Edumacation
Two Jim’s joined us today… one with Talent, the other a Senator!
We did have two guests today. Pete’s Uncle Jim and Former Missouri Senator Jim Talent. Senator Jim Talent brought to our attention something we didn’t think was a huge issue, but it really is something that concerns all of us - and also is something that seems like a quicker fix than health care, the economy and the war. If you find you’re having problems with the roads in your communities, be it a pothole or a condition of the bridge you cross everyday to work, then check out www.getamericamoving.com and do something about it.
Uncle Jim covered a lot in education. In essence, I agree with his overall argument, that there is a dumbing down of America. Test scores are low and schools are being put on watch due to No Child Left Behind. We’re in serious trouble America. What should we do here? Should we adopt A-PLUS? I think we seriously need to leave “No Child” behind.
I agree the system is broken, but it seems to me Uncle Jim’s solution is to impose his idea of what makes for a good education on ‘us’. The problem I see with that view is its likely to stifle educational innovations as much as the current broken system!
What Jim and other progressives fail to understand is their version of ‘a whole education’ can only get a chance under the current system by massive political action, which requires organization, funding and a campaign to convince voters to adopt it. Such a proposal will be met by fierce resistance from groups who do not share Uncle Jim’s opinions on what makes for the best education. Undoubtedly such groups will produce their own PhD’s and studies and raise their own cash.
Right will be pitted against left, politics as usual.
Instead, I ask progressives such as Jim to join libertarians and conservatives in opening the doors of freedom and innovation in education. Demand vouchers and show the world your superior system! However, you have to allow for failures. You cannot let the perfect be enemy to the better than what we have. You have to allow parents to use the voucher at church schools (which are many times subsidized by congregations, giving added value to education dollars). You have to compromise with tax-paying home school parents.
The only way innovations in education of the kind Jim proposed will ever gain traction is if people like Jim are willing to step out and let consumer choice select the fittest systems among a panoply of choices. Let empowered parents regulate successful systems by voting with their voucher dollars! What will happen when some bold group of teachers dares to create a better way? Will others copy success? Will the less informed parents learn of the best schools by reputation? I think they will, how can they not?
I don’t want to see public school eliminated, but I would like to see them improve and would like to keep Washington DC largely out of primary education. I don’t believe ‘privatization’, (ie, corporations running the local systems) will serve to improve education, it merely trades government educrats for corporate ones. The only way to replace the current system is to open it to competition. Indeed, the government schools can point to successful new systems as a guide on how they must change. In the end, however, if the local government system cannot change for the better, why shouldn’t it die for lack of faith by those it is intended to serve?
Big Brother Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 11:32 am
Todd, you don’t seem to be considering that markets (like you’re proposing) do not necessarily respect diversity of needs. Even if every child had an equal voucher (which is NOT what libertarians and conservatives propose anywhere I’ve seen it — they want to attach it to property taxes and so forth), there would still be major problems. For starters, children with special needs would never be able to obtain the resources they require. As was pointed out during the show, some kids need more resources. Why should kids who need fewer resources get more than they need, while kids who need more resources get less than they need?
To illustrate, under your system, as I understand it, let’s say we have 1000 kids. 800 of them learn best in a certain type of standard classroom. They are satisfied there, and in fact they have far more resources than they need. What doesn’t go toward learning goes toward better facilities, more fun activities, etc. But another 100 kids have various learning disabilities. And the last 100 are really devoted to learning and are driven to excel. These last 200 kids, on two sides of this simplified spectrum, can’t get what they need. Instead of the 1 teacher per 15 kids in the standard classroom (this is the future, remember, where ALL education is better), the "special-needs" kids require more like 1 per 5 or something. And the "advanced" kids require college-level instruction, advanced science equipment, etc. But they can’t afford this, either, because they’re stuck with equal funding.
We need a more-objective system that doesn’t privilege those with the fewest needs. It’s that difference between equity and equality. If you have a way to address that, I’m all ears. But the system you seem to be setting forth does not address it at all. Once again, the market fails to lead to optimum (or even acceptable) results, just like in every single other aspect of social life.
Besides this (and I have about 80 more criticisms, but I’ll just level one more at this point), a market-based system will lead to homogeneity of curriculum, circumstances, and just about everything else at different schools, with no enforceable standards at all. Yeah, sorry, we don’t want kids getting sent to fucked-up fundamentalist christian schools or extremist madrassas. We don’t want kids going to Christian Science schools that teach them all medicine is bad just because a parent has some fucked-up view that 99.99% of us think should die with that parent (soon). One’s kids aren’t just one’s own kids — they’re not roperty that has no effect on anyone else. Society is affected by them. And society should have some say over what they are taught in schools, especially if we’re all pitching in to a common pot that is used to fund all the schools (which is what your system sounds like).
Oh, and it’s not like Uncle Jim was just throwing out crazy ideas that had never been tried. Aside from the Montessori and Dewey schools he mentioned, there are dozens of progressive charter schools and have for centuries been schools that practice various libertarian education methods (not to be confused with libertarian economics or the Libertarian party).
Todd in FL Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Well, I think you don’t understand the system I envision. I don’t believe I said anything about voucher amounts being uniform. I imagine a tiered system with a standard base and supplemental special needs vouchers, including transportation vouchers to help poor families overcome geographical limits on choice. I’d say the funding governments would have to determine the different amounts based on their local economy and population.
I think that answers paragraphs 1 through 3. I’m curious to hear the evidence and reasoning which leads you to conclude the market fails to achieve optimum or acceptable results? What are you talking about? What is YOUR alternative?
I find your impulse to deny religious people equality in a voucher system curious. What gives you the right? If tax dollars are being spent by beneficiaries, then the government isn’t imposing religion on ANYONE. What if majorities decided your kids weren’t just yours and your views were wacky and your kids needed to have your beliefs contradicted? That is a violation of the establishment clause, if you ask me. (and vouchers have been addressed by the Supreme Court and ruled constitutional, so long as they meet certain criteria.
What can you offer in support of your baffling claim that freedom in educational choice will lead to homogeneous curricula? That seems absurd on its face.
Granted, methods which are shown to work may well enjoy widespread acceptence, but the whole point of opening up education funding to competition is to get a wider range of choices! So that kids who do better under self pacing can attend a school which meets their needs and kids who do better with paced structure can go where their needs are met.
