Hard to believe this is from 22 years ago, the debate goes on...
Date: March 6, 2002
To: PFIC Message Board
From: mobilesuit
Subject: I think we might need some new nomenclature
I have been getting confused with pier and area names lately. Are the actual names of these places really the same? If they are, well damn, I’m outta luck. lol. Otherwise, perhaps we can make some more specific names for these places.
Here are the places I’m talking about:
O’side: there is an Oceanside in northern SD. but obviously there is another one.
Ocean Beach: there is an Ocean Beach Pier in SD but again, there is another one.
HMB: is this Hermosa Beach?
Yea, I know... if I read the posts and they are catching salmon, it’s not in socal. But you know. You kinda click on it with hopes of the report being from the place you’re wondering about. Well just a thought and some babbling I guess. Back to work!
Posted by fishaholic
hmb=Half Moon Bay, I think
Posted by Ken Jones
Internet = laziness/shortcuts/new vocabulary, etc. It seems that when people hooked up with the Internet and e-mail messages all the seemingly steady-as-a-rock rules for spelling and grammar were forgotten. Guess everything is speeded up and people do not want to take the time to write properly. To a point I guess that is O.K. (see e-mail messages with no messages on our board) but when making reports it would be better if people would spell out the names of locations, types of baits, and other relevant information.
Posted by dazex
I agree. I guess once you're on the board for a while, you start to pick up some of the common acronyms, lingo used. It's like the board has a sort of lingo/jargon on it's own. -Dazex
Posted by gyozadude
NO... it isn't the Internet...To come to the defense of technology, let me just say that people are naturally lazy. The Internet doesn’t exacerbate this problem. It just makes it more visible, like mammograms and breast cancer. For example, I don’t usually communicate with teenagers in my daily associations. It’s either very young children still in diapers or kick-rear-end technical and product people who make the stuff that drive pretty much the entire developed world’s information infrastructure. I get my main dose of proletariat drivel on this site... not to sound condescending... but that’s just the way it is. I think it's therapeutic to some degree. It keeps me in touch with the common man or woman. I had my first Internet email account at the Univ. of British Columbia back in 5th grade in the late 70’s. It was an experimental thing for a special education course. For almost two decades, we only had a handful of shortcuts, e.g. smiley [
], winking smileys [;-)] It was only after the proliferation of portals and email to the masses that we acquired acronyms like ROFLMAO...etc. The Internet didn’t create this. It was the casual plebes injecting their idle humor because, rather than using the Internet for work, they waste their time away (like I'm doing now ). No, the Internet != laziness/shortcuts/new vocab. Rather, proles = laziness/shortcuts/new vocabulary.- Gyozadude
Posted by Wild Moose
Okay, Okay I'm sorry for the acronym/abbreviation. HMB - Half Moon Bay, San Mateo Co. (er County). But as I read about all the different species quite a few of you catch ‘down south’ I'm rather jealous and would almost rather be there. As for the shorthand, it’s not really due to laziness on my part but rather I was still cold from the outing and was just saving my fingers (which at the time felt like they were going to break off). Tight Lines to you all.
Posted by Ken Jones
Plebes, Proles and Karl Marx... Pier Rats Unite! I’ve always said that pier rats are the plebeians of the fishing fraternity. Fits right in that we're also the proletariat. Gee, I just hope Karl Marx doesn't find out. He’ll have us doing all kinds of wacky things to gain equality with those fly fishermen. Pier Rats unite...
Posted by gyozadude
Would Marx approve of using a Calcutta 400? He'd probably roll over in his grave if he knew about all the wonderful, privately produced lures, rods, and reels and tackle we all favor. - Gyozadude
Posted by SD Fisherman
Nah, as long as Karl knew that...we were rebelling against the bourgeoisie or our Aristocratic “Superiors” by calling in sick to work in order to go fishing, hehe. Hey we have to come out on top somehow, eh? -Don aka SDF
Posted by SD Fisherman
I mean YEAH he would approve, hehe.
Posted by Albert Yi
Speaking of flyfishers... I'm a flyfisherman as well as a pier-rat... So what would that make me? A double agent? A bastard? Do I have the best of both worlds, or have I inherited the worst that both worlds have to offer? Hehehe... - Albert Yi
Posted by Ken Jones
Albert... Albert, you know that Lenin demanded total commitment. How can you serve two different gods? Would you rather catch one of those dinky 6-inch hatchery raised trout or a 100-pound mud marlin? Now be honest. Of course you could fish from some of the small Bay Area piers with your fly rod. Nothing more interesting than seeing a sturgeon rise to a properly placed fly. (And I used to know a guy who actually fished for them with his fly rod and a BIG fly. Said he had taken quite a few although he was generally fishing from a boat.)
Posted by lucy
Crappy educational system... So much for the “liberal” approach of dumbing down the schools so that even borderline vegetables can graduate from high school—despite being unable to read or write!
Posted by gyozadude
Actually, I like the educational system... It can be so easy to graduate that a smart student could fish for four hours a day during high school days and still end up the Valedictorian. (Disclaimer: I’m being facetious here.... if you’re currently getting less than a 3.7/4.0 GPA, you don’t qualify for this fish-study program)- Gyozadude
Posted by blast29
Before you go blaming “Liberals” for the struggling educational system in California, perhaps you could explain how this came to pass since the state has had an extreme Conservative as Governor for 16 of the past 20 years. Even our current Governor describes himself as a Moderate. It seems far more likely that our Conservative leadership has “dumbed down” education in order to create a large undereducated work force that can be more easily exploited by the Enron types (staunch Conservatives, by the way).
Posted by gyozadude
Spending bills are approved by Assembly & Senate. The Gov’nor is basically a figurehead in CA. 95% of the budget is spoken for by law, 52 - 54% is automatically mandated to education. So there’s nothing really the executive branch can do. It's all about how the media spins the story. If you look at the numbers... you'd see few variations in spending and growth in actual dollars per student over those years. I only blame the executive branch when they blow $9Billion on bad electricity contracts. If you need someone to blame... look to the (former) speaker of the Assembly...Willy Brown. A consummate political tactician, his obstructionist and liberal bent shaped spending policies more than anyone in CA politics in the last two decades. So before blaming governors and the executive branch, at least lets all first learn about how Gov't works before blaming those only in the Executive branch. If you look at relative spending per student, CA actually compares well with other states. You're talking about small differences of say less than 5-10% variation in state-to-state spending in most cases. I think Lucy has a point about the liberal education that young people get in CA. I'll add that liberal parents are adding to that problem. - Gyozadude
Posted by Ken Jones
As an ex-teacher I feel I should have an opportunity to add my views. Educational reform is not really a liberal versus conservative issue—with one big exception. I say that because both sides of the political spectrum have repeatedly stated that they wanted to improve educational standards, both have tried to grab political advantage for their particular “educational plans,” and both have failed to achieve measurable improvement. This has been going on at least since the ‘60s. The exception I mentioned is the educational establishment itself and for good or bad it is caused by the liberal leanings of most teachers. Most teachers enter the profession because they want to do well, help kids, and improve society. Unfortunately, the desire to do good and to help kids has, over the years, developed more into the realm of helping students’ self esteem than in preparing a student sufficiently ready to compete in the real world that exists outside of school. Even while academic improvement is constantly on the tongue and mind of most teachers, it still comes in second to the goal of social reform. Thus the never-ending meetings on diversity, on development of non-traditional means of instruction (so that non-English speaking students are not at a disadvantage when competing against those more literate in English), and on basic social issues. These are seen as the priorities in most schools (at least to the teachers) even if more news is given to academic reform. Win the hearts and souls of the workers and you will see improvement unimagined. In schools the hearts and souls are committed to social reform, not to academic reform. Teachers are not against academic improvement but are for it only as long as it doesn't interfere with the more important social agenda. Not all teachers fall in this group but enough to insure that the inertia that exists will probably last for the foreseeable future.
