World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[ElkinFencer10]

I'm all for trade schools in addition to traditional universities. My problem is the states that do what mine has been trying to do - push trade schools by defunding traditional universities as well as defund the arts in high schools to fund trade classes. I think a woodshop or automotive repair class is a fantastic thing for high schools to offer, but I don't think it's right to eliminate theater or music programs to pay for that.

Admittedly though, the NEA put out a report in 2012 urging further development and emphasis of vocational training in schools. Such behavior could be an overreaction to that advice. This may just be the education pendulum swinging in a different direction.

The problem is that school funding, in most states, has stagnated at already insultingly low levels. In North Carolina, for example, my school is not alone in having enough money in the budget to give teachers one case of paper for the year. The entire school year. I have ten packs of paper to last me 36 weeks with around 90 students, and I'm required to print off progress reports for each of them every week. And that's just something simple like paper. That's not even getting into supplies for more specialized classes (like the vocational classes) or adding entirely new departments (since a lot of schools don't even offer classes like that or didn't until a couple years ago).

[Forlorn Drifter]

I'm all for trade schools in addition to traditional universities. My problem is the states that do what mine has been trying to do - push trade schools by defunding traditional universities as well as defund the arts in high schools to fund trade classes. I think a woodshop or automotive repair class is a fantastic thing for high schools to offer, but I don't think it's right to eliminate theater or music programs to pay for that.

I have no idea if my state has been doing this, but it's a problem in small schools to begin with. For everything excluding core classes and sports at my high school, the budget was tight, and poor judgement or funding the wrong program at the wrong time made things worse. The only music program we had in high school was Band, and the main thing keeping it going was how it played with sports, along with the fact that winning competitions made the school look good. Theater was a miracle to keep going, and 3/4 of that comes from re-using the same costumes and equipment for years on end, along with the fact that they would give the set work too complicated or dangerous for theater tech to the Ag department. The Ag department ran on the fact that winning competitions would look good for the school. Everything else came from hardcore booster clubs or the school deigning that program important enough for the year.

I would have killed to have a realistic shop class, or go to a nice ass magnet school like some others I know, but that wasn't in the cards and I got pretty shafted by that. Heck, one of the schools in SA lets you get AP credit for college level Agricultural courses. That would have cut me a lot of money and a lot of time if I could have gone there.

[Erik_Twice]

Do you not think this is a brilliant way to look at the world? Sure, the reality is that most people will never get very far economically, but the sheer belief that you can has driven some individuals to succeed that never would have been able to anywhere else in the world. Hell, our entertainment industry alone was pioneered by people who felt this way and in many cases is still fueled by them.

No, not at all, I think it's self-denial. One should be aware of the actual possibilities of "success" and realize that the possibilities of turning into a millonaire are incredibly small.

I also don't think this "American work ethic" is something that has driven the American film industry to succeed, it's a footnote compared to the inherent benefits of its technological advantange and political hegemony after WWII. Personally, I feel this way of look at the world is dated and rooted in American exceptionalism more than reality.

And ultimately, even if it were true I would rather have a country with less superstars if that means people don't have to declare bankrupcy because they got ran over by a car or fell ill.

[prfsnl_gmr]

The problem is that school funding, in most states, has stagnated at already insultingly low levels. In North Carolina, for example, my school is not alone in having enough money in the budget to give teachers one case of paper for the year. The entire school year. I have ten packs of paper to last me 36 weeks with around 90 students, and I'm required to print off progress reports for each of them every week. And that's just something simple like paper. That's not even getting into supplies for more specialized classes (like the vocational classes) or adding entirely new departments (since a lot of schools don't even offer classes like that or didn't until a couple years ago).

I have two children in school right now, and both education funding and teacher pay in North Carolina - despite our "education" lottery - are disgraceful. (Basically, our state legislature views teachers as political enemies and punishes them accordingly.) It is an absolutely horrible situation, and as a product of mid-western public schools, it is unlike anything I experienced gowing up. I cannot wait until our state legistalure is once again composed of people who understand the importance of public education.

[Ack]

Do you not think this is a brilliant way to look at the world? Sure, the reality is that most people will never get very far economically, but the sheer belief that you can has driven some individuals to succeed that never would have been able to anywhere else in the world. Hell, our entertainment industry alone was pioneered by people who felt this way and in many cases is still fueled by them.

No, not at all, I think it's self-denial. One should be aware of the actual possibilities of "success" and realize that the possibilities of turning into a millonaire are incredibly small.

I also don't think this "American work ethic" is something that has driven the American film industry to succeed, it's a footnote compared to the inherent benefits of its technological advantange and political hegemony after WWII. Personally, I feel this way of look at the world is dated and rooted in American exceptionalism more than reality.

And ultimately, even if it were true I would rather have a country with less superstars if that means people don't have to declare bankrupcy because they got ran over by a car or fell ill.

