🚀 go-pugleaf

J.M. Ivler wrote:

> : J.M. Ivler wrote:
>
> An arguement that she makes. My point is that these same issues were there
> when I grew up. Some of the kids have Levi's, others had Wranglers and
> then there were those that wore that crap from Caldors (a general cheap
> department store in the north east where I grew up).

Your mother appears to be a smart person. ;-)

Yes, there has always been competition.  It would be silly to say there wasn't.
The continual push for material thing and the marketing too children has
made that situation even harder for kids than before.  Saying its the same
doesn't account for changing family situations and demographics.

> If the school system were to get back to the job of focusing on basic
> educational processes, like making sure that kids could do the basic stuff
> they need to do before they move from one grade to the next, then we would
> see public education make a drastic gain in quality.

The school systems have a lot more to deal with than they used to.  Therange of issues
with their students is broader and parent participation
varies widely by geographic and economic zone.  Look at how many
school nurses are now primary medical care givers for students because
they have no family medical care.

> : The time I spend with my kids isn't going to help when there are
> : other things going on in the school system.
>
> Um, wrong. If you reward proper behavior, if you spend that time
> explaining why the compitition is uninportnat now. If you work with your
> kids to help raise them above that, then there is a greater chance that
> they will not stoop to the level of competing over materialistic things,
> but over things that use their talents and abilities. Each time a parent

Um, right and wrong.  Yes we can have a definite affect on ourchildren's values and
the values of their friends through example.
In a perfect world this would be enough.  There are plenty of kids
for whom the bulk of their social skills and morals will come from
the school system.  Many children spend several times the time
with their school chums in school than they do actively interacting
with their parents.

> My wife spends quite a great deal of time teaching my daughter about
> proper clothing, mixing and maching, getting a "look" that fits her. My
> daughter is very proud of the skills that she has developed. I see no

No one said they should go without personality.  You might want toreread this whole
paragraph.  You are claiming that getting hung up
on your appearance at school is an important confidence builder.
We probably have come to a parting of opinions here.

> It is not the schools place to be a social equalizer, anymore thn it is
> their place to teach ethics, values or multi-culturalism. Schools should

One of the great benefits of public schools is that they are the greatmixer for
society.  Schools have always reinforced shared values
(look at the Pledge of Allegiance).  One of their jobs is to reinforce
a shared set of mores.

Its not that I'm really disagreeing with you.  It does seem, however,
that you are assuming that everyone else is doing as good a job as
you are.  This is just not true.  There are a lot of kids out there who
do not have a single adult helping them through the situations you
are talking about.  In the end you and I pay for the mistakes being
made today and all your good work with your one (N) kids isn't
going to help if a gazillion other people don't give a darn.