Posted by Songslinger
The P Word... It always strikes me as bizarre when educational failures or successes are discussed without ever invoking a crucial component: PARENTS. No school will function well if the parents are indifferent to learning. If the parents are uneducated and willfully ignorant, the child has a poor chance of success. It takes great character and unusual strength to surmount one’s parents, too much for most kids, even those who are driven to learn. The home should be a base from which to spring, yet too often it is a tether or prison. Let's stop blaming politicians and the system. Throw all the money you want at the schools here and nothing will improve unless the parents are encouraged (forced, even) to participate and nurture the concept of knowledge. Two more ideas: Pay the teachers more but fire the incompetent ones. Release the stranglehold of unions and you will see better competition.
Posted by blast29
The Governor is powerless re: education? Absolutely not! The Governor’s clout comes from his leadership of his party, his appointments and his veto power, among other things. Back in the ‘50s and early ‘60s, California had the finest public school system in the WORLD. From elementary school to the Cal State and UC systems, a world-class education was available to any California resident. We had more junior colleges (prime vehicles for WWII and Korean War vets to re-enter the educational system) than the rest of the nation combined. Pasadena, El Camino, Pierce and LACC were routinely ranked as the best in the nation. And it was FREE. Who created this system? The Liberal Governor Edmund Brown. Who started the dismantling of this system? The Conservative Governor Ronald Reagan. The Conservative initiative Prop. 13 was the final nail in the coffin for world-class public education in California. The poor and the working class are the primary victims of the declining public school system, with a particularly pernicious effect in Black and Latino communities of this ilk. Since these groups are traditional Democratic constituencies, you do the math. Is it logical that the Liberals would do it to themselves and their own? Learn the history of public education in California before you go about pontificating about the reasons for its decline.
Posted by stinkyfingers
Crazy article regarding Liberals & schools. You won’t believe this one... ACLU - thank you. A guy on another board posted the following:
=============everything below this line was cut and pasted===========
“This story came out of California. It seems that there is some sort of an anti-discrimination law in California that some school districts interpret as a mandate to teach their captives (you might want to call them students, not me) all about lesbianism, homosexuality and transgenderism. (My spell-checker didn’t like that one even a little bit.) The little rug rats are supposed to be exposed to positive images of homosexuality. Yeah, that ought to help them find jobs, right? Anyway... the little captives are ushered into a room and shown skits with the catchy little title of “Cootie Shots.” In one of these skits you hear a transsexual boy say, “Let them say I’m like a girl. What’s wrong with being like a girl? Let them laugh, let them scream, they’ll all be beheaded when I’m queen.” Then you have a little girl say, “The one I love, she wears a dress.” And so forth … you get the picture.
Well, some parents are more than a little upset. In fact, they’re filing lawsuits! They say that the school district violated their rights because their kids weren’t allowed to opt out of the Cootie Shots class. Now... here comes some woman from the UCLA Teacher Education Program named Rosa Futomoto. She has something to say about the parents who are suing the school district. Futomoto says: “If they really feel that way their children maybe should be home schooled. And if that would be their choice then maybe they can afford a private school where they can practice racism and sexism and whatever they want to practice.”
There you have it, folks. The incredible arrogance you find among those holier-than-thou academic types who just can’t understand why any parent would want to exercise control over their child’s sexual and social upbringing. This snide, officious woman is telling you that if you don’t want your children to learn all about gays, lesbians and other sexual oddities then you should just take your children to some private school where, of course, everybody knows they teach racism and sexism. How much longer are you folks going to put up with this? How much longer are you going to stand by while the government takes your children for hours a day and indoctrinates them with this type of garbage? How much longer are you going to put up with the arrogance of people like Rosa Futomoto? Just when was the last time you wrote to your Congressman or Senator demanding school choice?”
Posted by lucy
Now, THAT’s total crap...That’s just some more of your old typical fundamentalist Christian propaganda intended to scare the morons. Let’s not drag that kind of crap with a legitimate discussion of the deterioration of educational standards, eh? Reminds me of that garbage that was going around in which it was claimed that the Teletubbies were a homosexual plot to indoctrinate toddlers—which was based on the fact that one of them dresses in purple! Like, how totally stupid can you get?
Posted by gyozadude
I am a product of CA education... Blast 29: You need to remember... I'm mostly a product of the California education system. Except for four years of outstanding education in B.C. most of my High School and University years were spent in CA. I know the history and I lived it. It's easy for the media to paint the picture of Prop 13 being the worst thing for education. But why have I succeeded? My parents were immigrants from Taiwan. We came with only $500 in pocket and a family of six living in a 1-bedroom apartment on $110/month. We took advantage of the educational system and thrived. I'm a graduate of the UC system as well. I am the living disproof of liberal assertions that Prop 13 and the Republicans dismantled the education system in CA. This is flatly wrong.
I’d invite you to do some accounting on the amount of money spent on education in CA and the year over year growth and the amount spent per student, per class, per school. And then ask yourself why other states that score better do so on less money. Bigger budgets aren't the answer. They never were. It’s good parenting, strict discipline, and solid curricula that are the keys to higher scholastic achievement.
I would like to add I wholeheartedly agree with Ken's assessment of this self-esteem thing in schools. I was always taught by my parents that self-esteem was earned, not an entitlement. I recall my graduation day at Cal Berkeley. I received the Departmental Citation for outstanding student in Nuclear Engineering. My Dad chided me that had I been in EECS, I probably wouldn’t have won. He’s probably right, and that humbled me... even though I still think I'm pretty kick rear end in the brains side of things... but kids these days have an attitude problem of too much false esteem and the brutal reality is they need more strict discipline and repetitive schooling activities to achieve their potential. Otherwise they may get distracted by drugs, gangs, video games, and fishing...
BTW, have you ever thought that the reason for decline in scholastic achievement in Black and Latino communities is not a function of budget? I would propose that the lack of achievement is largely because of cultural inferiority in a Socialist Darwinian sense. Sure, it sounds racist... but why is it that UC Berkeley is 40% Asian? Simply because Asians are culturally inclined towards scholastic achievement and their families encourage them to excel or get smacked silly and grounded for the rest of puberty. Do the whites? Blacks? Hispanics? do this? Not at all and not to the degree that Asians do. Are there signs that genetics also affect scholastic achievement? Absolutely. But is it politically correct to talk about such things? No, and so real change never takes place to solve the problem because the liberals prevent real dialog and real science from uprooting the true causes.