Finally, did I hint Jim’s methods were crazy or out there? I’m simply making the point that progressives would do well to stop the impulse to impose their education ethic on all of us, and instead seek a system which allows them to demonstrate their superiority over other methods.
Big Brother Reply:
August 8th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Well, I must say that’s very decent of you. So special-needs kids would have more-valuable vouchers? Wouldn’t this require some kind of objective system to determine need?
If we’re talking about economics, I’ve pointed you to my alternative in the past but you refuse to investigate it, so I’m not really interested in debating it here. If we’re talking about schools, I’ve already begun my case and will continue to make it here.
Is the system for the parents or the kids, Todd? I mean, how am I denying "religious people" any right other than to have their kid indoctrinated with my tax dollars? What am I missing? I’m much more concerned about methodology than curriculum. But there is no way that an orthodox religion can be conveyed in conditions that encourage critical thought and teach sciences (the way we know science needs to be taught in order for our society to advance or even keep up). Which makes me think that the methodologies practiced in such schools would be contrary to promoting a healthy public.
And what’s with calling my well-thought-out, long-held opinion an "impulse"?
That’s how it should be. I really don’t like the idea of parents’ beliefs being imposed as gospel. Kids should be exposed to diverse ideas. So the content of curriculum should reflect a broad range of ideas and perspectives. And learning methods should incorporate instruction on critical thinking, analysis, and independence of thought. You’re just not going to find that in orthodox religions (though you will find it in some reformed Jewish and Christian sects).
Like I would ever ask you for your analysis of the Constitution, Todd
I already explained it. Parents will stick their kids in schools that conform to their view of the world. This is very bad for society, as kids will have no exposure to alternate perspectives. There will be no incentive for some schools to "waste" their money supplying a diverse range of opportunities. Even though most people wouldn’t send their kids to these fucked-up schools that eschew diversity, some would, and that is bad.
It sounds like we both have essentially the same goals, Todd. That’s good. But what you don’t seem to be admitting (or realizing?) is that we have no reason to believe kids will end up in the most appropriate schools under your system. If parents are the ones deciding where their kids end up, they are free to not consider the kids’ needs, right? They might just consider their own interests. So if they are arch-Catholics, and there is an orthodox catholic school in the system that has no special-needs facilities, and their kid has special needs, they might very well say "fuck it" and send their kid to the catholic school for ideological indoctrination, ignoring her special needs altogether. Would you agree that would be bad?
In a more objective system, the KIDS’ rights would be respected over the PARENTS’ supposed prerogative to fuck their kids over for life based on their own whims.
Todd, stop calling other people’s ideas impulsive. It is so rude and degrading, and it really exposes your unwillingness to consider that other people might have thought about this. To call my views "impulsive" is absurd enough, since I’ve been thinking and even writing on these matters for 15 years. But to lump Uncle Jim in there, with his decades of experience and his PhD - -whatever you think of that, it’s hardly impulsive.
Anyway, that reference on my part was just that you seemed to be dismissing the long history of libertarian education when you said people like my uncle and me should "show the world your superior system." But on second thought, that probably wasn’t fair. We’ve shown the powers that be, and anyone else interested, but those same powers have not really allowed alternative methods to see the light of day. Experimental schools that have been acknowledged by local governments tend to get swept under the rug.
But even in your system, I don’t really see how obscure ideas with little initial support could ever gain as much traction against dominant, mainstream ideas that would get more consolidated funding and have more promotional capacity.
Which leads me to yet another criticism to add to the mountain of arguments I have against the voucher system: MARKETING. We all know that marketing is one of the most counterproductive forces in contemporary economics. Slick advertisements designed by psychologists are used to convince people to do even things that are bad for their health (drinking alcohol, taking tweaked out pharmaceuticals, etc). Do we really want school choices to be subjected to that level of bullshit? Do we really think kids should wind up going to a school just because their TV ads were most convincing? Is that a way to promote a healthy democracy or society?
And what kind of marketing-oriented school is going to teach kids to be non-consumers, or critical consumers, or smart consumers? Kinda contradictory, no?
This is the one thing I need you to address, Todd. How does your system foster teaching methodologies that encourage critical thinking. Not just for the lucky kids who wind up in good schools (which maybe are the majority, or maybe are not), but for the kids who get stuck in religious conformity camps by dickheaded parents? (Yes, I realize this is already a problem.)
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
That’s how it should be. I really don’t like the idea of parents’ beliefs being imposed as gospel. Kids should be exposed to diverse ideas. So the content of curriculum should reflect a broad range of ideas and perspectives. And learning methods should incorporate instruction on critical thinking, analysis, and independence of thought. You’re just not going to find that in orthodox religions (though you will find it in some reformed Jewish and Christian sects).
Brian, I’m not really in Todd’s dugout here because I don’t understand enough of this to solidly disagree with you, but at what age do you feel that critical thinking, analysis, and independence of thought really come into play for kids relating to important issues that may shape their future lives? My feeling is that most kids are just concerned with their own little worlds and social networks than anything that’s actually really important. Don’t most parents want to have their kids taught similar ideals to their own? At what age do you think that kids would use that independency to actually start to formulate ideas that may be different from the ones their parents most likely wish to instill in them?
Big Brother Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Eric, I don’t think skills such as "critical thinking" and independence of thought can only be applied to social issues like politics, law, ethics, economics, etc. I mean, can’t children learn and exercise these kinds of things on a broad range of topics? What’s most important is that kids be encouraged to be skeptical, to challenge their teachers and other authorities, to seek their own answers instead of always being "instructed", etc. I think if kids are encouraged to challenge what they are taught, to test it against other ideas, to push in their own directions — on any and all subjects — then curriculum is a secondary concern. Methodology (pedagogy) is far more important than content.
As for what most parents want their kids to be taught, I really don’t give a fuck. I’m sick of this social assumption that offspring are property, and the indoctrination of offspring is a "parental right," for reasons I’ve already expressed. What about kids’ rights to an education that doesn’t stunt them for life? What about the right to access diverse resources and opportunities? Children are not pets, they’re fellow human beings who will be saddled with the impact of a good or bad education, with more or fewer opportunities, and they have a right to NOT get fucked over by narrow-minded or ill-intended parents. Society OWES that right to children.
This is, by the by, the explicit ideal behind public education. It’s not something radical, I just am not willing to compromise on the matter, whereas most educators have long since surrendered that ideal. (It’s not the reason we have public education — that’s much more nefarious, but we’ll talk about that some other time.)
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
ok, to paraphrase then, you feel that these skills are valuable, and usable to kids at quite a young age then, say 8 to 10 years? yes? And that you are ok with your kids potentially coming home with opinions that are broader, but could be quite unlike your own, which may not be that bad of a thing anyway I guess.
ok, thanks Brian.
E.
Big Brother Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Yeah, I think that sums it up well, Eric. The first part isn’t my opinion, but rather the conclusion of centuries of experiential research into the matter by libertarian educators. The literature on this subject is some of the most fascinating reading I’ve ever done. And, yeah, if I ever were to have kids, I am 100% certain I would want them to be heavily exposed to ideas that contradicted my own. I mean, parents have so much potential influence over their kids, why not let them be exposed to alternative ideas or ways of thinking?
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
If they’ve been instilled with the widely accepted definitions of what is morally right and wrong, nothing I guess.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
I think most local school districts already have facilities for special needs children and am certain their budget offices calculate per pupil costs. As for what body governs tiered voucher amounts, it is a role I’d like to see heavy teacher involvement, for who would know better than those making a living off voucher receipts? Perhaps a quasi governmental board with local union representations? I’d love to see unions (of all stripes) move away from political group representation and instead focus on teacher mentoring, professionalism, testing standards and inter-school social networking. I know there are some fine local teacher unions that already do many of those things, I just think it is a shame so much of their budget goes to fighting left vs right political battles, when it would be better spent supporting the art of instruction. All 3 of my kids attended private schools here in Gainesville at one time or another and all 3 schools had annual tuitions under this county’s annual per pupil expenditure. The one farthest from that average was a private christian school, subsidized by the church that built and maintained the facilities. The other two schools had no such subsidy (for they were secular) and have their own campuses to maintain.We could all just get along and have NO fights over curricula when all parents get the very powerful vote of voucher dollars and could freely wield that power in a school of their choice. What a wonderful world it could be!
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
DAMN IT. DAMN IT. That last post had PARA-EFFING-GRAPHS!!!! Gaaaa! WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THIS SCRIPT???
Pant.
Pant.
Pant.
Sweet mother of AlGore, patron saint of the Interwebs, I beseech thee, smote thy wicked servant BigBro, punish him his transgressions against thy command for the error free production scripts, cast watery pressure unto the depths of his bowels, bring forth discomforting urges to flatulate, resisted only by knowledge of the moisture it would release. Inflict him! I beseech thee! Until he sets this code to rights, I pray. Amen.
Big Brother Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Hahaha, I love it when you’re funny on purpose, Todd. You really do write well. And I am suddenly feeling a bit gassy…
Xena Reply:
August 20th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Actually, no. The tuitions for at least TWO of those private schools are considerably MORE than the cost per pupil in the local public school. At one, we are paying $1250.00 annually more than the per pupil allocation for public school students. At the other, we paid nearly $2k more. And that was for pre-K and Kindergarten. The higher grades, of course, are more expensive in both schools.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 20th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
The 2007 US Census Annual Survey of Local Government Finances (page 111[actual]) reports our county spent $7,605 per pupil. I know for a fact that is over $1500.00 more than the annual High School tuition at Trilogy. I also know the annual Pre-K/Kindergarten tuition was not more than $7,605 by any stretch. You are apparently confusing the amount available in a McKay tuition voucher with the actual cost per pupil. I don’t know where the revenue for McKay originates. Administrative overhead is generally a big money drain in government school systems, especially in large ubran ones.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Do you mean your brief mention of socialist anarchy way back when? As you have said before, anyone can put a bunch of links out there, I’m just curious to hear your own words on why ‘the market’ fails to achieve optimum results.
Let us stipulate you are right and markets don’t achieve the optimum - can you point me to something that does? I think it would help me understand what you consider optimum, which I hope we can agree can be wholly subjective, in certain contexts.
Big Brother Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Yeah, I’ll get to this. It will take a lot of time if I can’t post links or cut and pace. We’re talking about an entirely different economy, from top to bottom. And this isn’t the section for that. But by "optimum" what I mean is not contributing to massive starvation, global climate change, disease, unemployment, wars, etc, etc. Beyond that, I’m sure it’s very subjective. But can we at least agree on some broad aims that an optimum good economy would achieve?
Again, I don’t want to get into it here, but I’m thinking a lack of famine and wars would be a good start. I think there can be little doubt that capitalism has caused both of those on countless occasions throughout history. Then again, I’m sure you’ll find doubt…
Todd in FL Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Depends on what you mean by ‘capitalism’. I don’t think any ‘ism’ can literally cause wars, etc. Did communism cause the starvation and famine in the Ukraine, famously lied about by Pulitzer prize winner Walter Duranty? Or was it instead Stalin who did this?
Todd in FL Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Also, I don’t mean that you shouldn’t post links, I’m just curious of the foundations of this view, in your own words, not via link. I’ve no problem with links used as references.
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
I agree the system is broken, but it seems to me Uncle Jim’s solution is to impose his idea of what makes for a good education on ‘us’.
Todd… my friend. Please explain how you are not attempting to do just that with your vision here, and what line you’ve drawn between uncle Jim, and "us." Educators vs. the public? I’m unclear on what you mean by that.
(this cut and paste method of yours Brian is fun!!)
E.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
BC Weez,
My vision doesn’t impose any particular teaching method. It allows parents to be education consumers, with the power of a voucher they can use to ‘fire’ a school system they don’t like.
I’m not trying to divide Jim from ‘us’ or educators from ‘us’. I’m trying to say that ‘we’ consist of a wide diversity of opinion and knowledge and belief and while I think those teaching ideas Jim discussed are the best way for some kids, I’m not so sure they are the best for all kids. Presumably, the people who know each individual child the best are that child’s parents. If that isn’t generally true, we have a much bigger problem on our hands.
To sum, parents who share Jim’s vision or are impressed with the results his methods produce, can freely support it with their vouchers. Those who don’t, don’t have to support it.
Did that answer your question?
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
I think that if you are more careful with your words some of these threads may end up being much shorter.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I dunno, perhaps if others were so damn quick to be offended, the same would be true?
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 19th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
(sigh).
Big Brother Reply:
August 13th, 2008 at 1:09 am
Even if in 80% of households, parents put in the effort to make the best educational decisions for their kids — which I think without other fundamental social changes is a long shot — doesn’t your system fail to serve too many kids? The "much bigger problem" we may well have on our hands is that parents are indeed not, in many cases, the best people in whom to entrust such decisions. You haven’t responded to any of my challenges on these matters, unless I’m missing a post.
As for "Jim’s system," I don’t think you were paying any attention during the show. He could not have been clearer that there needs to be a huge array of teaching styles, curriculum, methods, etc. He said it over and over. He’s talking about everything from classrooms that somewhat resemble today’s, to more radical "open classrooms" and such.
The question I pose is, do we really want our tax dollars, via parents’ voucher choices, supporting pedagogical methods that discourage free/critical thought, disempower young people, reinforce horrible stereotypes, impose backwards moral codes, etc? I’m actually surprised you think public funds should be devoted to backwards projects that fuck kids over and fuck society over, just so parents can have their kids molded in their image. Yuck.
Todd, it seems that no matter the subject or the guest you have to disagree with what is said. You have contradictory ideas about every topic. Everyone agrees that you are intelligent, yet I fail to see how you have become an expert on all subjects. Pete and his producers select guests knowledgeable and even expert in their fields, but I guess you know more than they do.
To my knowledge you have never been a teacher nor do you have a degree in education. You have no expertise in education other than the education you received and the education your children receive. How is it that you know so much about it? I was a teacher for 28 years at different grade levels; Jim taught in high school and college and has studied educational theories and practices for years. We have lived it, Todd, and we are passionate about the lives and education of our children. We are not people who got involved because of the "tremendously high salaries."
We are people who care about kids, and about the future of our society (just as much as you do), and we have personally seen and experienced what works and what is not working . Isn’t it possible that we actually know something about the changes we think would be effective in producing better ways for kids to learn?
Just because someone has ideas that differ from yours doesn’t automatically make them wrong. Do you argue topics just for the sake of arguing? You call the show nearly every day, you write comments on the blog regarding nearly every topic, and rarely do you agree with anything anyone else says.
It seems to me the only ones who are imposing their ideas for educational reform on us are those government officials who tell us what we need to teach, in what time frame it should be done, and how all students should get high scores on tests that some of them can’t even read because of their learning disabilities. Don’t you think we have had that imposed upon us, or better yet, crammed down our throats forever? What is wrong with those of us who are educators coming up with some theories that are different and, hopefully, better?
You immediately attack whatever others say. It has become very tiresome. Sometimes I find it hard to read your comments through to the end. Even if Brian and Pete were not my sons and Jim not my brother, I would be frustrated with your constant barrage of criticisms.
I would not argue with you about your field of expertise because I am not as knowledgeable as you are in that area. I wouldn’t presume to know the solutions in your field. Give educators some credit for being the experts in that field.
Big Brother Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Wow, I can’t believe I’m about to say this, but I have to come down on the side of Todd in this sub-argument, Mom. As much as I disagree with the content of Todd’s ideas on this and nearly all other subjects, and I too believe he is a contrarion partisan who loves to pick fights… I also think Todd has a valid stake in this matter and it’s his prerogative to criticize and offer ideas.
I mean, one could set forth the same criticisms of me for not having a degree in education or whatever, if one was not my mother or if one disagreed strongly with my views. Hell, I don’t have a degree in anything. But I wouldn’t take kindly to that, and Todd should not, either. His ideas deserve to be argued on their merits (or severe lack thereof). Invalidating our opponents because they lack certain degrees gets us nowhere.
I imagine that Todd has read a good deal about education. I personally have at least a dozen books on education on my shelves, and I have read countless articles on the subject. I’ve also taken and even taught numerous workshops on education and related matters. Most importantly, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking and discussing education-related issues. And yet, lo and behold, no degree. Todd might have similar experiences and knowledge bases. And to me it sounds like he’s thinking more clearly, and with better intentions, than a lot of so-called experts in the field, . Surely the ideas he has presented here are not as bad as many put forth by people with PhD after their nams, including the ones who set up and defend the current status quo…
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
I really don’t know what to say to this. I don’t disagree with every topic, but why call in on a subject where my opinion is already represented? Last week, when I called to offer my continued support for the invasion, occupation and reconstruction of Iraq, Pete went ballistic. He told me I was the only caller who had the opinions I have, which is another way of saying I have independent opinions, isn’t it?
Also, where have I represented my opinions as expert? It is true I know a great deal, but that is from a lifetime of learning, which involves constant reassessment given new facts or arguments. So when I call it is to offer what I know (or what I think I know) , especially when I hear something I believe to be false.
What does my lack of credentials have to do with anything I’ve said? Have I questioned Jim’s knowledge or credibility in any way? I just don’t get your hostility over my informed opinion about education. It is as if you are saying ‘Who the hell are you to have an opinion? Shut up and don’t question us, we’re experienced and creditialled."
In fact, I’ve only offered what I think is the best compromise to fix our various, broken education systems. I haven’t questioned your passion, committment or financial motives, so why act as if I have?
Mary, I have never once called the show without saying WHY I think someone else’s opinion is wrong. I can support my opinions with facts an reasoning and am more than willing to back it up with references. I don’t hold a single opinion to be contrary.
It would be nice if you could address the content of my arguments instead of complaining that I have wide ranging informed opinions.
That is exactly my point Mary!! But the fact is, educators do not have uniform theories. I say you should DEMAND the freedom of vouchers and implement your theories as soon as possible. But don’t deny the other teacher with another way the opportunity to demonstrate their program’s merit!
Well, I’m sorry you think I "immediately attack whatever others say". I know for a fact that isn’t true. I will challenge any opinion I think is false (such as yours, about me), with the evidence and reasoning which informs my opinion. That isn’t an attack. It is reasoned dissent. At least, that is what it was it feels like from behind these blue eyes.
wow. My mother just completely owned Todd. I am very impressed with my mom and very proud of her. She was a great teacher and loved what she did. She took many of her students under her wing and in to our home. I am very lucky to have a woman who is such a great teacher as my mother
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
ouch.
I am surprised she hasn’t been on the show yet….
I’m afraid Pete wouldn’t be able to squeeze me in between you everyday callers. Besides, I have been on the show by phone several times usually when Pete calls me. I don’t need the attention those of you who call every day seem to need. Do you or do you not agree with me Todd and Weasel?
I mean John and Weasel.
I agree with you Mary but fear what could be your obvious bias. I also just read Brian’s post and feel that it is more valid than yours. He doesn’t have a degree either. Could you be just venting out your frustration with Todd’s "history?"
Of course I’m tired of Todd’s rants and his contrary opinions. He loves attention and loves to argue. I did admit that I believe he is intelligent so I’m not saying he doesn’t know anything about education. I just said I don’t believe he is an expert in all subjects as he portrays himself. He may read every book on education and do tons of research, but that does not make him an expert any more than it does anyone else. Ahem… You really need to experience being a part of the system in addition to research. I don’t believe I am an expert, but I sure do have the experience. Like Jim said, there are many in the field of education who cannot facilitate the learning as they are expected to do and as students would appreciate, but there are many more who can and do. I believe I could do a ton of research about, let’s say, people who live in the ghetto or who are raised in abusive situations, but until I actually live what they live, I am not an expert in how they feel. I once had a black student tell me, "Mrs. Dominick, you don’t understand because you don’t live where I live." I wasn’t sure if he meant in public housing in a predominantly black area of the city or if he meant I didn’t have black skin. I therefore, asked one of our black adults to talk with him and help him out. He was right, I didn’t understand how he felt. BTW, I truly admire Todd for advocating for the appropriate education for his children. I knew too many parents who did not.
The statement Todd made regarding Jim trying to impose upon others his views of what should be done and undone in education is with what I take greatest exception. Jim, too, has read and read and read and observed and observed, and experienced teaching in these institutions of learning, so it is my belief that he has more of a handle on what works and doesn’t work just as I believe I do. Never did I state that all those with a Ph.D know more than those without. While I was in education we teachers had what I believe were valid complaints about people who have never been or who had not for many years been in a classroom who were the ones making the rules and imposing their views upon us. How could they possibly know what is going on and what is best for individual students when they have not set foot in the classrooms? I am talking about school district officials and government officials who were not dealing with these students on a personal basis .
How can the commisioner of education force students who cannot read or write because of physical or learning disabilities, kids who are mentally retarded or those who cannot speak or read the language because they are from another country to take those ridiculous standardized tests? We educators were forced to teach to the tests so our schools could get high scores and not be identified as low performing schools. The finest teachers I knew frequently voiced their opinions that the tests were invalid, inequitable, and a waste of time and money. We are failing our students daily. NCLB is a farce. We leave many, many students behind.
As I said in a previous post, B.C., even if I was not related to Jim or Pete I would make the same remarks to Todd. I have yet to be convinced that he makes his statements solely out of the desire to open up other schools of thought. Yes, I am tired of hearing and reading only contradictory comments from him, and it is a rare occasion when he agrees with anything others say. He lives to contradict. As you are aware, other callers to the show and people who write on this blog often say similar things to Todd. If you think I am being too harsh, so be it.
Brian, I realize you do not have a degree, yet I also know that you disagree with much of what Todd says much of the time to which your prior comments attest. You do have research to back up what you say just as Todd states that he has. I am not quoting any resources or passing on any websites. I am summarizing what I have learned over the years through courses, research and experience. I simply do not understand how Todd can disagree with every expert about every subject that is brought up any more than I think you or I can or should. Oddly enough, other people than ourselves actually do know things that we don’t. Also, you do not contradict EVERYTHING you hear or see on PBM. If you think my statements are biased or baseless, that is your belief and you are free to feel that way.
BTW. you are out of the will. Funny how you and Pete take turns with that. One day you’re in, the next day you are out. Oh well, we’re not leaving anything worthwhile anyway.
John from Cleveland Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Mama, I’ll take you to lunch next time I am in ‘Cuse… I’d expect more than the few hundred I’d get, but that’s all I can expect to cash in on after Pete’s butt-buddy Obama gets elected and raises the death tax.
(SATIRE)
Big Brother Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
First, Ma, I didn’t say your statements are biased or baseless. I just disagreed. What’s with all the overstatement going on around here? I did think your overall thrust was to suggest that non-teachers (or at least Todd) shouldn’t have an opinion on these matters. Sorry if I misunderstood or mischaracterized.
Second, I think you spend more money putting me and Pete in and out of the will than you will likely leave behind in any case. And it’s all moot because you aren’t going to die "ever, ever, ever." You promised when I was 5 and I’m holding you to it!
B.C. Weasel Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
The statement Todd made regarding Jim trying to impose upon others his views of what should be done and undone in education is with what I take greatest exception.
Mary, pls. see my reply (#2), to Todd’s post (#1). (maybe there should be some vertical lines to keep better track once these pages get so flippin’ long. oy)
Yes, I am tired of hearing and reading only contradictory comments from him, and it is a rare occasion when he agrees with anything others say. If you think I am being too harsh, so be it.
thank you for being forthcoming with your feelings on Todd’s contradictory nature, I don’t necessarily think that you were being too harsh, but was just curious about their origins. I don’t totally disagree with you either.
thank you Mrs. Dominick.
Have a great day!
Eric.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Have I? In what way?
You cannot support this with any facts or quotes. I think your insistence my comments are simply to contradict is a cheap shot and frankly, a dodge to avoid addressing the content of my dissent. As I said in a prior post, why call an offer an opinion which is already represented?
Really? I do hope you’ll read my other comments. You are way off base here, Mary.
My $0.02 on this subject.
1. Parents are not doing enough for their kids… they aren’t reading to them, checking their homework, and demanding more out of them.
2. We over-emphasize standardized tests. From the SAT to other state-required ones.
3. There are so many subjects that we require students to take that are not as useful as others that are not taught. I’d drop foreign language for business.
4. We under-emphasize the two most important subjects. Math and English should be taught twice as long. And when I say English class, I am talking more about writing and grammar and NOT 17th century classical literature.
I do understand that we need to cultivate the minds of our youth here. Please don’t flame. Seeing Art and Music classes getting cut all over the place hurts me. I loved photography and almost majored in Art in college (then I realized I’d end up painting pictures that hang on the wall at the Holiday Inn).
Mary, I find your statement "I don’t need the attention those of you who call every day seem to need" to be a tad cruel. Sure, many of us call daily… I’d also like to believe that it is our collective contribution that has helped transform your son’s show into what it is. He has done excellent, but would stand alone (and without all of the sponsors that have shown up recently) if he didn’t have the callers. I have said to him and Alexandra that if he wants me to call less just to say so.
Big Brother Reply:
August 10th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
My $.05 on John’s paltry $.02 contribution…
True enough. The economy has a large role in this. If parents didn’t have to work 2 or 3 jobs to keep their kids fed and clothed, this would be less of an issue. In any case, complaining that parents don’t do enough gets us nowhere. There’s no public-policy opportunity there. The only thing we can do things about, collectively, is dealing with public education policy.
Actually, by revolutionizing education (reform is for sissies), we can maybe inspire a new generation of people who love learning and will want to spread that love to their kids. It’s got to be really hard for a parent who hated school (justifiably), or who got fucked over by the school system, to encourage their kids to participate wholeheartedly in a system they know is a sham. A new system might inspire a bit more faith — by finally deserving it.
Fat lot of good business classes will do kids whose highest (realistic) aspiration is to be foreman at a farm, where Spanish instruction would have served them better. I note this not to suggest we should teach class-appropriate subjects (meaning economic class), but that our fucked-up class system renders standardization of curriculum ridiculous. Since capitalism thrives on hierarchy, and capitalist hierarchy ensures that 90% of the workforce has little hope of becoming bosses, your business classes will mis-serve the vast majority of students. Unless you want to teach lessons in withstanding the degradation and depravity of the workforce… a task school systems are already perfectly suited for (seemingly their only role at this point: teaching subservience and survival of boredom).
Why not teach economics classes that don’t accept market capitalism as the only valid form of economy, and have pupils develop ideas for alternatives that won’t pit them against each other, worker vs. worker, class vs. class? Business classes are just status-quo instructionals: how to survive, cope with or get ahead in a shitty system.
It’s really weird to see such generalized prescriptions. Standardized testing is wrong (we both agree), but somehow standardized curriculum is key? Man, I write computer code for a living and I have almost no use for even high-school level math. I wonder how many people do… I suffered through so much of that bullshit for no reason at all. And you want to double it? I would have preferred twice as much English (and less of lots), but lots of kids in my English classes didn’t feel that way, and I can’t blame them.
So we have you to blame for all those shitty, obnoxious, intellectually offensive interruptions every 20 minutes? Like the blogcast wasn’t bad enough!
In all seriousness, your calls are great, John. No one has more of a need for attention than my little brother, as he’d be the first to admit. I don’t think that was the criticism Mama Mary was making. The thing about Todd in particular is that he seems to need a very special kind of attention as some kind of iconoclast among iconoclasts — like he can’t stand that his status-quo apologetics aren’t being expressed on such an independent-minded show… which is kind of annoying. Also, Mama likes to poke fun now and again, and if you take offense at even her jabs, your skin is still thinner than I thought.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 12th, 2008 at 9:59 am
This is bullshit, really. I don’t condone corporatist influence in our government, because I hold laissez faire economic principles, but I do recognize the difference between my ideals and reality. Those with wealth and capital are not going to give it up without concessions and will simply abandon a system where the cost of doing business is too high.
I think you are principally wrong about economics and while very good at bitching about the disparities of capitalism, you offer little in the way of viable alternatives which respect freedom. It seems you are more than willing to give up economic liberty for some kind of social equity (security), all the while bemoaning those would would yield on some civil liberties in the name of national security.
Big Brother Reply:
August 13th, 2008 at 12:56 am
Todd, you’re going to wind up with egg on your face precisely to the extent you make claims about me, since you clearly know nothing about me despite your apparent assuredness that you have me all figured out.
An article of mine appears in a book that came out last month that is about 300 pages of alternatives to capitalism. I’ve been writing on th subject for 15 years. You really don’t know what tree you’re barking up, but if you think I’m someone who complains without offering alternatives, you’re just demonstrably wrong. I started teaching workshops on alternative economics all over the country in 1996.
Your definition of "economic liberty," from what I can gather, is profane. It is the "freedom" to take more than one needs, and the freedom to leave others hungry and wanting — including the children of others your cherished market crushes. It is barbaric, and the worst part is, you know it is barbaric and you stand by it. You are a thoughtful, deliberative person, and that means when you defend markets, you are defending all their attendant horrors. What you call "liberty" the vast majority of the world’s population calls thievery.
Would I sacrifice someone’s freedom to have in excess in order to make sure that no child goes hungry? You bet I would. I’d take the extra food right off your plate and give it to that child.
Somehow you find that inconsistent with my belief in civil liberties? On what planet is the freedom to have in excess equivalent to the rights to basic human dignity, speech, equality under the law, and so forth? Since Day One on this blog you have insisted that the "pursuit of property" is an inalienable right. But it is actually just a privilege that trumps the more-basic rights of others. If I can own all the newspapers, you do not have free speech. If I can buy justice, you can have none.
Stop pretending your belief in what you call "economic liberty" is akin to the belief we both share in basic civil liberties. They’re not analogous. You sound like George Bush, just attaching the word "liberty" to things you think everyone should believe are good.
Todd Reply:
August 13th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Brian,
Please forgive me if I gave the impression I have you all figured out. I had hoped using the word ’seems’ in my post would be read as a tentative qualifier. For one, you haven’t really expounded on the economic theories you hold to be correct. I only generally know you as an anti-capitalist, which indicates economic theory out of line with what I know about economics.
And don’t be so assured yourself that I’m barking up the wrong tree about economics. My education on the subject began over 20 years ago, as I began to pay attention to the news and didn’t know what GDP or inflation actually were, I knew peripherally that inflation was bad, because the double digit pain of the late 70s was only 6 or 7 years before then and so I gathered.
I do hope we can have a civil discussion regarding our differing economic theories, however I’m concerned we may ‘talk past’ each other because we have different moral assumptions.
When you use morally loaded words such as ‘barbaric’, ‘profane’, ‘attendant horrors’ and ‘thievery’, then judge me for knowing these things and still supporting the system, you sort of resemble an archtypical, finger pointing fundie yelling "Sinner!"
You also do exactly as you accuse me of doing - ie, "you clearly know nothing about me despite your apparent assuredness that you have me all figured out"
It is difficult, I hope you agree, to have any kind of civil discussion if one party frames their arguments with such forceful moral certainty that dissent from their view can be nothing less than profane or heretical.
I’d very much enjoy and probably learn from an exchange with someone who dissents strongly with my views, though if you persist in your judgmental assertions, it will become tiresome and I will be forced, at some point, to offer you one of my hairy danglers for a tongue bath!
Because this blog’s comments aren’t really suited for a lengthy back and forth, editing, preview or anything else, if you’re game I’d like to offer my dangerous liberty forum as a place we can continue discussions. If you have a webcam, we can even have back and forth using Youtube, and post them inline in the forum (I’ve put in youtube add in with [ubb] tags).
I don’t want to be accused of trying to promote my own forum, which is dead and was created because other local forums were heavily moderated and certain posters used the decorum rules to harrass those who challenged their foolishness. I just find this format unwieldy for the type of discussion we would likely have, because it traps posts with multiple links, strips image tags, etc.
My own moderation standard is to only ban dumbasses, no matter what their views, once there was general agreement among regular participants that the person in question was, in fact, certifiably retarded or dishonest.
So what do you say?
Big Brother Reply:
August 13th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
I’m going to have to graciously turn you down on this, Todd. I would be much more interested in debating someone whose "moral assumptions" are more in line with mine. It makes little sense to argue details between two people headed in opposite directions. From what I can tell of your economic views — and I’ve said over and over I’m not certain, but guessing based on what you’ve said — we don’t want the same things for society, so I don’t see the value in a debate.
On other matters, such as education, I feel differently. I think perhaps we have similar broad goals on that subject. But I’m constantly in debates with liberal and progressive people talking about economics, and I find that both more challenging and more productive.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 14th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Brian,
I have to say I’m quite surprised at your answer! It seems obvious there is little sense in arguing details with people headed in the same direction! Is it true true to say there really is no argument for people who agree? Please tell me how it "makes sense to argue details between two people headed in [the same] direction"?
If I expand the analogy to say, 80 individuals in a single bus (society), only one or two a piece want to go East (collectivist), West (individualist), South (theist) and North (secularist). However once headed in the same general direction, their will be those with Northern & Eastern preference will not be wanting to go due East or North. They’ll want to go NE. Some NNE. or ENE.
But since there is only one bus, those who want to head in the opposite direction take issue with those who want to head East! And so you say it makes no sense to argue the details (benefits) of taking our whole bus one way or the other?
Really?
I mean, if "we don’t want the same things for society", and society is the only bus, how can you say there is no value in debate? John Stuart Mill, wrote the following in On Liberty (emphasis is mine):
I’m not saying you are trying to silence my opinion in the context of Mill’s essay, but instead illuminate the value in debate between people who don’t want the same things for society! If I am wrong, if my arguments are faulty, if my reasoning unsound, what better way to find out than to debate dissenting views? Who would be more likely to point out errors in my own views - those who have opposing views or those who generally agree with me?
I guess what I was asking for in my post (#3) above was that you’d ratchet down your moralizing and offer more in the way reasoned logic, supported by evidence or sourced in some way.
If you still don’t see the value in debate with someone who disagrees with your understanding of economics that is fine, just don’t ever again say that I’ve refused to investigate your views on economics!
Steve from Jasper Reply:
August 14th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Todd, I know you’re smart and can out debate me on this blog I’m sure.
But, do you know you come across as a pompous ass?
You’re probably a great, genuine guy but I think Pete and Brian have out done you in the eyes of the majority.
Go ahead and tear me apart now, I really don’t care.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 14th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Steve,
I’ve no desire to tear you apart! I’m curious though - what have I said which comes across as ‘pompous’? Having been married the 2nd time for 8 years now, I’m reminded daily I’m an ass!
Steve from Jasper Reply:
August 14th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Todd,
Thanks for taking it easy on me. You can, and probably will, destroy me when it comes to knowledge of the issues and facts.
It’s just that you spout a voluminous amount of verbiage and expect everybody to be baffled by your bull shit!
I’m a common sense kind of person.
I like it short and sweet.
Now you can unload on me!
Todd in FL Reply:
August 14th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Steve,
Well, I guess I’d have to disagree what I spout is bullshit and only say in my defense that some issues do take many words to hash through. Should I be sorry I know a lot and have strong, independent opinions? I don’t think so, do you?
I do recognize most listeners/readers don’t want a bunch of detail (plus the layout/comments don’t lend themselves to a lengthy back and forth), which is why I won’t belabor the issue.
It does seem that the majority of criticisms aimed at me haven’t been at the content of my words, but the quantity or frequency or that I dare to have an opinion which contradicts the majority!
Big Brother Reply:
August 16th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Todd, you sure are verbose. My god, man. You’ve got to get a grip.
I would rather debate economics with people who have DIFFERENT ideas than me but want a genuinely better society. I want to argue about the best systems to achieve the things I value. You and I have very different values, from what I can tell. I think you have the "private interest" values of a very small, elitist minority (private property before people/public goods, etc). I, on the other hand, have "public interest" values (which may also be minority values, I don’t know). My main values are self-management, equity, solidarity and diversity. I could go on and on and explain what I mean by each of those, but I am very sure that in the end we’ll wind up not even sharing the same values. So I don’t want to debate how to get from here to there with someone who doesn’t want to get to the same place. Sorry, it’s no fun, it’s pointless (if not counter-productive), and it will surely just turn into mud slinging.
So can we have enough of this now? (Somehow I bet we can’t…)
Steve from Jasper Reply:
August 16th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Brian, Todd believes what he says. The problem is…….he says too much! I find myself skimming through his posts.
I’m middle of the road. I hate the Democratic party just as much as I hate the Republican party!
I don’t believe that I invalidated Todd’s comments. I believe I said he should not invalidate Jim’s or mine and that is what I feel he tried to do. I reread my comment that you take issue with and I simply said that Todd should give educators more credit, that we do, indeed, know of what we speak and have valid reasons for feeling as we do. We are not imposing our views on anyone but instead, we are sharing them just as those who speak about alternative sources of energy or politics or religion share theirs. What we think isn’t going to change anything anyway unless we change the way government operates. Right?