Actually, I was thinking primarily of the foundation of the American film industry, in which just about every major studio and some of the more notable minor ones was founded by an immigrant or the children of immigrants in the US, building off of technology designed in part by Thomas Edison, also the son of an immigrant. Much of this foundation is pre-WWI.

Sure, the possibilities are small...yet we somehow managed to defy those odds quite often. Yes, perhaps as part of our dated view of exceptionalism. We created new forms of communication, art, music, management techniques, weaponry, and a variety of other advances before we ever became a superpower. We then continued making creations, some great, some terrible. We raced another behemoth to put men into space and then onto the moon, created miles of infrastructure larger than anywhere in the world, developed new means by which to power our growing cities, and developed a mass communication system that is now global and almost impossible to comprehend in its size but provides near instantaneous contact between almost anywhere in the world. We've helped form world governments and organizations, provided aid to all manner of peoples everywhere, and grown food that feeds the hungry on the distant corners of the globe.

Sure, we're not perfect, not by a long shot. But I'll take what we've got and hold my head high. American exceptionalism isn't that dated in my opinion. We're a marvelous country that has done some amazing things in an incredibly short time frame. I'd rather live here than anywhere else in the world.

[ElkinFencer10]

The problem is that school funding, in most states, has stagnated at already insultingly low levels. In North Carolina, for example, my school is not alone in having enough money in the budget to give teachers one case of paper for the year. The entire school year. I have ten packs of paper to last me 36 weeks with around 90 students, and I'm required to print off progress reports for each of them every week. And that's just something simple like paper. That's not even getting into supplies for more specialized classes (like the vocational classes) or adding entirely new departments (since a lot of schools don't even offer classes like that or didn't until a couple years ago).

I have two children in school right now, and both education funding and teacher pay in North Carolina - despite our "education" lottery - are disgraceful. (Basically, our state legislature views teachers as political enemies and punishes them accordingly.) It is an absolutely horrible situation, and as a product of mid-western public schools, it is unlike anything I experienced gowing up. I cannot wait until our state legistalure is once again composed of people who understand the importance of public education.

Oh god, I'm sorry. Did they have an issue losing teachers? I know Charlotte-Mecklenburg lost about a third of its teaching force over this past summer. Can you blame them, though? They took away tenure, they're increasingly stressing standardized tests that we have only vague guidelines on what they'll cover, school funding and teacher pay are both among the worst in the country, the General Assembly is about to take away retirement health insurance coverage (thank god I was hired last year since that proposal only affects teachers hired since January 1st), and we're demonized every time a kid performs poorly.

I got the dirtiest look from our freshmen counselor today when I took her my list of freshmen who failed my class (I had 12 out of about 45). She said "Wow, this is kind of a lot, isn't it?" I just looked at her and said "I just gave them the grades they earned" because of those 12, every single one had either 20+ absences for the semester (the county's student handbook says you fail because of attendance policy violation after 8 unless you stay to make up time) or below a 40 average in the class. And yet somehow it's my fault that these kids didn't come to school.

Also, as a quick addition, that education lottery got gutted with Bev Perdue (to hell with that woman) and then brutally murdered with Pat McCrory (he seriously should rot in hell for covering up that shit with the Dan River).

[Ack]

This thread has suddenly become a fascinating look at North Carolina's education issues.

[ElkinFencer10]

This thread has suddenly become a fascinating look at North Carolina's education issues.

There are a plethora, and as one who works inside it and grew up in it, I can tell you a LOT about it if you're ever interested (or want to hear me rant endlessly about being abused by my employer, the State of North Carolina).

[Erik_Twice]

Funny anecdote. I took one of those online tests that tell you who you side with in politics and the closest Republican to my thinking, Rand Paul, has a whooping 36% in common with me.

For comparison, I have 88% in common with Demochristians (Popular Party) and the Radical Left/Communists (United Left, Podemos). The only American politician in that range is Bernie Sanders (Hillary has 81%) and it comes mostly to stuff I consider to be very basic, not actual agreement in world view.

[ElkinFencer10]

Funny anecdote. I took one of those online tests that tell you who you side with in politics and the closest Republican to my thinking, Rand Paul, has a whooping 36% in common with me.

For comparison, I have 88% in common with Demochristians (Popular Party) and the Radical Left/Communists (United Left, Podemos). The only American politician in that range is Bernie Sanders (Hillary has 81%) and it comes mostly to stuff I consider to be very basic, not actual agreement in world view.

Rand is a bit of a mixed bag in that he's (for the most part) a fairly legit libertarian, so he'll agree with Democrats on some social issues (he's not all that libertarian when it comes to abortion) but will typically side with Republicans on fiscal issues.

I'm registered as a Democrat, but I consider myself a democratic socialist (please don't crucify me or try to tell me why I'm wrong; I'm just sharing my affiliation), so I really don't totally agree with any major American politicians aside from Bernie Sanders (who also identifies as a democratic socialist) and Elizabeth Warren (she's not a socialist, but she's very much a populist, so there's a lot of common ground when it comes to worker and consumer protections).