You know, we could drag this out forever and I could take copious space on this fishing board to cite proof after proof. If the liberals took a step back and answered questions such as why private schools can achieve such high test scores with fewer dollars per student than public schools, why some states do better for less money, and why is there so much fluff in school curricula... then I think we'd all start on trying to address the problem. But the way it is now, the system is broken and the Liberals want to dump more money into a broken system. That's just foolish. As a big CA taxpayer, I'll move to WA State before rolling back to pre Prop 13 days. Gyozadude
Posted by gyozadude
Crazy article regarding Liberals & schools... Hey Stinky... I don't know why the conservative right makes such a big stink out of homosexuality. We may discover that in the RNA transcription phase of reproduction, sometimes the gene that defines sexual preference may get swapped around. This may occur in 1-5 % of cases naturally and this occurs in society, even though you'd think that Darwinism would have eliminated this over time, but it hasn’t happened, so if being gay is genetic and natural, so be it. Anyway, it is a valid lifestyle choice and though I don't practice it, I think there's nothing wrong with schools teaching this stuff to kids who may need to know. As long as they're also teaching the full spectrum of reading, writing and arithmetic, history, science, etc... I have no problems and I don't think any others should feel uncomfortable with this. I just saw that movie with Michael Douglas and Annette Bening – “American President” or something like that... and one line I really like is, “Why [aren't we all] card-toting members of the ACLU, an organization who’s sole purpose is to defend the Bill of Rights...” - Gyozadude
Posted by blast29
So am I... I attended public schools in the Brown (Edmund not Jerry) era. Several of my classmates went on to UCLA and UCSB, one went to Harvard (a football player), one to Yale, one to Stanford (another football player), one to Cal Tech and one to Harvey Mudd (Pomona complex). I chose USC because I'd always wanted to take the boosters’ train back to South Bend for the Notre Dame game. Many others chose the junior college-state college route or out-of-state institutions. We were all well prepared for the academic life that followed. I also took my turn in Vietnam upon graduation because my upbringing and the school system created in me a sense of public service (due at least in part to gratitude for the free quality education I'd received). I'm still grateful for the running start I got from the public school system. It breaks my heart to see what it’s become. I say fix it so others can benefit as I did. No matter what it takes!
Posted by Nopal
I am a product of CA education... So am I. In fact, I'm still going to college. I'm not going list my GPA, awards that I might have gotten, etc, because I don't need them to make a point. Let me just say that the thing that always struck me as most unusual about the CA education system (I originally studied up to the equivalent of junior high in Mexico) is that you have to pretty much search and fight for a challenging and engaging education yourself. You have to challenge the teachers to provide more than what they otherwise would. If you go with the flow then the classes are, compared to the education south of the border, too easy and lacking in substance, just what Ken was referring to. Things may be a bit different once the university level is reached, but without a solid foundation to begin with, that is irrelevant.
This is also one of the reasons that I must disagree with you in regards to race and scholastic achievement. I have known as many Mexican people with “kick ass” brains in Mexico than the equivalent white/Asian number here. This to me is simply a function of the different education systems and the environment in which they exist, and not of race. Culturally, Asians tend to put more emphasis in education, I agree. But, I submit to you that it is merely a cultural phenomenon. It is unwise to stretch the boundaries of reason in order to attribute to race that which can merely be explained as an effect of the environment in which a particular individual may grow up.
Posted by stinkyfingers
You missed the POINT! Hello? Anybody got his or her brain on today? These are kids. KIDS should NOT be thinking about SEX - PERIOD. I don’t want my kid to ask, “What does gay mean?” Because the only way to explain it to talk about sex. Kids should be carefree and have fun. I don’t want my kids learning about sex until I think they are ready. And I'll be damned if anybody else tries to teach my CHILD about sex - as a matter of fact, I may go to prison for what I may do to someone if they tried...
Posted by gyozadude
I learned Sex Ed in 2nd grade... I learned where babies came from, about sexual orientation and all sorts of genital parts and biology in 2nd grade. That was really, really, really liberal back then in a country-hick town. I was only seven years old! Too young? I don't think so. Kids can have fun and be educated too. Remember that a few hundred years ago, life span, social structures like marriage, and sexual imperatives to procreate were all sort of synchronized. People got married around 14 - 20 years old. Romeo and Juliet is a story about teens.
It’s now 2002. Better nutrition implies that girls reach biological maturity at age 11 - 12 now and boys at 13 - 15. Yet, we’re delaying marriage until over 30! You need someway to satisfy the sexual imperative, and kids will experiment with sex whether we like it or not. The best way to insure these kids don’t “screw” up their futures is through education. They need to know all about safe ways of having sex, as well as all the ways that STD’s get transmitted, and what the consequences of some of them are: AIDS, HPV, Syphilis, etc. Getting to them at age 8 or 9 isn't too early. It’s at a time when they are innocent enough not to giggle or laugh and get embarrassed, as well, it prepares them for wild changes that soon occur after just a couple of years. I can't believe I’m taking a totally Liberal stance here... but I am! - Gyozadude
Posted by baitfish
I learned Sex Ed in 2nd grade...I disagree with that, 2nd grade is way too young. But I do agree with sex Ed in schools with the parents having the option of not including their children. However, Sex Ed is something that needs to be learned as the child approaches sexual maturity, not when they are 7 years old, which is way to soon in their development. I don’t think you are taking into consideration the amount of growing a person does in between the ages of 7-12, that child is night and day as far as their hormones are concerned. A child should be taught sex ed around age 12, if a child is sexually active any earlier than that, there has got to be some type of sexual abuse that must have caused it. Also teaching them before they are prepared for it can traumatize them and cause problems. A simple demonstration of male female reproduction systems and sex at age 12, then a more advanced STD and safe sex and talks about orientation at age 15. The child just does not comprehend it and could lead to a lot of confusion before they have experienced enough life to comprehend the ramifications of sex and culture. Adam, I catch my fish with my feet on the ground...
Posted by stinkyfingers
Wow - YOU really believe that??? "Our Conservative leadership has “dumbed down” education in order to create a large undereducated work force that can be more easily exploited" - you said that. You say they did this intentionally for their agenda. Is that what you're saying? Of course it is. I'm floored. What a conspiracy theory you have there, you really believe it??? Folks: We have just left the atmosphere...
Posted by blast29
Wow - YOU really believe that??? Conservatives won’t screw the public in pursuit of their own agendas? Can you spell “Quackenbush”? Conservatives and their Corporate backers would never harm an entire state in pursuit of riches? Can you spell “Kenny Boy and Rolling Blackouts”?
Posted by baitfish
Your Quackenbush example is a far cry from a political part agenda to create a state of idiots. Adam
Posted by blast29
I never said “Idiots”. I said “undereducated.” And aside from calling me loopy, you’ve not explained why it seems that schools in poor and working class neighborhoods--too often Black and Latino ones--suffer the most. Many of these schools don’t have enough textbooks for their students, who must share them in class and who are not allowed to take them home to study at night. In some cases, even these few textbooks are obsolete to begin with. My cousin is a substitute teacher in the LAUSD, and she has to bring her own crayons and watercolors for the kids to use! These problems are not caused by liberal policies but by an acute lack of funding. The pattern is too uniform and too longstanding to write off as happenstance.
What, then, is the cause? Race might be the answer some choose to cloud the issue, but it’s more than that. Education can be the great leveler, a way to bridge the gap between “Haves” and “Have-nots.” Is it that far-fetched that elements of the “Haves” wish to keep potential competitors” in their place"?...i.e. “You can mow my lawn, fix my car or man the cash register at Walmart, but don't ever dream of becoming my partner at the law firm.”
Posted by baitfish
Well I don't think it has anything to do with Liberals or Republicans. My wife is a substitute with LAUSD, and she is trying to become a full-time teacher. In order to not make broad generalizations about schools, I will speak about what I know, and that is LAUSD. LAUSD is too big, so it is impossible to manage the money. Also, it is run by a bunch of bureaucrats who could not balance a checkbook. The reason that they don’t get better is that they don’t have to, no one gets fired, and any amount of reprimands from your superiors mean nothing if you don’t get fired in the long run. The majority of persons who I have met who become government employees, do it for the following reasons, Money, security, too help the common man or to escape reality. When there is no accountability for their actions, then the people in those positions that are in it for non-selfless reasons are susceptible to be the wonderful people that we deal with at the DMV to use a universal example. The reason kids have fewer textbooks and supplies at their school is because of how the schools are funded. The schools receive bonuses for doing well, schools that do poorly are not given more money. In the lower income areas, population densities are higher creating larger requirements of schools. The problem is lower income areas are breeding grounds for ignorance, which results in lower test scores, which results in less “bonus” money, in a highly populated area. It is simple math to discover what happens when all those items are added together. Adam
Posted by Ken Jones
Get involved, and then offer suggestions... Anyone who says the answer to better-educated students will be found in throwing more money into the educational system does not understand what goes on at schools. As for teachers, they are among our most important public servants and (in most cases) do deserve increases in pay. At the same time many have personal agendas and refuse to teach what is mandated by the state.
