🚀 go-pugleaf

never@million wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 06:25:57 GMT, Rudy Canoza <rudy-canoza@excite.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Desmond and Molly Jones wrote:
>>> In article <1184786861.900793.235660@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,  
>>> Pubkeybreaker at pubkeybreaker@aol.com says...
>>>> Desmond and Molly Jones wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The result is, Edwards continued, if you live in a wealthy suburban
>>>>> area, the odds are very high that your child will get a very good
>>>>> public school education. If you live in the inner city or if you live
>>>>> in a poor rural area, the odds of that go down dramatically.
>>>> The question that should be asked is:  What is causing this problem?
>>>>
>>>> If the problem is that not enough money is being spent on inner city
>>>> schools, then this is a problem that is correctable.
>>>>
>>>> I believe, however, that this is not the root cause of the problem.
>>>> The "wealthy" suburbs are wealthy because the people living in them
>>>> are highly skilled, well educated and have high paying jobs because
>>>> they are well educated.  These people MOTIVATE their children that
>>>> education is important and push them to succeed.
>>>>
>>>> The people living in the inner city, on the other hand, are poor
>>>> PRECISELY
>>>> BECAUSE they lack education. They lack education because they did not
>>>> care about learning when they had the opportunity. They do not VALUE
>>>> education.
>>>> And they pass on this attitude to their children.   It is a self-
>>>> perpetuating problem
>>>> within inner city families.  Most of whom are single parent families
>>>> anyway because
>>>> good 'ol dad  had no sense of responsibility.  The 5 F's  apply.
>>>>
>>>> No amount of money spent on schools will educate children who just
>>>> don't give a
>>>> sh*t.   This is a cultural problem.  Bill Cosby's remarks are dead
>>>> center.
>>> You contradict yourself.
>> No, he doesn't.
>>
>>
>>> First you say that inner city kids "are poor
>>> PRECISELY BECAUSE they lack education."
>> Technically, it's because their parents lack 
>> education...and good work habits...and salable job skills.
>>
>>
>>> Then you say "No amount of 
>>> money spent on schools will educate children who just don't give a
>>> sh*t."
>> He's correct.  Another thing the poor parents of poor 
>> children is a good attitude about the value of 
>> education.  They don't value it, and they don't 
>> encourage their children to value it.  They don't send 
>> their children to school ready to learn.  They are 
>> uncooperative with, even belligerent toward, the 
>> teachers and school administrators.  They don't tell 
>> their children to keep their fucking mouths shut and 
>> their goddamned hands to themselves.  Their children 
>> shout out, fight, throw stuff, do everything they can 
>> to disrupt the school environment.  It's the parents' 
>> fault, but the teachers can hardly be expected to keep 
>> that in mind when some miscreant is attacking them or 
>> other students in class.
>>
>> The students don't give a shit because their parents 
>> don't give a shit.  Money spent trying to instruct 
>> these animals is an unmitigated waste.
>>
>>
>>> Education and teachers are there so that kids *DO* give a shit.
>> NO.  It is not the teachers' job to motivate students. 
>>  Students need to arrive in class *already* motivated. 
>>  It is the teachers' job to educate students ready to 
>> learn, but there are very few such students in inner 
>> city schools.
>>
>>
>>> Money 
>>> buys buildings, blackboards, computers, curriculum, libraries, ball 
>>> fields, paint, tools and materials.
>> All that stuff is already there, but it is pearls 
>> before swine as far as inner city "students" (huh) are 
>> concerned.
>>
>>
>>> Put two and two together and you can see *why* kids in poor schools 
>>> don't give a shit. They are treated like shit.
>> They don't give a shit because their parents are shit 
>> who have already instilled shit values in the kids for 
>> five years before shoving them off to be warehoused for 
>> another 12 years.
> 
> If any person is concerned about the veracity, though somewhat harshly
> stated, of Canoza's comments, need only to observe the students
> exiting inner city schools at the end of the day. It appears more like
> a mass prison break in slow motion. Students meandering along in a
> mindless march with their IPods and cell phones in head and hand while
> nearly mauling the community in their path. 

It's bad on their way *to* school.  Some months ago, 
L.A. mayor Antonio Villaraigoza and some other big 
shots were in a bus on their way to a central city 
school; I think it was some promo to suggest the public 
transit system was working better for students.  While 
the bus was stopped at an intersection, some lowlife 
lubricano punk walked up to the bus and sprayed stupid 
lubricano graffiti on a window 
(http://danielhernandez.typepad.com/daniel_hernandez/2007/02/kid_tags_bus_ca.html).


> 
> It is impossible for the qualified teachers to maintain a learning
> environment where students can not and do not arrive ready to learn.
> It won't work. It hasn't worked. 
> 
> Public education is a joke of the worst water. And with that said, so
> goes the future of America. Taking a concern or complaint to a school
> board is a futile activity at best. There is little or no fiscal
> ability to overcome the insidious creep of "dumbing" down this future
> population of people who will very soon be creating more of the same,
> too often during their pubescent years to boot. Marl Twain said it
> best in his observation of school boards: God made the Idiot for
> practice, and then He made the School Board. 
> 
> The money allotted to schools is based on average daily attendance,
> not performance or results. No child left behind is like the call of
> the wild. Recent attempts via of federal subsidized programs to
> improve the scores in reading, writing and 'rithmatic has resulted in
> "teaching to the test," not helping students thinks. 
> 
> Much is said about schools of the inner city but little can be
> accomplished.  
> 
> And for those children and teens who overcome the effects of having to
> attend one of these "plants of educational activity," it is an
> absolute verification that there is some hope for them based on their
> character. 
> 
> But what about the massive numbers who are in need of something far
> different from what the educational system is offering? Business as
> usual. And we, those who are concerned, wonder why good teachers burn
> out and leave the system.
> 
> The Los Angeles School District boards meeting are broadcast on access
> channels of TV. If you want to fall asleep, tune in and the minutiae
> of the so-called policy setting activities of these elected officials
> will put the viewer to sleep. 
> 
> Go for it, Rudy. Nail it down.
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> DCI