are very intelligent, they just cannot interact with other children.
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 5:01:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 10:20:06 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:16:44 AM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:15:00 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
What is your opinion on the fact that more money is spent on the education of someone with a mental deficit rather than the gifted in the United States? In my opinion, money spent on someone that cannot learn is irrational.

There needs to be a cap on per student spending. I know at my child's school district, there are several kids with 2 and 3 personal aids, just for them.

Yeah, that's utter insanity. Ugh, humanity is such an insufferable irrational bunch.

If you expect to get anywhere in life, you need to get rid of the idea that you are so much smarter than all who disagree with you.
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 5:04:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
We give them the extra money because they need it more to become successful in society. Those who are above average intelligence can actually teach themselves and don't need the extra funding.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 5:29:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 5:04:42 PM, rogue wrote:
We give them the extra money because they need it more to become successful in society. Those who are above average intelligence can actually teach themselves and don't need the extra funding.

often times the intelligent people just get bored of the stuff and don't bother with school in general. "Teaching oneself" is completely useless to companies unless they can see some form of credentials.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 5:54:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 5:29:44 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:04:42 PM, rogue wrote:
We give them the extra money because they need it more to become successful in society. Those who are above average intelligence can actually teach themselves and don't need the extra funding.

often times the intelligent people just get bored of the stuff and don't bother with school in general. "Teaching oneself" is completely useless to companies unless they can see some form of credentials.

That is a good point. What they want to see in terms of high school is a diploma and those who are above average easily earn it likely along with several ap tests. Most schools do offer advanced classes but usually that just offers more work. I don't think it is the school's job to keep smart kids entertained. I was one. If they are bored they can join orgs, get involved with other aspects of school and life. It is the school's job to challenge them and most school are doing that. It is more important to help those in need than "entertain" those who will most likely succeed otherwise.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 6:02:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 3:36:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.

And in what way would 'equalizing funding' lead you to conclude that we should cut funding entirely for some students and not others? Your conclusion does not follow from your argument.

But shouldn't student funding be largely equal across the board. Otherwise is is state sponsored discrimination against the non-mentally/physically handicapped.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 6:04:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 3:41:19 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.

So, if for area A property taxes can pay for 90% of a school and in area B property taxes pay for 50% of a school, because we're in an age of equality and fairness the government should only give 10% to both, since giving anymore funding to B based on mitigating circumstances is unfair?

You do know that equality of opportunity isn't the same as equality of outcome, right?

No, if area b can afford better education then they can use it, but the spending per student in area b should be the same within area b. And while different from area b, spending per student in area a should be largely equal. So what I am saying, is that within one school, one child should not get $200000 in help, when another only gets $15000. If that clarifies it at all.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 6:35:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 5:54:39 PM, rogue wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:29:44 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:04:42 PM, rogue wrote:
We give them the extra money because they need it more to become successful in society. Those who are above average intelligence can actually teach themselves and don't need the extra funding.

often times the intelligent people just get bored of the stuff and don't bother with school in general. "Teaching oneself" is completely useless to companies unless they can see some form of credentials.

That is a good point. What they want to see in terms of high school is a diploma and those who are above average easily earn it likely along with several ap tests. Most schools do offer advanced classes but usually that just offers more work. I don't think it is the school's job to keep smart kids entertained. I was one. If they are bored they can join orgs, get involved with other aspects of school and life. It is the school's job to challenge them and most school are doing that. It is more important to help those in need than "entertain" those who will most likely succeed otherwise.

Yes, but those who will succeed will produce great works in science, medicine and engineering that will shape the world to be a better place. Advancing these ideals is important because they're so critical to everyday life for everyone. Its important that those can achieve this are encouraged to take part in it, otherwise we'd lose out on another Tesla or Einstein.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 7:29:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 6:02:06 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:36:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.

And in what way would 'equalizing funding' lead you to conclude that we should cut funding entirely for some students and not others? Your conclusion does not follow from your argument.