I was involved in a world history program with Stanford University for several years and one of the things I found most disturbing was the teachers who said they did not teach the state mandated units in world history—even though they knew their students would be tested on them. A San Jose teacher skipped most of World War I and World War II because a study of Latin America was considered more relevant to her students. A teacher in Oakland basically skipped World War I, World War II and the Cold War because she wanted to do a longer unit on Africa. So even though this was part of a high prestige program several of the teachers were not teaching those subject areas mandated by the state. Not surprisingly their students scored low when the state tests on history were given and perhaps not surprisingly their schools were eventually dropped from the Stanford University program.
Just before I quit teaching I was forced to attend a SADAIE course to learn how to teach in a non-traditional way. Since 50% of the students in our school were Latino, we were told to teach/test by letting them draw pictures, do group projects, etc. The message was don’t require as much reading and writing. Every teacher in the state has to take SADAIE or a similar program.
As for the students, I'll never forget a mentor and highly honored teacher (and one who was a favorite of students) who retired a couple of years ago. He often said that schools and the debate about schools were among the most dishonest subjects in society. His feelings were that the vast majority of students in our public schools are not there to learn; they are there primarily for social reasons. Take away sports, clubs, and other social activities, toughen the standards, and let students know they truly need an education if they hope to succeed in life, and they might show some improvement. However, many will not show improvement no matter how good the teacher or facilities, that is a sad fact of school life. What is truly alarming is the number of male students that are falling by the wayside. Hope there are enough low skilled jobs still around when and if they get ready to work.
I had six foreign exchange students live in my home over the years (Denmark, Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Japan and Truk Island). Every single one of them wanted to learn and had a different attitude about schools than the average American student. And although few were of any greater intelligence than the average students in our schools, all were much better students and found the American school surprisingly easy—in fact of little or no challenge.
Many students are not in school to learn, many parents offer little or no help, school staffs typically receive little in the way of meaningful guidance, and no one seems to agree on what the goal of education should be. It’s a mix that doesn’t work and shows why so many people are deserting the public schools. (And I am leaving out about a hundred other problems found in schools). There are many problems and I don’t think that simple solutions like increasing the money for schools will lead to increased learning.
Posted by Ken Jones
A disservice... Blast29, You say “Is it that far-fetched that elements of the ‘Haves’ wish to keep potential competitors "in their place”?... i.e. “You can mow my lawn, fix my car or man the cash register at Walmart, but don't ever dream of becoming my partner at the law firm.”
Yes it is! You’ve got to be kidding if you think that’s a reason why the schools are in bad shape. I’m only 55 years of age but I've never heard a single person utter those thoughts—other than a few left wing-types that tried to frame all problems in the context of race or economics. Are there racists out there? Sure? But that doesn'’ mean that most people want to keep a certain group on the bottom. Contrary to what most people believe, the vast majority of people who have money earned it—they didn't inherit it. And the way they earned it was by hard work, a little bit of luck, or “knowing someone” who provided them a chance to show what they could do. As someone who came from a bitterly poor family, I feel your generalizations do disservice to the opportunity that still exists in our society. Unfortunately too many people have psychologically convinced themselves they cannot succeed. They give up and then sure enough they don’t succeed. But don’t blame it on society. Personal responsibility still has to come in to play somewhere in the mix.
Posted by gyozadude
Textbooks, textbooks, textbooks...When I went to high school, I was told that textbooks were expensive and not easily replaced. As such, I diligently wrapped my textbooks using free book covers available in our school library. At the end of the year, I returned all my textbooks back in as good a condition as I received them. If we had a law that said we cut off a digit (yakuza-style) of the student (no anesthetic) for each textbook he/she destroys, loses, lets dog/cat eat, then you'd have less loss of textbooks. The problem is that the poor people you defend hurt themselves because they haven’t got the gumption to protect and value what they have. They’re always going to be looking outside for a handout. The actual solution can only be within. Gyozadude
Posted by blast29
A disservice... I'll admit I had it easier than many when I started out; perhaps that's why my views on “opportunity” verge on “entitlement”—I don't see why everyone shouldn’t have the same chances I did. And my views on devious social and political manipulation go back to my days at USC (an expensive and extremely conservative private institution), where I saw up close the machinations of the economic elite. I was appalled. I never said that most people are racists or that they didn’t work hard for their prosperity. Clearly most people aren’t racists and are honest and hard working. But political manipulation is also real, especially with complete control of the media. Create a false bogeyman (i.e. illegal Mexican immigrants flooding the school system), and draconian policies can be instituted. Does that make the majority of the people racists or evil? Clearly not. They’ve just been manipulated into feeling threatened or taken advantage of.
Posted by baitfish
I personally volunteer every year with the March of Dimes and Red Cross, my time is worth way more than my money, since I don’t have much, but if someone had to choose between making a $50,000 donation or volunteering in their spare time, I would say make the donation, the money will go farther and vice versa with a $50 donation and volunteering, your time is worth more. But we are not talking about non-profit organizations; we are talking about government run institutions, otherwise known as schools. If you were to give the LAUSD board $10,000,000 I guarantee you that the average student would never know it. As for the rest of the schools, I would say that there is not a whole lot of difference when compared to other large school districts. One of my huge pet peeves is tenure, what genius thought this up? Well your class is the dumbest in the nation, you smoke while you teach them... oh wait it says here you have been teaching here for 5 years.... weeellll hhhmmmmm.... Keep Up the Good Work!!!!! What the heck is that? There is no reason for the teachers to even try harder than they absolutely have to; it is a system that establishes mediocrity. An employee is responsible for his work if he does not do it he gets fired, why are teachers and principals and board members and each and every employee not held responsible?
Adam, I catch my fish with my feet on the ground...
Posted by minnowcatcher
Time is always worth more...My two cents... It’s a vicious circle. Parents vs. Children vs. Teachers vs. admin/government.
First—Parents need to know raise their children. School is NOT FREE DAYCARE. Bluntly, they need to give a damn. Children are extraordinary imitators when parents are interested so are kids. Private schools and the better scoring public primary/secondary schools REQUIRE parental hours or pay fines.
Second—Children need to know failure is NOT an option. The theory of I'm O.K. you’re O.K. does not fly very far on skid row. Self-esteem needs to come from accomplishment not from hot air.
Third—More money doesn’t make for better teachers. Parental interest, student interest, safe and well supplied schools mean more to most of the teachers I know than a pay raise would. (For some, better and sufficient supplies would BE a raise.)
Lastly—Government “runs amok” because we as taxpayers let it. YOU CAN fight city hall if enough people care. The next time the chancellor drives up in a state owned luxury car, write your congressman. When you see the BELMONT LEARNING FIASCO draining more money out of the edu budget start a ruckus. Encourage others to do so as well. This, at least in theory, is still a government of the PEOPLE. When enough people care again then it will become one in practice.
I now relinquish my soapbox... Good fish’, Maybe fishing should a mandatory class...DJ
Posted by Songslinger
It's A Good Soapbox
Posted by Ken Jones
Let's get back to fishing news...
