Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

THIS is what I've been saying for YEARS!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:27 PM
Original message
THIS is what I've been saying for YEARS!
From a speech by Ted Kennedy.

The first paragraph could have come out of MY mouth, or from my 'pen.'


<<<I propose that every child in America, upon reaching eighth grade, be offered a contract. Let students sign it, along with their parents and Uncle Sam. The contract will state that if you work hard, if you finish high school and are admitted to college, we will guarantee you the cost of earning a degree. Surely, we have reached a stage in America where we can say it and mean it - cost must never again be a bar to college education.

We must also inspire a renaissance in the study of math and science, because America today is losing out in these essential disciplines. Two major studies last month ranked American students 29th in math among the 40 leading industrial nations. Over the last 30 years, we have fallen from 3rd to 15th in producing scientists and engineers. Incredibly, more than half of all graduate students in science and engineering in American colleges today are foreign students.

National standards in math and science have existed for more than a decade. We need to raise those standards to be competitive again with international norms, and work with every school to apply them in every classroom.

We should encourage many more students to pursue advanced degrees in math and science. We should make tuition in graduate school free for needy students in those disciplines. And we should make undergraduate tuition free for any young person willing to serve as a math or science teacher in a public school for at least four years.>>>


http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0112-37.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. I could get behind that!!!
Go Teddy Go!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. It would be a winning campaign message, that's for sure
Until the republicans got around to calling it a brazillion-dollar tax and spend liberal program to indoctrinate more people into the evil liberal ways through liberal arts colleges and liberal professors and liberal liberal liberal liberal evil evil throw money at the problem liberals.

If you catch my drift.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Speak directly to the poor farmer, or factory worker...
Ignore the RW pundits.

"Wouldn't YOU like to see your child go to college without a backbreaking amount of debt? We can do it. We can guarantee any child who works hard and takes school seriously goes to college and comes out of it more prosperous than you could ever have imagined. All it will take is for you to vote Democratic."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-25-06 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #2
33. Hmm what you say sounds awfully familiar, I think I have heard it somewher
:shrug: Nothing Ventured, Nothing Gained....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbaraann Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. The problem with Math and Science
is that a lot of people who major in those fields go to work for the Military-Industrial Complex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Unfortunately true...
But it still doesn't diminish our need for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
6. Teddy's been a voice in the wilderness about this for years
Maybe we're finally coming to a time when more people will listen to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Village Idiot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
7. The present administration would insert a caveat...
whereby any free college science education must include studies in Intelligent Design.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. And I would add...
a contract for kids without academic talent that tells them if they work hard we will train them so they can make a living wage out of high school.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I think that's a good idea as well...
I actually think we should adopt a two or three tiered plan which takes into consideration those who are more likely to make use of vocational training, apprenticeships, etc...those who would seek a moderate level of college education, and those who would follow it all the way to a doctorate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I agree that would be a great plan
it shouldn't be inflexible, as there are many who start out in the trenches and end up in PhD programs, but we aren't doing a good job of guiding our young people right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I think we could compact our system somewhat...
There's an unfortunate amount of wheel-spinning somewhere in the middle, where kids are supposed to start picking a direction but don't have any idea what direction to go. I think we're doing them a disservice by not providing some sort of guidance early on, and allow kids to channel their interests and talents more effectively toward some sort of definable goal.

And definitely not inflexible. Inflexibility is stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tenshi816 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #8
39. Yes, yes, yes!!!
Not every kid is cut out to go to university and there's absolutely no shame in that. There's nothing wrong with taking another avenue to find a profession that provides a "living wage", as you quite rightly put it (as opposed to a "do you want fries with that" job).

For example, I personally know (in the UK) two young men with computing degrees who retrained a few years ago as plumbers and now have more work than they can handle - tried to find a good plumber lately? Neither regrets his decision, other than wishing they had skipped doing a degree and gone straight into vocational training.

I also know a former engineer who retrained as a landscape gardener. He's another one who wishes he had gone that route from the very beginning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. I have two daughters with huge college debts
We never had enough money to be able to save for college, but we couldn't qualify for financial aid. One kid, now 22, has $37,000 in student loans, but still doesn't have a BA due to some personal problems. She's not in school, and they're starting to bill her a combined $400 a month, which she doesn't have. She just started working two low-wage jobs.
The other, a college sophomore, is $15,000 in debt but will need to borrow at least $20,000 more to get her BA.
Their situation is not unusual.
It makes me sick that they and their peers will have to deal with these debts all their lives.
When I went to college in 1969, tuition was $250 a semester, plus $65 in fees. A year of college at my school, including room and board, cost $1500, not counting books. Even working at the minimum wage of $1.60 an hour, I was able to earn enough to pay my own way after my freshman and sophomore years. Took me another 4 years but I did it.
College costs have risen way out of proportion to the incomes of average Americans, and there's far less aid available.

Kennedy's right on the mark, and while he's at it, we need a better way for these kids in debt to work off their loans. Vista and Americorps pay off about $4700 of a college loan, which is a drop in the bucket. Meanwhile the tax cuts keep going to the billionaires.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Yep...and this affects EVERYONE.
There isn't a single citizen who doesn't want a better life for their child(ren) than they had themselves. The Republicans are STEALING their children's futures and replacing them with a mountain of debt.

THIS is a meme we need to broadcast far and wide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
14. Really. Especially sciences. I know so many high school people
who would have worked harder in math and science - had they been able to go back and do it all over again (high school). Some do. Many go back & take high school courses after a few years of an arts degree. So they can qualify for a science oriented one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. I'm math-challenged...I'll admit it.
There's something in my brain that doesn't process sequencing very well. But I have no problem grasping scientific concepts because I found other ways to go at the problem. MYSELF. Not through the schools.

We need to wake the people up to how important this issue is...keeping our children out of higher education is crippling our country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. I'm great at a few types of math, bad at others. And yes - sometimes
minds work differently at different times of life. If you stream kids at the age of 13, you are missing out the minds that mature or compensate later on.

Very important that a pro-active approach take place when people are young. But so too, that doors are not closed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I don't think we encourage them to look to themselves
for direction early on. We don't encourage their interests, and show them the path to succeed at the things that fascinate them.

I agree with you that we shouldn't shut doors. I was far more able to grasp things at 20 than I was at 13.

As far as math goes...I have no problem with regular math...I failed algebra three times. Just don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Algebra was okay for me. Though for other reasons I tanked in my
last years of high-school.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I was bored stupid in Jr. High and High School...
It wasn't until I got to college that I actually started enjoying the whole process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. I was on the ball and motivated in grade ten. Then lost it. The drive &
the curiosity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. I was always curious...
just not particularly good at conforming. I didn't like to play by the rules. I didn't want them trying to shove THEIR interpretation of everything at me all the time. I wanted to know the stuff they weren't telling us, the stuff the teachers might not even have known.

Plus I went to 9 different junior highs and 7 different high schools, so it was really hard for me to keep up and/or adapt to different class and credit requirements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. I was a ninny. Too sweet by double.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I was quietly stubborn...
not a trouble-maker, but just more like a spiny rock. I'd do what I HAD to do, but little more. I usually had my face buried in a book and really didn't want to be bothered.

A few teachers were able to pull me out, but most didn't even bother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Intellectually - I grew up with radio. On all the time. So I was well
Edited on Fri Feb-24-06 06:34 PM by applegrove
informed. And the pattern at home was to look outside the box - because the box (radio) was such an ongoing presence. But my intellectual life only translated to one friend. I was in the wrong group. I should have been with other nerds. I failed miserably at any emotional or self-actualization. I was weaker as an ego by the end of high-school than I had been at 14. If fact I almost didn't exist by the end. Took years to find my way back. Bad choices. Wrong people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. I hung out with the freaks and weirdos...
The D&D geeks, the stoners, the other mishaps of science fiction. I am SO not a joiner.

I think school is pretty much a conformity box, trying to get everyone to fit through the round holes whether they like it or not. It's now all about inappropriate dress (while we used to wear beer tee-shirts to school), and playing along with an ever longer list of rules to encourage people to go along with the social norms...Dress codes, drug testing, zero-tolerance, etc...

I mean, god forbid anyone should be different, or accepted for being themselves.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
20. Who needs MATH & LEARNIN


Thinkin peple need schoolin and edacatun.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
25. You got that right. What one of Teddie's brothers said...




Sen. John F. Kennedy, acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination, September 14, 1960.

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?"
If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal" to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.

In short, having set forth my view -- I hope for all time -- two nights ago in Houston, on the proper relationship between church and state, I want to take the opportunity to set forth my views on the proper relationship between the state and the citizen. This is my political credo:

I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves.

I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate. I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts, which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but that we propose concrete means of achieving them.

Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today. For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power, restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies. And the only basic issue in the 1960 campaign is whether our government will fall in a conservative rut and die there, or whether we will move ahead in the liberal spirit of daring, of breaking new ground, of doing in our generation what Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson did in their time of influence and responsibility.

Our liberalism has its roots in our diverse origins. Most of us are descended from that segment of the American population which was once called an immigrant minority. Today, along with our children and grandchildren, we do not feel minor. We feel proud of our origins and we are not second to any group in our sense of national purpose. For many years New York represented the new frontier to all those who came from the ends of the earth to find new opportunity and new freedom, generations of men and women who fled from the despotism of the czars, the horrors of the Nazis, the tyranny of hunger, who came here to the new frontier in the State of New York. These men and women, a living cross section of American history, indeed, a cross section of the entire world's history of pain and hope, made of this city not only a new world of opportunity, but a new world of the spirit as well.

Tonight we salute Governor and Senator Herbert Lehman as a symbol of that spirit, and as a reminder that the fight for full constitutional rights for all Americans is a fight that must be carried on in 1961.

Many of these same immigrant families produced the pioneers and builders of the American labor movement. They are the men who sweated in our shops, who struggled to create a union, and who were driven by longing for education for their children and for the children's development. They went to night schools; they built their own future, their union's future, and their country's future, brick by brick, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, and now in their children's time, suburb by suburb.

Tonight we salute George Meany as a symbol of that struggle and as a reminder that the fight to eliminate poverty and human exploitation is a fight that goes on in our day. But in 1960 the cause of liberalism cannot content itself with carrying on the fight for human justice and economic liberalism here at home. For here and around the world the fear of war hangs over us every morning and every night. It lies, expressed or silent, in the minds of every American. We cannot banish it by repeating that we are economically first or that we are militarily first, for saying so doesn't make it so. More will be needed than goodwill missions or talking back to Soviet politicians or increasing the tempo of the arms race. More will be needed than good intentions, for we know where that paving leads.

In Winston Churchill's words, "We cannot escape our dangers by recoiling from them. We dare not pretend such dangers do not exist."

And tonight we salute Adlai Stevenson as an eloquent spokesman for the effort to achieve an intelligent foreign policy. Our opponents would like the people to believe that in a time of danger it would be hazardous to change the administration that has brought us to this time of danger. I think it would be hazardous not to change. I think it would be hazardous to continue four more years of stagnation and indifference here at home and abroad, of starving the underpinnings of our national power, including not only our defense but our image abroad as a friend.

This is an important election -- in many ways as important as any this century -- and I think that the Democratic Party and the Liberal Party here in New York, and those who believe in progress all over the United States, should be associated with us in this great effort.

The reason that Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson had influence abroad, and the United States in their time had it, was because they moved this country here at home, because they stood for something here in the United States, for expanding the benefits of our society to our own people, and the people around the world looked to us as a symbol of hope.

I think it is our task to re-create the same atmosphere in our own time. Our national elections have often proved to be the turning point in the course of our country. I am proposing that 1960 be another turning point in the history of the great Republic.

Some pundits are saying it's 1928 all over again. I say it's 1932 all over again. I say this is the great opportunity that we will have in our time to move our people and this country and the people of the free world beyond the new frontiers of the 1960s.



Today, though, it's more like Berlin in 1936.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. I'm too young to remember Jack
but I do respect those words.

Thom Hartmann replayed them some weeks ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wain Donating Member (803 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
29. Why the fall in ranking over 30 years?
What has changed in the education system over past 30 years? It's fair to assume current student and teacher innate talent is at least equal to 30 or 60 years ago.

How has grade school curriculum changed for basics such as math, science, english/literature/language, history? How has teacher training and education changed? How has grade inflation lessened the degree of difficulty in instruction and testing? Have life style/quality of living improvements reduced the challenge for us? Do we need more adversity to drive us forward in world rankings?

How has the level of discipline in schools changed? How much more difficult is it to be a good teacher in today's environment of litigation, cobweb of federal and state restrictions/limitations, and administrative/union bureaucracy? How has standardized testing narrowed the focus of education to the goal of getting good scores, particularly for a school's ability to get more fed and state money?

The questions are many. The answer is probably plural.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-25-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. Hi wain!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wain Donating Member (803 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #32
40. My thanks!
much appreciate a welcome from the one and only newyawker99

:woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-25-06 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #29
34. All of the above
I saw the curriculum at our local high school being dumbed down between the time I graduated and the time my brothers (3.5 and 5 years younger) graduated. They introduced a lot of electives that could be substituted for basic requirements. For example, you could take filmmaking instead of English. Now filmmaking is a great elective, but it's no substitute for writing and literature.