But shouldn't student funding be largely equal across the board. Otherwise is is state sponsored discrimination against the non-mentally/physically handicapped.

Are you arguing that funding should be equal for all students, or are you arguing that funding should be cut for special-ed students (but presumably not 'normal' students)? These positions are contradictory, you realize this right?
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 7:57:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 7:29:50 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 6:02:06 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:36:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.

And in what way would 'equalizing funding' lead you to conclude that we should cut funding entirely for some students and not others? Your conclusion does not follow from your argument.

But shouldn't student funding be largely equal across the board. Otherwise is is state sponsored discrimination against the non-mentally/physically handicapped.

Are you arguing that funding should be equal for all students, or are you arguing that funding should be cut for special-ed students (but presumably not 'normal' students)? These positions are contradictory, you realize this right?

Equal funding for students within a school district. If different districts have different school tax rates, then that equal funding number can go up or down accordingly.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 7:58:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 7:29:50 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 6:02:06 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 3:36:46 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:48:12 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:17:19 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 2:01:19 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/24/2013 1:32:27 PM, Polaris wrote:
At 2/24/2013 10:18:11 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
I should clarify what I mean by 'special-ed' : I don't mean ADD or dyslexia, rather extreme mental retardation, such as down's syndrome.

In those cases, special-ed teachers are little more than baby-sitters.

Who should be paid for by parents, not taxpayers.

I don't know about that. I can see the logic behind using less public resources to fund special-ed classes, however it is a bit draconian to cut the funding entirely.

No its not, in an age of supposed equality and fairness, why should one kid get 20x the funding of another.

And in what way would 'equalizing funding' lead you to conclude that we should cut funding entirely for some students and not others? Your conclusion does not follow from your argument.

But shouldn't student funding be largely equal across the board. Otherwise is is state sponsored discrimination against the non-mentally/physically handicapped.

Are you arguing that funding should be equal for all students, or are you arguing that funding should be cut for special-ed students (but presumably not 'normal' students)? These positions are contradictory, you realize this right?

I think that he's saying that funding should be cut from current levels, which are unequal, and redistributed amongst all students until they are funded equally.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 8:03:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 5:54:39 PM, rogue wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:29:44 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:04:42 PM, rogue wrote:
We give them the extra money because they need it more to become successful in society. Those who are above average intelligence can actually teach themselves and don't need the extra funding.

often times the intelligent people just get bored of the stuff and don't bother with school in general. "Teaching oneself" is completely useless to companies unless they can see some form of credentials.

That is a good point. What they want to see in terms of high school is a diploma and those who are above average easily earn it likely along with several ap tests. Most schools do offer advanced classes but usually that just offers more work. I don't think it is the school's job to keep smart kids entertained. I was one. If they are bored they can join orgs, get involved with other aspects of school and life. It is the school's job to challenge them and most school are doing that. It is more important to help those in need than "entertain" those who will most likely succeed otherwise.

This is rubbish.

And as a former gifted student who had the entire gifted program partially defunded while I was enrolled in it, I can tell you that it made an enormous difference. The extra hours with which to explore an area outside the school curricula under the guidance of an adviser were by far the most rewarding, and happiest, of my primary education. It wasn't 'just more work'.

Regular classes were absolutely torturous for me. The first time we learned something I loved it. But reviewing it over and over again became unbearably boring, and a lot of the smarter kids became the equivalent of unpaid teachers aides instead of being challenged on a daily basis. It's not fun to have to teach other children in school, especially when many of them are more interested in making your life miserable than learning.

It doesn't take much to engage gifted children, there's usually an enormous positive feedback loop when it comes to learning. But because of ideas like this they are all too often pushed to the side because its assumed that they can fend for themselves.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 8:30:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 8:03:58 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:54:39 PM, rogue wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:29:44 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:04:42 PM, rogue wrote:
We give them the extra money because they need it more to become successful in society. Those who are above average intelligence can actually teach themselves and don't need the extra funding.

often times the intelligent people just get bored of the stuff and don't bother with school in general. "Teaching oneself" is completely useless to companies unless they can see some form of credentials.