Date: March 6, 2002
To: PFIC Message Board
From: mobilesuit
Subject: I think we might need some new nomenclature
I have been getting confused with pier and area names lately. Are the actual names of these places really the same? If they are, well damn, I’m outta luck. lol. Otherwise, perhaps we can make some more specific names for these places.
Here are the places I’m talking about:
O’side: there is an Oceanside in northern SD. but obviously there is another one.
Ocean Beach: there is an Ocean Beach Pier in SD but again, there is another one.
HMB: is this Hermosa Beach?
Yea, I know... if I read the posts and they are catching salmon, it’s not in socal. But you know. You kinda click on it with hopes of the report being from the place you’re wondering about. Well just a thought and some babbling I guess. Back to work!
Posted by fishaholic
hmb=Half Moon Bay, I think
Posted by Ken Jones
Internet = laziness/shortcuts/new vocabulary, etc. It seems that when people hooked up with the Internet and e-mail messages all the seemingly steady-as-a-rock rules for spelling and grammar were forgotten. Guess everything is speeded up and people do not want to take the time to write properly. To a point I guess that is O.K. (see e-mail messages with no messages on our board) but when making reports it would be better if people would spell out the names of locations, types of baits, and other relevant information.
Posted by dazex
I agree. I guess once you're on the board for a while, you start to pick up some of the common acronyms, lingo used. It's like the board has a sort of lingo/jargon on it's own. -Dazex
Posted by gyozadude
NO... it isn't the Internet...To come to the defense of technology, let me just say that people are naturally lazy. The Internet doesn’t exacerbate this problem. It just makes it more visible, like mammograms and breast cancer. For example, I don’t usually communicate with teenagers in my daily associations. It’s either very young children still in diapers or kick-rear-end technical and product people who make the stuff that drive pretty much the entire developed world’s information infrastructure. I get my main dose of proletariat drivel on this site... not to sound condescending... but that’s just the way it is. I think it's therapeutic to some degree. It keeps me in touch with the common man or woman. I had my first Internet email account at the Univ. of British Columbia back in 5th grade in the late 70’s. It was an experimental thing for a special education course. For almost two decades, we only had a handful of shortcuts, e.g. smiley [
], winking smileys [;-)] It was only after the proliferation of portals and email to the masses that we acquired acronyms like ROFLMAO...etc. The Internet didn’t create this. It was the casual plebes injecting their idle humor because, rather than using the Internet for work, they waste their time away (like I'm doing now ). No, the Internet != laziness/shortcuts/new vocab. Rather, proles = laziness/shortcuts/new vocabulary.- GyozadudePosted by Wild Moose
Okay, Okay I'm sorry for the acronym/abbreviation. HMB - Half Moon Bay, San Mateo Co. (er County). But as I read about all the different species quite a few of you catch ‘down south’ I'm rather jealous and would almost rather be there. As for the shorthand, it’s not really due to laziness on my part but rather I was still cold from the outing and was just saving my fingers (which at the time felt like they were going to break off). Tight Lines to you all.
Posted by Ken Jones
Plebes, Proles and Karl Marx... Pier Rats Unite! I’ve always said that pier rats are the plebeians of the fishing fraternity. Fits right in that we're also the proletariat. Gee, I just hope Karl Marx doesn't find out. He’ll have us doing all kinds of wacky things to gain equality with those fly fishermen. Pier Rats unite...
Posted by gyozadude
Would Marx approve of using a Calcutta 400? He'd probably roll over in his grave if he knew about all the wonderful, privately produced lures, rods, and reels and tackle we all favor. - Gyozadude
Posted by SD Fisherman
Nah, as long as Karl knew that...we were rebelling against the bourgeoisie or our Aristocratic “Superiors” by calling in sick to work in order to go fishing, hehe. Hey we have to come out on top somehow, eh? -Don aka SDF
Posted by SD Fisherman
I mean YEAH he would approve, hehe.
Posted by Albert Yi
Speaking of flyfishers... I'm a flyfisherman as well as a pier-rat... So what would that make me? A double agent? A bastard? Do I have the best of both worlds, or have I inherited the worst that both worlds have to offer? Hehehe... - Albert Yi
Posted by Ken Jones
Albert... Albert, you know that Lenin demanded total commitment. How can you serve two different gods? Would you rather catch one of those dinky 6-inch hatchery raised trout or a 100-pound mud marlin? Now be honest. Of course you could fish from some of the small Bay Area piers with your fly rod. Nothing more interesting than seeing a sturgeon rise to a properly placed fly. (And I used to know a guy who actually fished for them with his fly rod and a BIG fly. Said he had taken quite a few although he was generally fishing from a boat.)
Posted by lucy
Crappy educational system... So much for the “liberal” approach of dumbing down the schools so that even borderline vegetables can graduate from high school—despite being unable to read or write!
Posted by gyozadude
Actually, I like the educational system... It can be so easy to graduate that a smart student could fish for four hours a day during high school days and still end up the Valedictorian.
(Disclaimer: I’m being facetious here.... if you’re currently getting less than a 3.7/4.0 GPA, you don’t qualify for this fish-study program)- GyozadudePosted by blast29
Before you go blaming “Liberals” for the struggling educational system in California, perhaps you could explain how this came to pass since the state has had an extreme Conservative as Governor for 16 of the past 20 years. Even our current Governor describes himself as a Moderate. It seems far more likely that our Conservative leadership has “dumbed down” education in order to create a large undereducated work force that can be more easily exploited by the Enron types (staunch Conservatives, by the way).
Posted by gyozadude
Spending bills are approved by Assembly & Senate. The Gov’nor is basically a figurehead in CA. 95% of the budget is spoken for by law, 52 - 54% is automatically mandated to education. So there’s nothing really the executive branch can do. It's all about how the media spins the story. If you look at the numbers... you'd see few variations in spending and growth in actual dollars per student over those years. I only blame the executive branch when they blow $9Billion on bad electricity contracts. If you need someone to blame... look to the (former) speaker of the Assembly...Willy Brown. A consummate political tactician, his obstructionist and liberal bent shaped spending policies more than anyone in CA politics in the last two decades. So before blaming governors and the executive branch, at least lets all first learn about how Gov't works before blaming those only in the Executive branch. If you look at relative spending per student, CA actually compares well with other states. You're talking about small differences of say less than 5-10% variation in state-to-state spending in most cases. I think Lucy has a point about the liberal education that young people get in CA. I'll add that liberal parents are adding to that problem. - Gyozadude
Posted by Ken Jones
As an ex-teacher I feel I should have an opportunity to add my views. Educational reform is not really a liberal versus conservative issue—with one big exception. I say that because both sides of the political spectrum have repeatedly stated that they wanted to improve educational standards, both have tried to grab political advantage for their particular “educational plans,” and both have failed to achieve measurable improvement. This has been going on at least since the ‘60s. The exception I mentioned is the educational establishment itself and for good or bad it is caused by the liberal leanings of most teachers. Most teachers enter the profession because they want to do well, help kids, and improve society. Unfortunately, the desire to do good and to help kids has, over the years, developed more into the realm of helping students’ self esteem than in preparing a student sufficiently ready to compete in the real world that exists outside of school. Even while academic improvement is constantly on the tongue and mind of most teachers, it still comes in second to the goal of social reform. Thus the never-ending meetings on diversity, on development of non-traditional means of instruction (so that non-English speaking students are not at a disadvantage when competing against those more literate in English), and on basic social issues. These are seen as the priorities in most schools (at least to the teachers) even if more news is given to academic reform. Win the hearts and souls of the workers and you will see improvement unimagined. In schools the hearts and souls are committed to social reform, not to academic reform. Teachers are not against academic improvement but are for it only as long as it doesn't interfere with the more important social agenda. Not all teachers fall in this group but enough to insure that the inertia that exists will probably last for the foreseeable future.
Posted by Songslinger
The P Word... It always strikes me as bizarre when educational failures or successes are discussed without ever invoking a crucial component: PARENTS. No school will function well if the parents are indifferent to learning. If the parents are uneducated and willfully ignorant, the child has a poor chance of success. It takes great character and unusual strength to surmount one’s parents, too much for most kids, even those who are driven to learn. The home should be a base from which to spring, yet too often it is a tether or prison. Let's stop blaming politicians and the system. Throw all the money you want at the schools here and nothing will improve unless the parents are encouraged (forced, even) to participate and nurture the concept of knowledge. Two more ideas: Pay the teachers more but fire the incompetent ones. Release the stranglehold of unions and you will see better competition.
Posted by blast29
The Governor is powerless re: education? Absolutely not! The Governor’s clout comes from his leadership of his party, his appointments and his veto power, among other things. Back in the ‘50s and early ‘60s, California had the finest public school system in the WORLD. From elementary school to the Cal State and UC systems, a world-class education was available to any California resident. We had more junior colleges (prime vehicles for WWII and Korean War vets to re-enter the educational system) than the rest of the nation combined. Pasadena, El Camino, Pierce and LACC were routinely ranked as the best in the nation. And it was FREE. Who created this system? The Liberal Governor Edmund Brown. Who started the dismantling of this system? The Conservative Governor Ronald Reagan. The Conservative initiative Prop. 13 was the final nail in the coffin for world-class public education in California. The poor and the working class are the primary victims of the declining public school system, with a particularly pernicious effect in Black and Latino communities of this ilk. Since these groups are traditional Democratic constituencies, you do the math. Is it logical that the Liberals would do it to themselves and their own? Learn the history of public education in California before you go about pontificating about the reasons for its decline.
Posted by stinkyfingers
Crazy article regarding Liberals & schools. You won’t believe this one... ACLU - thank you. A guy on another board posted the following:
=============everything below this line was cut and pasted===========
“This story came out of California. It seems that there is some sort of an anti-discrimination law in California that some school districts interpret as a mandate to teach their captives (you might want to call them students, not me) all about lesbianism, homosexuality and transgenderism. (My spell-checker didn’t like that one even a little bit.) The little rug rats are supposed to be exposed to positive images of homosexuality. Yeah, that ought to help them find jobs, right? Anyway... the little captives are ushered into a room and shown skits with the catchy little title of “Cootie Shots.” In one of these skits you hear a transsexual boy say, “Let them say I’m like a girl. What’s wrong with being like a girl? Let them laugh, let them scream, they’ll all be beheaded when I’m queen.” Then you have a little girl say, “The one I love, she wears a dress.” And so forth … you get the picture.
Well, some parents are more than a little upset. In fact, they’re filing lawsuits! They say that the school district violated their rights because their kids weren’t allowed to opt out of the Cootie Shots class. Now... here comes some woman from the UCLA Teacher Education Program named Rosa Futomoto. She has something to say about the parents who are suing the school district. Futomoto says: “If they really feel that way their children maybe should be home schooled. And if that would be their choice then maybe they can afford a private school where they can practice racism and sexism and whatever they want to practice.”
There you have it, folks. The incredible arrogance you find among those holier-than-thou academic types who just can’t understand why any parent would want to exercise control over their child’s sexual and social upbringing. This snide, officious woman is telling you that if you don’t want your children to learn all about gays, lesbians and other sexual oddities then you should just take your children to some private school where, of course, everybody knows they teach racism and sexism. How much longer are you folks going to put up with this? How much longer are you going to stand by while the government takes your children for hours a day and indoctrinates them with this type of garbage? How much longer are you going to put up with the arrogance of people like Rosa Futomoto? Just when was the last time you wrote to your Congressman or Senator demanding school choice?”
Posted by lucy
Now, THAT’s total crap...That’s just some more of your old typical fundamentalist Christian propaganda intended to scare the morons. Let’s not drag that kind of crap with a legitimate discussion of the deterioration of educational standards, eh? Reminds me of that garbage that was going around in which it was claimed that the Teletubbies were a homosexual plot to indoctrinate toddlers—which was based on the fact that one of them dresses in purple! Like, how totally stupid can you get?
Posted by gyozadude
I am a product of CA education... Blast 29: You need to remember... I'm mostly a product of the California education system. Except for four years of outstanding education in B.C. most of my High School and University years were spent in CA. I know the history and I lived it. It's easy for the media to paint the picture of Prop 13 being the worst thing for education. But why have I succeeded? My parents were immigrants from Taiwan. We came with only $500 in pocket and a family of six living in a 1-bedroom apartment on $110/month. We took advantage of the educational system and thrived. I'm a graduate of the UC system as well. I am the living disproof of liberal assertions that Prop 13 and the Republicans dismantled the education system in CA. This is flatly wrong.
I’d invite you to do some accounting on the amount of money spent on education in CA and the year over year growth and the amount spent per student, per class, per school. And then ask yourself why other states that score better do so on less money. Bigger budgets aren't the answer. They never were. It’s good parenting, strict discipline, and solid curricula that are the keys to higher scholastic achievement.
I would like to add I wholeheartedly agree with Ken's assessment of this self-esteem thing in schools. I was always taught by my parents that self-esteem was earned, not an entitlement. I recall my graduation day at Cal Berkeley. I received the Departmental Citation for outstanding student in Nuclear Engineering. My Dad chided me that had I been in EECS, I probably wouldn’t have won. He’s probably right, and that humbled me... even though I still think I'm pretty kick rear end in the brains side of things... but kids these days have an attitude problem of too much false esteem and the brutal reality is they need more strict discipline and repetitive schooling activities to achieve their potential. Otherwise they may get distracted by drugs, gangs, video games, and fishing...
BTW, have you ever thought that the reason for decline in scholastic achievement in Black and Latino communities is not a function of budget? I would propose that the lack of achievement is largely because of cultural inferiority in a Socialist Darwinian sense. Sure, it sounds racist... but why is it that UC Berkeley is 40% Asian? Simply because Asians are culturally inclined towards scholastic achievement and their families encourage them to excel or get smacked silly and grounded for the rest of puberty. Do the whites? Blacks? Hispanics? do this? Not at all and not to the degree that Asians do. Are there signs that genetics also affect scholastic achievement? Absolutely. But is it politically correct to talk about such things? No, and so real change never takes place to solve the problem because the liberals prevent real dialog and real science from uprooting the true causes.
You know, we could drag this out forever and I could take copious space on this fishing board to cite proof after proof. If the liberals took a step back and answered questions such as why private schools can achieve such high test scores with fewer dollars per student than public schools, why some states do better for less money, and why is there so much fluff in school curricula... then I think we'd all start on trying to address the problem. But the way it is now, the system is broken and the Liberals want to dump more money into a broken system. That's just foolish. As a big CA taxpayer, I'll move to WA State before rolling back to pre Prop 13 days. Gyozadude
Posted by gyozadude
Crazy article regarding Liberals & schools... Hey Stinky... I don't know why the conservative right makes such a big stink out of homosexuality. We may discover that in the RNA transcription phase of reproduction, sometimes the gene that defines sexual preference may get swapped around. This may occur in 1-5 % of cases naturally and this occurs in society, even though you'd think that Darwinism would have eliminated this over time, but it hasn’t happened, so if being gay is genetic and natural, so be it. Anyway, it is a valid lifestyle choice and though I don't practice it, I think there's nothing wrong with schools teaching this stuff to kids who may need to know. As long as they're also teaching the full spectrum of reading, writing and arithmetic, history, science, etc... I have no problems and I don't think any others should feel uncomfortable with this. I just saw that movie with Michael Douglas and Annette Bening – “American President” or something like that... and one line I really like is, “Why [aren't we all] card-toting members of the ACLU, an organization who’s sole purpose is to defend the Bill of Rights...” - Gyozadude
Posted by blast29
So am I... I attended public schools in the Brown (Edmund not Jerry) era. Several of my classmates went on to UCLA and UCSB, one went to Harvard (a football player), one to Yale, one to Stanford (another football player), one to Cal Tech and one to Harvey Mudd (Pomona complex). I chose USC because I'd always wanted to take the boosters’ train back to South Bend for the Notre Dame game. Many others chose the junior college-state college route or out-of-state institutions. We were all well prepared for the academic life that followed. I also took my turn in Vietnam upon graduation because my upbringing and the school system created in me a sense of public service (due at least in part to gratitude for the free quality education I'd received). I'm still grateful for the running start I got from the public school system. It breaks my heart to see what it’s become. I say fix it so others can benefit as I did. No matter what it takes!
Posted by Nopal
I am a product of CA education... So am I. In fact, I'm still going to college. I'm not going list my GPA, awards that I might have gotten, etc, because I don't need them to make a point. Let me just say that the thing that always struck me as most unusual about the CA education system (I originally studied up to the equivalent of junior high in Mexico) is that you have to pretty much search and fight for a challenging and engaging education yourself. You have to challenge the teachers to provide more than what they otherwise would. If you go with the flow then the classes are, compared to the education south of the border, too easy and lacking in substance, just what Ken was referring to. Things may be a bit different once the university level is reached, but without a solid foundation to begin with, that is irrelevant.
This is also one of the reasons that I must disagree with you in regards to race and scholastic achievement. I have known as many Mexican people with “kick ass” brains in Mexico than the equivalent white/Asian number here. This to me is simply a function of the different education systems and the environment in which they exist, and not of race. Culturally, Asians tend to put more emphasis in education, I agree. But, I submit to you that it is merely a cultural phenomenon. It is unwise to stretch the boundaries of reason in order to attribute to race that which can merely be explained as an effect of the environment in which a particular individual may grow up.
Posted by stinkyfingers
You missed the POINT! Hello? Anybody got his or her brain on today? These are kids. KIDS should NOT be thinking about SEX - PERIOD. I don’t want my kid to ask, “What does gay mean?” Because the only way to explain it to talk about sex. Kids should be carefree and have fun. I don’t want my kids learning about sex until I think they are ready. And I'll be damned if anybody else tries to teach my CHILD about sex - as a matter of fact, I may go to prison for what I may do to someone if they tried...
Posted by gyozadude
I learned Sex Ed in 2nd grade... I learned where babies came from, about sexual orientation and all sorts of genital parts and biology in 2nd grade. That was really, really, really liberal back then in a country-hick town. I was only seven years old! Too young? I don't think so. Kids can have fun and be educated too. Remember that a few hundred years ago, life span, social structures like marriage, and sexual imperatives to procreate were all sort of synchronized. People got married around 14 - 20 years old. Romeo and Juliet is a story about teens.
It’s now 2002. Better nutrition implies that girls reach biological maturity at age 11 - 12 now and boys at 13 - 15. Yet, we’re delaying marriage until over 30! You need someway to satisfy the sexual imperative, and kids will experiment with sex whether we like it or not. The best way to insure these kids don’t “screw” up their futures is through education. They need to know all about safe ways of having sex, as well as all the ways that STD’s get transmitted, and what the consequences of some of them are: AIDS, HPV, Syphilis, etc. Getting to them at age 8 or 9 isn't too early. It’s at a time when they are innocent enough not to giggle or laugh and get embarrassed, as well, it prepares them for wild changes that soon occur after just a couple of years. I can't believe I’m taking a totally Liberal stance here... but I am! - Gyozadude
Posted by baitfish
I learned Sex Ed in 2nd grade...I disagree with that, 2nd grade is way too young. But I do agree with sex Ed in schools with the parents having the option of not including their children. However, Sex Ed is something that needs to be learned as the child approaches sexual maturity, not when they are 7 years old, which is way to soon in their development. I don’t think you are taking into consideration the amount of growing a person does in between the ages of 7-12, that child is night and day as far as their hormones are concerned. A child should be taught sex ed around age 12, if a child is sexually active any earlier than that, there has got to be some type of sexual abuse that must have caused it. Also teaching them before they are prepared for it can traumatize them and cause problems. A simple demonstration of male female reproduction systems and sex at age 12, then a more advanced STD and safe sex and talks about orientation at age 15. The child just does not comprehend it and could lead to a lot of confusion before they have experienced enough life to comprehend the ramifications of sex and culture. Adam, I catch my fish with my feet on the ground...
Posted by stinkyfingers
Wow - YOU really believe that??? "Our Conservative leadership has “dumbed down” education in order to create a large undereducated work force that can be more easily exploited" - you said that. You say they did this intentionally for their agenda. Is that what you're saying? Of course it is. I'm floored. What a conspiracy theory you have there, you really believe it??? Folks: We have just left the atmosphere...
Posted by blast29
Wow - YOU really believe that??? Conservatives won’t screw the public in pursuit of their own agendas? Can you spell “Quackenbush”? Conservatives and their Corporate backers would never harm an entire state in pursuit of riches? Can you spell “Kenny Boy and Rolling Blackouts”?
Posted by baitfish
Your Quackenbush example is a far cry from a political part agenda to create a state of idiots. Adam
Posted by blast29
I never said “Idiots”. I said “undereducated.” And aside from calling me loopy, you’ve not explained why it seems that schools in poor and working class neighborhoods--too often Black and Latino ones--suffer the most. Many of these schools don’t have enough textbooks for their students, who must share them in class and who are not allowed to take them home to study at night. In some cases, even these few textbooks are obsolete to begin with. My cousin is a substitute teacher in the LAUSD, and she has to bring her own crayons and watercolors for the kids to use! These problems are not caused by liberal policies but by an acute lack of funding. The pattern is too uniform and too longstanding to write off as happenstance.
What, then, is the cause? Race might be the answer some choose to cloud the issue, but it’s more than that. Education can be the great leveler, a way to bridge the gap between “Haves” and “Have-nots.” Is it that far-fetched that elements of the “Haves” wish to keep potential competitors” in their place"?...i.e. “You can mow my lawn, fix my car or man the cash register at Walmart, but don't ever dream of becoming my partner at the law firm.”
Posted by baitfish
Well I don't think it has anything to do with Liberals or Republicans. My wife is a substitute with LAUSD, and she is trying to become a full-time teacher. In order to not make broad generalizations about schools, I will speak about what I know, and that is LAUSD. LAUSD is too big, so it is impossible to manage the money. Also, it is run by a bunch of bureaucrats who could not balance a checkbook. The reason that they don’t get better is that they don’t have to, no one gets fired, and any amount of reprimands from your superiors mean nothing if you don’t get fired in the long run. The majority of persons who I have met who become government employees, do it for the following reasons, Money, security, too help the common man or to escape reality. When there is no accountability for their actions, then the people in those positions that are in it for non-selfless reasons are susceptible to be the wonderful people that we deal with at the DMV to use a universal example. The reason kids have fewer textbooks and supplies at their school is because of how the schools are funded. The schools receive bonuses for doing well, schools that do poorly are not given more money. In the lower income areas, population densities are higher creating larger requirements of schools. The problem is lower income areas are breeding grounds for ignorance, which results in lower test scores, which results in less “bonus” money, in a highly populated area. It is simple math to discover what happens when all those items are added together. Adam
Posted by Ken Jones
Get involved, and then offer suggestions... Anyone who says the answer to better-educated students will be found in throwing more money into the educational system does not understand what goes on at schools. As for teachers, they are among our most important public servants and (in most cases) do deserve increases in pay. At the same time many have personal agendas and refuse to teach what is mandated by the state.
I was involved in a world history program with Stanford University for several years and one of the things I found most disturbing was the teachers who said they did not teach the state mandated units in world history—even though they knew their students would be tested on them. A San Jose teacher skipped most of World War I and World War II because a study of Latin America was considered more relevant to her students. A teacher in Oakland basically skipped World War I, World War II and the Cold War because she wanted to do a longer unit on Africa. So even though this was part of a high prestige program several of the teachers were not teaching those subject areas mandated by the state. Not surprisingly their students scored low when the state tests on history were given and perhaps not surprisingly their schools were eventually dropped from the Stanford University program.
Just before I quit teaching I was forced to attend a SADAIE course to learn how to teach in a non-traditional way. Since 50% of the students in our school were Latino, we were told to teach/test by letting them draw pictures, do group projects, etc. The message was don’t require as much reading and writing. Every teacher in the state has to take SADAIE or a similar program.
As for the students, I'll never forget a mentor and highly honored teacher (and one who was a favorite of students) who retired a couple of years ago. He often said that schools and the debate about schools were among the most dishonest subjects in society. His feelings were that the vast majority of students in our public schools are not there to learn; they are there primarily for social reasons. Take away sports, clubs, and other social activities, toughen the standards, and let students know they truly need an education if they hope to succeed in life, and they might show some improvement. However, many will not show improvement no matter how good the teacher or facilities, that is a sad fact of school life. What is truly alarming is the number of male students that are falling by the wayside. Hope there are enough low skilled jobs still around when and if they get ready to work.
I had six foreign exchange students live in my home over the years (Denmark, Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Japan and Truk Island). Every single one of them wanted to learn and had a different attitude about schools than the average American student. And although few were of any greater intelligence than the average students in our schools, all were much better students and found the American school surprisingly easy—in fact of little or no challenge.
Many students are not in school to learn, many parents offer little or no help, school staffs typically receive little in the way of meaningful guidance, and no one seems to agree on what the goal of education should be. It’s a mix that doesn’t work and shows why so many people are deserting the public schools. (And I am leaving out about a hundred other problems found in schools). There are many problems and I don’t think that simple solutions like increasing the money for schools will lead to increased learning.
Posted by Ken Jones
A disservice... Blast29, You say “Is it that far-fetched that elements of the ‘Haves’ wish to keep potential competitors "in their place”?... i.e. “You can mow my lawn, fix my car or man the cash register at Walmart, but don't ever dream of becoming my partner at the law firm.”
Yes it is! You’ve got to be kidding if you think that’s a reason why the schools are in bad shape. I’m only 55 years of age but I've never heard a single person utter those thoughts—other than a few left wing-types that tried to frame all problems in the context of race or economics. Are there racists out there? Sure? But that doesn'’ mean that most people want to keep a certain group on the bottom. Contrary to what most people believe, the vast majority of people who have money earned it—they didn't inherit it. And the way they earned it was by hard work, a little bit of luck, or “knowing someone” who provided them a chance to show what they could do. As someone who came from a bitterly poor family, I feel your generalizations do disservice to the opportunity that still exists in our society. Unfortunately too many people have psychologically convinced themselves they cannot succeed. They give up and then sure enough they don’t succeed. But don’t blame it on society. Personal responsibility still has to come in to play somewhere in the mix.
Posted by gyozadude
Textbooks, textbooks, textbooks...When I went to high school, I was told that textbooks were expensive and not easily replaced. As such, I diligently wrapped my textbooks using free book covers available in our school library. At the end of the year, I returned all my textbooks back in as good a condition as I received them. If we had a law that said we cut off a digit (yakuza-style) of the student (no anesthetic) for each textbook he/she destroys, loses, lets dog/cat eat, then you'd have less loss of textbooks. The problem is that the poor people you defend hurt themselves because they haven’t got the gumption to protect and value what they have. They’re always going to be looking outside for a handout. The actual solution can only be within. Gyozadude
Posted by blast29
A disservice... I'll admit I had it easier than many when I started out; perhaps that's why my views on “opportunity” verge on “entitlement”—I don't see why everyone shouldn’t have the same chances I did. And my views on devious social and political manipulation go back to my days at USC (an expensive and extremely conservative private institution), where I saw up close the machinations of the economic elite. I was appalled. I never said that most people are racists or that they didn’t work hard for their prosperity. Clearly most people aren’t racists and are honest and hard working. But political manipulation is also real, especially with complete control of the media. Create a false bogeyman (i.e. illegal Mexican immigrants flooding the school system), and draconian policies can be instituted. Does that make the majority of the people racists or evil? Clearly not. They’ve just been manipulated into feeling threatened or taken advantage of.
Posted by baitfish
I personally volunteer every year with the March of Dimes and Red Cross, my time is worth way more than my money, since I don’t have much, but if someone had to choose between making a $50,000 donation or volunteering in their spare time, I would say make the donation, the money will go farther and vice versa with a $50 donation and volunteering, your time is worth more. But we are not talking about non-profit organizations; we are talking about government run institutions, otherwise known as schools. If you were to give the LAUSD board $10,000,000 I guarantee you that the average student would never know it. As for the rest of the schools, I would say that there is not a whole lot of difference when compared to other large school districts. One of my huge pet peeves is tenure, what genius thought this up? Well your class is the dumbest in the nation, you smoke while you teach them... oh wait it says here you have been teaching here for 5 years.... weeellll hhhmmmmm.... Keep Up the Good Work!!!!! What the heck is that? There is no reason for the teachers to even try harder than they absolutely have to; it is a system that establishes mediocrity. An employee is responsible for his work if he does not do it he gets fired, why are teachers and principals and board members and each and every employee not held responsible?
Adam, I catch my fish with my feet on the ground...
Posted by minnowcatcher
Time is always worth more...My two cents... It’s a vicious circle. Parents vs. Children vs. Teachers vs. admin/government.
First—Parents need to know raise their children. School is NOT FREE DAYCARE. Bluntly, they need to give a damn. Children are extraordinary imitators when parents are interested so are kids. Private schools and the better scoring public primary/secondary schools REQUIRE parental hours or pay fines.
Second—Children need to know failure is NOT an option. The theory of I'm O.K. you’re O.K. does not fly very far on skid row. Self-esteem needs to come from accomplishment not from hot air.
Third—More money doesn’t make for better teachers. Parental interest, student interest, safe and well supplied schools mean more to most of the teachers I know than a pay raise would. (For some, better and sufficient supplies would BE a raise.)
Lastly—Government “runs amok” because we as taxpayers let it. YOU CAN fight city hall if enough people care. The next time the chancellor drives up in a state owned luxury car, write your congressman. When you see the BELMONT LEARNING FIASCO draining more money out of the edu budget start a ruckus. Encourage others to do so as well. This, at least in theory, is still a government of the PEOPLE. When enough people care again then it will become one in practice.
I now relinquish my soapbox... Good fish’, Maybe fishing should a mandatory class...DJ
Posted by Songslinger
It's A Good Soapbox
Posted by Ken Jones
Let's get back to fishing news...