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 6:54 am
Mary,
I wish I had the time this past weekend to read your posts and reply, but alas, my Saturday was spent installing a bifold door for a teacher’s supply alcove at my middle son’s school for annual beautification day. The opening was 47 inches, too small for two 24 inch doors, which meant building a little wall - but the ceiling is a suspended one, which meant I had to extend a header board to the opposite wall as well. I went to Home Depot (sorry ChizD, Lowe’s was 30 minutes away and HD right around the corner) and get some lumber and they had a clearence sale with a mish-mash of items laid out on the main aisle.
I walked past 3 over the range microwaves, we’d been looking for a deal on a stainless steel (my wife got a 6 month old stainless GE dishwasher -retails ~ $1000 for $300.00 and a 4 year old Jen-Air stainess gas range with double electric ovens - a casserole oven on top and convection oven on bottom - retails ~ $2200 for $300) - and wouldn’t you know it, but a brand new LG microwave retailed for $479, discounted to $317 - and I signed up for their credit card for an additional 10% off!
So I finished the door at my son’s school and went home and began the install for the microwave (I installed the dishwasher, not the range, which needs a natural gas line to the kitchen, fortunately, the line to the water heater is on the opposite wall in the garage, so I’ll be able to tie in and go straight through) - but the cabinet above the range was too tall for the micro to be installed according to manufacturer’s specs, so I had to take it down, take it apart and trim almost an inch, which I did yesterday morning, cut a new bottom piece because the old range vent left a too-big hole, and put it pack together with the proper hole cut in the bottom.
Then the old back spash, which was basically bathroom tiles attached to the wall, had to be chipped/hammered out (thank god for my air compressor and air chisel), but they took the dry wall with them and revealed I only had a single wall stud spanning the width of the opening, which was fine, but meant that the replacement drywall wouldn’t be sturdy, so I ended up cutting plywood to fit the hole, then mounting the wall bracket. The old range hood was wired directly to the power and the new micro had a plug, so I had to install a wall box inside the top cabinet and wire the power to that, before finally installing the microwave.
I thought it would only take me 4 hours or so. I took more like 10! But it looks GOOD. And the microwave has a popcorn setting that detects moisture and automatically stops cooking when the bag is fully popped. Tried it out last night, couldn’t believe it! Our old microwave is older than my 16 year old - and it was a 5+ year hand me down from my first wife’s parents - and it burnt every bag of popcorn ever attempted.
I’ve got the Jen-Air in place now, but still have to tap into my existing gas line and get a new outlet for the oven - the old one has openings for 3 prongs, this new oven has 4 prongs.
I say all of this not because I think I need an excuse, but to once again establish how much more of man I am than your laddie, Pete! I have power tools that would probably make him pee himself a little, if he saw them up close!
As for your extensive comments, I hope to have time to respond to you later today or this evening. Until then, I’d like to know which of my comments you felt were invalidating yours or your brother’s comments?
Is it when I say ‘imposing your views’ - I’m not trying to be controversial or insulting, I’m just making the point that whatever system we have is imposed upon those who do not have the resources to pay property taxes AND private school tuition. That says nothing about the quality of the teachers in the system or even the merits of Jim’s ideal system (which, if I understood him correctly, far outweigh those ideas of his with which I take issue! - Indeed, my 8th grader goes to a school very much in line with Jim’s comments last week)
I’m advocating more freedom in education and trying to point out that good pedagogy will have good results, which will speak for themselves.
Does that clear that part up, anyway?
Now I have to run and get my 8 year old up, who needs a shower and food, so I can drop her at momma’s work and go on to my day job.
I cannot believe Brian took my side in a dispute with his own mother! I’m SHOCKED.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Hmm. I thought we could use ANCHOR tags, Brian! ? ! Can you fix? Please?
Big Brother Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 11:00 am
I just take whatever side logic and fairness dictates, even if it goes against my own preferences, alliances or interests. My mommy raised me to be that way.
If you write your damn HTML properly in the first place, or use the handy dandy link inserter in the editor bar, you wouldn’t have these problems. I fixed it for you this time as an extension of my goodwill.
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Oh hell. That explains it. Thanks for fixing. I wasn’t quite awake, I think. What is it going to take to get you to put in a preview button?
Big Brother Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 11:35 am
This plugin I’m using is really fussy with this theme. They don’t get along at all. I had a preview button for a while but it was messy. What’s it gonna take to get you to stop being "impulsive" with the submit button?
Todd in FL Reply:
August 11th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
If you would, substitute ‘penchant‘ above for ‘impulse’. Poor choice of words on my part.
You, of all people - you, my verbosity doppelganger - you, who presumes to call himself a webmaster - should not only know the great utility a working preview function offers, but also bear great shame for such a half-assed debug of the comment script! It is only PHP and only used by a gazillion other neo-hackers, some probably experiencing the same issues, some certainly with solutions for those able to artfully keyword the Googles over the interwebs and go deeper than the second page of results.
But you know all that. Which is why your ‘fussy messy plugin theme feud’ is hereby rejected with predjudice.
You call yourself a webmaster? Pffft. :roll:
Webgrasshopper, I say.
Big Brother Reply:
August 13th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
Man you love to taunt. But I’m not biting, I’m afraid. I spend all fucking day hacking PHP and WordPress. I don’t enjoy doing it for money. So I sure as hell am not going to do it in my free time — especially since I designed neither this site nor the theme — unless someone other than Todd from Florida asks nicely
My dog woke me up to eat and go outside. I didn’t know that there are hours this early in the morning.
Oh, and can we stop the freaking hate-fest already?
Todd in FL Reply:
August 15th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Is it just me or did BBB adjust the local time setting so our posting times are EST? For some reason I had thought the times were off a few hours or so…
John,
Are you including me in the hatin’? Other than my wholly justified prayer to the web gods to smite BBB, I had thought I was being civil!
The 2007 US Census Annual Survey of Local Government Finances (page 111[actual]) reports our county spent $7,605 per pupil. I know for a fact that is over $1500.00 more than the annual High School tuition at Trilogy. I also know the annual Pre-K/Kindergarten tuition was not more than $7,605 by any stretch.
You are apparently confusing the amount available in a McKay tuition voucher with the actual cost per pupil. I don’t know where the revenue for McKay originates.
Administrative overhead is generally a big money drain in government school systems, especially in large ubran ones.