That is a good point. What they want to see in terms of high school is a diploma and those who are above average easily earn it likely along with several ap tests. Most schools do offer advanced classes but usually that just offers more work. I don't think it is the school's job to keep smart kids entertained. I was one. If they are bored they can join orgs, get involved with other aspects of school and life. It is the school's job to challenge them and most school are doing that. It is more important to help those in need than "entertain" those who will most likely succeed otherwise.

This is rubbish.

And as a former gifted student who had the entire gifted program partially defunded while I was enrolled in it, I can tell you that it made an enormous difference. The extra hours with which to explore an area outside the school curricula under the guidance of an adviser were by far the most rewarding, and happiest, of my primary education. It wasn't 'just more work'.

Regular classes were absolutely torturous for me. The first time we learned something I loved it. But reviewing it over and over again became unbearably boring, and a lot of the smarter kids became the equivalent of unpaid teachers aides instead of being challenged on a daily basis. It's not fun to have to teach other children in school, especially when many of them are more interested in making your life miserable than learning.

It doesn't take much to engage gifted children, there's usually an enormous positive feedback loop when it comes to learning. But because of ideas like this they are all too often pushed to the side because its assumed that they can fend for themselves.

What advice would you give to an aspiring auto-didactic? My classes do not challenge me in the slightest. I was identified as TAG (talented & gifted), but my education has not been accelerated in any way.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 8:56:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 8:30:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/24/2013 8:03:58 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:54:39 PM, rogue wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:29:44 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/24/2013 5:04:42 PM, rogue wrote:
We give them the extra money because they need it more to become successful in society. Those who are above average intelligence can actually teach themselves and don't need the extra funding.

often times the intelligent people just get bored of the stuff and don't bother with school in general. "Teaching oneself" is completely useless to companies unless they can see some form of credentials.

That is a good point. What they want to see in terms of high school is a diploma and those who are above average easily earn it likely along with several ap tests. Most schools do offer advanced classes but usually that just offers more work. I don't think it is the school's job to keep smart kids entertained. I was one. If they are bored they can join orgs, get involved with other aspects of school and life. It is the school's job to challenge them and most school are doing that. It is more important to help those in need than "entertain" those who will most likely succeed otherwise.

This is rubbish.

And as a former gifted student who had the entire gifted program partially defunded while I was enrolled in it, I can tell you that it made an enormous difference. The extra hours with which to explore an area outside the school curricula under the guidance of an adviser were by far the most rewarding, and happiest, of my primary education. It wasn't 'just more work'.

Regular classes were absolutely torturous for me. The first time we learned something I loved it. But reviewing it over and over again became unbearably boring, and a lot of the smarter kids became the equivalent of unpaid teachers aides instead of being challenged on a daily basis. It's not fun to have to teach other children in school, especially when many of them are more interested in making your life miserable than learning.

It doesn't take much to engage gifted children, there's usually an enormous positive feedback loop when it comes to learning. But because of ideas like this they are all too often pushed to the side because its assumed that they can fend for themselves.

What advice would you give to an aspiring auto-didactic? My classes do not challenge me in the slightest. I was identified as TAG (talented & gifted), but my education has not been accelerated in any way.

Read. Read voraciously and without pause. Read in class, in the hallway, at lunch. That was my only escape in school. Pick a topic that interests you and explore it. Some of mine included Greek and Roman Mythology (Ovid, Hesiod, Virgil, and Homer), enlightenment political philosophy (Locke, Hobbes, Paine, Hamilton, Madison and Jefferson), botany (an endless stack of keys and field guides). Eventually I developed a taste for fiction and read Hemingway, Camus, Nabokov, Tolstoy, Rand, Bronte and various others. I got into a Machiavelli phase, then poetry captivated me (Keats, Eliot, Poe). I also read Aristotle, Epicurus, William Hazlitt (My avatar) and Eric Hoffer. My grades slipped a bit, but it stopped me from being depressed.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -