namelesstavern.net

Businesses certainly have the right to insist on how employees behave while at work, but I don't think any business should have the right to insist on how their employees behave while NOT at work, in their own private time. What someone does outside of work should be utterly outside the purview of the company they work for, with very few exceptions. (Situations like armored car drivers getting deeply in debt to mob loan sharks I could see being an issue, or other such absolutely extreme cases, but they are, and should be, rare as all hell.)

-Arlos

Gaazy wrote:Zan, what do you mean by that with the not dictating how employees act thing? Is that just a government thing or all around you dont think they should?

It's a government organization. It would be akin to saying anyone who goes to church on Sundays isn't fit to teach science.

Gaazy wrote:Ya, like listen to them dang ole rappers that are ruining the minds of the kids nowaday. I guess its just not an important issue to give kids role models. I looked up to people like Michael Jordan and people like that, now they all look up to thugs like allen Iverson and 50 Cent

Hey man, leave AI out of this.

I dont quite understand that viewpoint Zanny for some reason. Like Arlos said, outside of work is different. But while they are at worK, they have certain standards they have to act towards to, government or not. As long as those standards are laid down up front when he/she is hired, they agree to live up to it or find somewhere else to work

But this is outside of work. If you're living with someone outside of wedlock that is grounds to be fired.

Zanchief wrote:

Gaazy wrote:Zan, what do you mean by that with the not dictating how employees act thing? Is that just a government thing or all around you dont think they should?

It's a government organization. It would be akin to saying anyone who goes to church on Sundays isn't fit to teach science.

teachers sign a contract when they agree to work for the school board

if they don't like the rules, they find a different school board with rules they can live with

I have no issues with people getting fired for breaching a contract

I guess I'm missing the big deal over this? The title of the post is misleading; sensationalist if anything.

About the only problem I see is the fact that people don't agree with the government paying for alternative education systems. However, some of the people bitching about the government paying for "Afrocentric" schools are the same ones who support privatization of the American public school system and having the government offer vouchers.

Both aren't great ideas... the end result will be division and inequality, but I guess that is what drives people in the first place.

To me you really are subtly saying you don't support choice, or options, but prefer the government mandated one size fits all socialist model.

I humbly disagree.

Then again, I had no issues with this, and I support the idea of taxpayers being able to choose where their kids go to school, within common sense reason.

Lyion wrote:To me you really are subtly saying you don't support choice, or options, but prefer the government mandated one size fits all socialist model.

In a way, yes I do. If you have different school boards, and different sets of rules, it will just put more pressure on the poorer schools because they'll get worse kids (the good ones will be shipped off into the nicer schools) so that just creates a cesspool where no one can get out of. Right now we have a lot of parents baptizing their kids just to get them into Catholic schools so they can keep them away from "dangerous immigrants". This is going to be the same principal everywhere. Every time you take the better students out of the worse schools things got a little bit worse for everyone else there.

See I was under the impression they meant the teacher coul dbe fired if she didnt act under catholic values AT school. I didnt see anything, or misinterpreted it one or the other, about being fired while outside of school. Maybe read it wrong. But thats what I meant, was IN school there should be standards to live up to

10sun wrote:I guess I'm missing the big deal over this? The title of the post is misleading; sensationalist if anything.

I'm personally in favour of a unified curriculum across schools, rather than each school teaching a completely different standard

Tikker wrote:

10sun wrote:I guess I'm missing the big deal over this? The title of the post is misleading; sensationalist if anything.

I'm personally in favour of a unified curriculum across schools, rather than each school teaching a completely different standard

110% agreed

I disagree. Kids should be taught to their own level of comprehension and aptitude not stuffed into a one size fits all container.

Neither should they have to be homeschooled and miss out on all the social development that comes with that, but thats a whole nother can o worms

teaching to comprehension levels and teaching completely different curriculums are two entirely different balls of wax, though

I mean I'm totally for advanced classes for kids who learn faster etc - I was in International Baccalaureate in school and I wouldn't want programs like that taken away, but that's added to a standard curriculum that you have to have base knowledge of first.

All kids should be given the basics as a standard, and then adjust as necessary based around that curriculum.. multiple curriculums that offer different credits and vary from each other greatly are why kids transferring schools have trouble transferring their credits and have to take added classes etc. Growing up in Norfolk VA we saw this problem heaps due to being such a big navy city. Senior year really sucked for kids who were just transferring especially - you transfer over with all this different stuff and the school says that doesn't satisfy this this and this, so you have a full schedule while your new friends are skipping out at 11 and having lunch at taco bell.

The problem is curriculums can teach vastly different things at different times. There is also the different ways children learn.

Each method of teaching that subject is valid. There is the Spiral method which introduces new topics quickly but repeats them over and over again. The thinking is that repetition will cause the topic to stick in kids minds. There is the Mastery method with requires kids to first learn a subject thoroughly. Then teach it back to retain it. Those are the most usual types but there are others. Just those 2 different types will have kids learning different things at different levels, however, so you can't even say "All 2nd graders will learn xyz" but it simply won't work unless you force all schools to use the same textbooks.

As for learning styles
there is kinesthetic - learning by doing
auditory
visual
and tactile - taking notes

And auditory learner will not learn math by sitting down with a bunch of manipulatives but a kinesthetic learner will. A kinesthetic learner will get nothing out of a workbook but a visual learner loves them.

This is the true reason schools fail so many kids. They aren't teaching to all styles of learning.

again

curriculum is different from teaching style

Tikker wrote:again

curriculum is different from teaching style

I personally think there should be a baseline standard required of each school. Reading, writing, math, and science should be set. This should be reinforced via standardized statewide testing to ensure adequate academic achievement is attained.

Outside of that, I don't think a curriculum should be pushed on schools. I like choice and options based on the decisions of the parents. Many want the state deciding how to teach and raise children. I disagree, and have no issue with different schools that allow for choice, as long as the academic learning is encapsulated within.

If Jewish parents in a community have enough members and want their kids going to a Jewish school, I have no problem with that. Statistically speaking, those kids will do better academically, and more importantly be more ready for life and turn into better citizens.

I dislike the state union based one size fits all method, and that's all you get which is hoisted on so many. Especially since the schools are often subpar and mired in promoting values that parents disagree with.

Adam and I had a good discussion regarding parenting/schools, and he made a good point that many parents simply use school as a daycare provider and are not actually involved with their kids. I think the fact so many areas have one school that ends up being a prison to 1/5 of the students who detract and hurt the growth of many others, that moving away from our current system is direly needed. Hopefully one day the powerful teachers union/lobby will be broken and real choice will be allowed, and a better environment for students will trump the current mediocrity that is our public school system.

Curriculum is what you actually use to teach. You think curriculum doesn't have a style?

I can hand you 2 math books for the same grade and they will not cover the same topics or if they do they will not be covered in the same order.

let me rephrase, since certain people seem too thick lately


I think that by the time someone graduates from highschool, then need to learn a minimum of A, B, C and D

how they get there, the extra things they've learned, and whatever other experiences they obtain via their school experience should fall to individual school culture/preferences/etc

But it's reasonable to hope that everyone that finishes highschool would be competent in A, B, C and D

Lyion wrote:Adam and I had a good discussion regarding parenting/schools, and he made a good point that many parents simply use school as a daycare provider and are not actually involved with their kids. I think the fact so many areas have one school that ends up being a prison to 1/5 of the students who detract and hurt the growth of many others, that moving away from our current system is direly needed. Hopefully one day the powerful teachers union/lobby will be broken and real choice will be allowed, and a better environment for students will trump the current mediocrity that is our public school system.

Great idea. Get all the kids that perform well, put them all in one "super school" and ignore all the other kids. It all seems so perfect. There's a consequence to all this choice, Lyion.

I think that at some point people just have to come to the conclusion that not every kid is going to be college material, and people have to stop seeing manual labour jobs a some sort of penalty, or undesirable

if my kid grows up, and wants to learn a trade, I'd be thrilled

if he wants to be a doctor, great

(i'm holding out for NHL superstar, but reliable plumber/electrician sounds good too )

Well said in both of your previous posts

I don't think anyone was saying that any teacher should have to teach in a uniformed manner and not accomodate the different learning styles of kids.. the whole point was that there should be a uniform standard of what you have be adequate in to graduate

Tikker wrote:let me rephrase, since certain people seem too thick lately


I think that by the time someone graduates from highschool, then need to learn a minimum of A, B, C and D

how they get there, the extra things they've learned, and whatever other experiences they obtain via their school experience should fall to individual school culture/preferences/etc

But it's reasonable to hope that everyone that finishes highschool would be competent in A, B, C and D

You are speaking of the end of the road whereas I was talking about the journey there. Gyps stated that learning needed to be uniform across the grades so kids transferring wouldn't have issues. I was pointing out why that would work.

BTW...who's resorting to the snide comments and personal attacks you were denouncing Evermore for now?

I agree with Tikk on the manual labor part. Most people are just too lazy to go out and do anything that requires effort. The losers who sit around going "ohhhh there arent any jobs arounddd i cant find workkk gimme that checkkk" are full of it, they just cant find the job they actually want. So many guys my age are so afraid of gettin a little dirt under their fingernails its just pathetic. Guess they dont want to have to pay for a manicure on the way to their tanning bed appointment too Fuckin sissys...