There are also a lot more kids from chaotic home backgrounds (in poorer neighborhoods) or over-indulged brats (in affluent neighborhoods) than ever before.

If I were Education Czarina, I'd provide free college for students who completed a rigorous pre-college curriculum with a B average: four years of English, including a survey of American and world literature; social studies, including geography, civics, economics, and American and world history; four years of math, biology, chemistry, physics, and a year that includes half a year each of geology and astronomy; four years of math, and four years of foreign language. Electives in music, art, and theatre would be available.

I'd put everyone through the same ninth and tenth grade curriculum, supplemented with explorations of various jobs that require no academic work beyond high school or two years of technical school. Non-college students would then continue with the English and social studies components of the curriculum and take whatever courses were needed for the general job area that they were attracted to, along with internships.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wain Donating Member (803 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #34
37. Hi Lydia
I like your solution of free college with conditions of preparedness, including opportunities for non-college training. Makes no sense to send more kids to college or for more training when they are not prepared. I shudder at the long term results - we'd most likely have new and greater problems than the ones we're trying to overcome.

I have a very good friend who teaches and is a teachers union leader. The fear teachers have today of litigation, bureaucracy and lack of a controlled, disciplined teaching environment is un-motivating. And the curriculum. Ugh! I had the greatest respect when Carter sent his daughter to public school in Washington. But, I completely understood Clinton sending his daughter to a private school. That's another powder keg - inner city education.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-24-06 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
30. Yep!
Kerry had a similiar plan. I remember his college plan was in high school to have the option of kids doing so many hours of community service and how many hours they do they'll get so much fincial aide for a community college.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-25-06 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. Nothing wrong with community service
but I think it's more fair that they be required to show initiative and willingness and talent in school rather than to fall prey to too many distractions outside. I think "Do well in school and you'll go to college--period" is a far better than trying to make them pay for it through other means.

Kids have enough distractions from school with their peers, sports, and families to add more to their burden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ellen Forradalom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-25-06 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
35. That's no liberal feel-good tax-and-spend fantasy
That is a solid investment in our nation's future. The most skilled, trained, creative work force in the world? We could move mountains with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genie_weenie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-25-06 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
36. Sorry, but this plan may cost 500 billion dollars
and that money is earmarked to have those kids stay away from college and go off to far corners of the globe...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robeson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
38. It is a great and noble thought. But it want happen....
Edited on Sun Feb-26-06 06:38 AM by Robeson
...in this country, at least not soon. As Gore Vidal said, "The not-so-poor do outnumber the poor but if the not-so-poor who are nicked heavily by taxes were to join with the poor they would outnumber the elite by 99 to 1. The politician who can forge that alliance will find himself, at best, the maker of a new society; at worst, in a hole at Arlington."

I don't see any politician willing or able to forge a new society, and most are probably more afraid of visiting that hole at Arlington.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PassingFair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
41. I would work for this measure every day!
I'm not so sure about free graduate school though.
I think graduate school attendees should have to
work as tutors or something to help pay for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catbert836 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-26-06 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
42. My Grand Scheme for Education
Edited on Sun Feb-26-06 07:41 PM by catbert836
OK, first of all students would have the same cirriculum for the freshman and sophomore years of high school. It would look something like this:
(naturally, these classes could be honors or no)
Math:
Year 1: Algebra 1
Year 2: Geometry

English:
Year 1: Comparative Literature and Writing
Year 2: American Literature

Social Studies:
Year 1: American Government/Economics
Year 2: American History

Language:
Year 1: French/Spanish/Whatever 1
Year 2: French/Spanish/Whatever 2

Science:
Year 1: Chemistry
Year 2: Biology

At this point, students would be divided into 2 categories: college prep and non-college. The non-college students would be able to substitute 2 of their core classes with electives in training, technical or otherwise, at community colleges or tech school. Here's what the cirriculum would look like for the college prep students, as well as the core classes the non-college students don't drop:

Math:
Year 3: Algebra 2/Triganometry
Year 4: Calculus OR Precalculus

English:
Year 3: European Literature
Year 4: World Literature

Social Studies:
Year 3: World History
Year 4: World Cultures/Current Affairs

Language:
Year 3: French/Spanish/Whatever 3
Year 4: French/Spanish/Whatever 4

Science:
Year 3: Physics
Year 4: Chemistry II, Biology II, or Physics II

Naturally, students with a particular interest in any of the core cirriculum would be able to choose which order to take those classes in. This would be especially helpful in science. Also, advanced students in math or language would be able to skip ahead and pursue independent study the remaining years of high school.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 03:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC