View Full Version : What would another 4 years look like under Obama and the Democrats?....see California
USANick7
10-09-2012, 12:30
http://www.culpepergop.org/2012/10/09/what-would-another-4-years-with-obama-democrats-look-like-see-california/
You have to like Victor Davis Hanson...I highly recommend his book Carnage and Culture...great response to Guns, Germs and Steel.
This is another debating point I wish Romney had hit Obama over the head with. You have the largest economy in the nation in the toilet because of adhering to the very policies that Obama has been applying at the national level. Then you have Texas, the second-largest economy, adhering to the policies Romney is calling for, and it is one of the biggest job creators in the nation.
Now if that's not driving the point home, if he uses it...I don't know what will.
Great comparison...
Agreed - Broadsword2004 makes a great comparison. The debacle that is the state of California's fiscal situation is but a microcosm of liberal fiscal policy in action. Despite all the wonderful advantages enjoyed by California...decades of tax and spend policies are driving it to bankruptcy.
USANick7
10-09-2012, 14:08
Now if that's not driving the point home, if he uses it...I don't know what will.
Great comparison...
Well that has always seemed to be the most frustrating point...we have examples of what happens when liberal vs. conservative policies are followed in plenty of places.
It's not that difficult to account for other considerations and present a fairly consistent pattern. Leftist polices not only yield poor results in mixed areas (by mixed I mean among areas which are comprised of both conservative and liberal leaning individuals) but even in areas where the vast majority of people are liberals.
Even in liberal bastions like Sweden you are seeing greater privatization of services precisely because they eventually reach a breaking point. It flies against the liberal mindset that centralized economic control and redistribution would produce better corporate results if only people could be made to understand them better and put aside their own narrow self interest.
Many places in Europe are held up as examples to Americans by our own left as demonstrations of a better "community spirit" with little to no consideration for what that actually means and what sort of results it has produced.
California is our own little experiment of what happens when leftist ideology is permitted to dominate. We have reached a tipping point in CA where producing people have given up attempting to fight the system and are simply relocating at the same time that non producing people are pouring in. It is a guarantee that when faced with this predicament, California will not attempt to change its course of action but will rather look to the federal government to subsidize its poor policy decisions at the expense of those states who have done a far better job managing their resources through a freer system.
I wonder if the broader lesson will actually be understood by liberals... their polices fail to work, not because people oppose them...but ultimately because they are dependent upon the hard work and efforts of those whom they harm. So while a society of limited government conservatives can coexist and thrive, a society of central planning leftists eventually pushes out the very thing it depends upon for its sustenance.
In theory... the worst thing that could ever happen to the liberal state...is for them to win the philosophical argument in the minds of producers and convert them, thus killing the host that makes their existence possible.
just my .02
Badger52
10-09-2012, 14:09
Despite all the wonderful advantages enjoyed by California...decades of tax and spend policies are driving it to bankruptcy. I liked the high-desert country as a kid, and there was a real cool lagoon down by La Jolla great for snorkeling.
What are the wonderful advantages nowadays? (I left in '69)
I think the car has already plummeted off Topanga Canyon Rd.
USANick7
10-09-2012, 14:13
What are the wonderful advantages nowadays? (I left in '69)
I think the car has already plummeted off Topanga Canyon Rd.
Natural resources, great coastline and ports, attractive scenery that attracts people, fertile soil, etc...
Give Hong Kong the same resources and it would be incredible to watch...
I liked the high-desert country as a kid, and there was a real cool lagoon down by La Jolla great for snorkeling.
What are the wonderful advantages nowadays? (I left in '69)
I think the car has already plummeted off Topanga Canyon Rd.
Point well taken - but agriculture, manufacturing, mining, fishing...even the holliwierd industry generates substantial jobs and revenue. Now factor in the energy potenial off the coast...California is rapidly becoming the poster child for mismanaging assets.
ETA: USANick7 just beat me while I was typing - CA has tremendous advantages - I'll call his Hong Kong and raise you a Singapore.
Somebody somewhere wrote about the difference between European vs US government spending. We've touched on it a few times here.
At first our spending was pretty much local, state and federal. You wanted another Fire Truck or Local Park you paid for it. Same with the states. The Feds? Well, they were kept at the Federal level.
The basic difference is that Europe is somewhat like the US states without the Feds. Each country in Europe stands alone (discounting the EU) and it's finances are out in the open - and most of them are in the toilet.
In the US state and local spending is being masked by the Federal Government through programs and grants. 16 million here, 20 million to this school system, 20 million over there and 15 million way over there. The Feds are propping up local and state government all over the country with checks written on an overdrawn account.
When our crunch comes it will be worse than Europe's.
Hanson's tidy analysis doesn't mention a key factor in California's decline: a referendum/initiative/recall process that allows the electorate to bypass the legislative process to enact spending bills that impact the state's economy without voters having any idea of the long term impact (http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/referenda.htm). He wants to blame this group or another for the sorry state of public education in California, but illegal immigration and the teachers' union are only part of the puzzle. The other part is the role of Proposition 13--a darling of populist Conservatives--in gutting education budgets. (I was in the LAUSD when it was passed and was one step ahead of its rippling impact from the fourth grade until I graduated from Cal.)
Does Hansen pay himself royalties for rehashing his earlier editorials without really contributing to the debate or playing an active role in forming viable solutions? (If he so desired, he could write an awesome piece breaking down support for the key spending initiatives that have helped to bankrupt the state. Then again, such a piece would risk turning a critical eye on his populist minded readers. I guess the mission of historians to tell truth to power only goes so far.)
Hanson was, at one time, a damn good professional academic historian who moved a debate or two forward by light years but that was long ago. Lewis Gould used to lambaste historians who "closed shop" after reaching a certain level of success on a regular basis. He probably didn't have Hanson in mind but he's increasingly a good example of what the man meant.
Other than that, a great editorial, the blogosphere at its finest.
(Clearly, the caffeine buzz I get from drinking Pepsi isn't working for me. I'm generally not this bitter.)
Hanson's tidy analysis doesn't mention a key factor in California's decline..........................
So the problem is "They are not spending enough"?
The propositions - in one form or another - by reducing spending or tax increases - was to limit the growth of government. But the government still got bigger with more unon folks and better pensions - not to mention the crazy earth firsters.
It is a fact - Not all people can work for local, state and federal governments. Somebody has to be out in the private sector turning $1 into $2 so it can be taxed to feed the beast.
Even here in Fayetteville when they have a surplus there is no talk of lowering taxes - just "Hey, look at the new programs we can start."
Tax revaluation? Every time revaluation comes around citizens call for it to be revenue nuetral. In otherwords the tax rate is reduced to match the budget - but no - "More free money, let's start some new programs."
So the problem is "They are not spending enough"?
The propositions - in one form or another - by reducing spending or tax increases - was to limit the growth of government. But the government still got bigger with more unon folks and better pensions - not to mention the crazy earth firsters.
It is a fact - Not all people can work for local, state and federal governments. Somebody has to be out in the private sector turning $1 into $2 so it can be taxed to feed the beast.
Even here in Fayetteville when they have a surplus there is no talk of lowering taxes - just "Hey, look at the new programs we can start."
Tax revaluation? Every time revaluation comes around citizens call for it to be revenue nuetral. In otherwords the tax rate is reduced to match the budget - but no - "More free money, let's start some new programs."Pete--
The point I am making is that the proposition process, introduced by John Randolph Haynes, allows voters to make important decisions about how the state government does or does not spend money without doing any research or having debates.
On its face, Proposition 13 seemed like a great idea because it cut property taxes and that meant more money in families pockets.:cool: But how much of this saved money did families have to spend to make up for the slashing of the LAUSD's transportation budget? Fewer school buses and shorter routes means more parents leaving work early to pick up their kids which means more cars on the road during rush hour which means higher gas prices, more smog, and more pot holes.*
Meanwhile, time that kids had previously spent studying/playing becomes time waiting for a ride or finding a way home. Now, hours that had once been family time clashing against study time. As the budget cuts also impact the quality of instruction and educational technology, kids are less self sufficient and need more help from their folks. "Whoop whoop whoop," is the sound of helicopter parents coming to the rescue, and look how that dynamic is impacting American civilization.
More recently, propositions have been floated to foot the bill for projects that, again, on the face, seem like great ideas (three strikes, more jails, no employer contributions to political campaigns from employees' paychecks) but where's the informed, respectful debate that increases citizens' civic awareness of the 'big picture'?
__________________________________________________ ___
*Traffic in California, especially in So Cal beggars the imagination of people who don't experience it first hand on a daily basis. Some years ago, I had to go to Chicago for my job. As the shuttle crawled from the airport towards downtown, the driver remarked "Traffic is really bad today." Some of the passengers chimed in that they'd never seen anything like it. I did a double take to make sure I was seeing the same thing (two lanes moving slowly, one lane stop and go, a fourth pretty much jammed) before replying "We'd KILL to have traffic this good back home."
Last hard class
10-09-2012, 15:48
This is another debating point I wish Romney had hit Obama over the head with. You have the largest economy in the nation in the toilet because of adhering to the very policies that Obama has been applying at the national level. Then you have Texas, the second-largest economy, adhering to the policies Romney is calling for, and it is one of the biggest job creators in the nation.
Fact check time:
California is the 2nd largest job creator in 2012 ( behind Texas). It's trending to take over Texas before the end of the year. This, despite the large decrease in Government payrolls. And I am OK with that.
LHC
.....The point I am making is that the proposition process, introduced by John Randolph Haynes, allows voters to make important decisions about how the state government does or does not spend money without doing any research or having debates. ..............."
Teachers - the ones who get the axe first.
The largest employer in our county after the military is the Cumberland County Public School system with just under 7,000 employees. With a school population of around 53,000 that works out to one employee for every 7.57 students.
With classroom sizes at 14 or more at least 50% of the employees do not work as teachers. The school system calls that 50% staff & support.
Yet every time the school system does not get it's DEMANDED money it lays off the teachers. So parents raise hell, the money is raised and the system hires one more teacher and one more "support & staff".
Maybe if the taxpayers would starve the beast and force it to fire some "support & staff" they could put more money into teachers and the classrooms.
Starve the Beast
When the High Sheriff of Cumberland County does not get his DEMANDED budget he layes of the school crossing guards - nothing else just the guards - and the first day of school the parents raise hell and the Sheriff gets his money for the SWAT team.
Starve the Beast.
And don't get me started on bussing - for that you need to follow the Wake County Circus.
Teachers - the ones who get the axe first.
The largest employer in our county after the military is the Cumberland County Public School system with just under 7,000 employees. With a school population of around 53,000 that works out to one employee for every 7.57 students.
With classroom sizes at 14 or more at least 50% of the employees do not work as teachers. The school system calls that 50% staff & support.
Yet every time the school system does not get it's DEMANDED money it lays off the teachers. So parents raise hell, the money is raised and the system hires one more teacher and one more "support & staff".
Maybe if the taxpayers would starve the beast and force it to fire some "support & staff" they could put more money into teachers and the classrooms.
Starve the Beast
When the High Sheriff of Cumberland County does not get his DEMANDED budget he layes of the school crossing guards - nothing else just the guards - and the first day of school the parents raise hell and the Sheriff gets his money for the SWAT team.
Starve the Beast.
And don't get me started on busing - for that you need to follow the Wake County Circus.
I need to type this very quietly as my housemate's closest friends and SO work in public education and I almost got my head ripped off for offering the following POV. (This isn't to say that the people who heard this disagreed in principle, but that they understood the implications WRT their union.)
IMO, the first thing that needs to be done is to find ways to evaluate teachers for their effectiveness at teaching rather than seniority, the ability to pass the buck, and political gamesmanship.
Paragrouper
10-09-2012, 17:28
Fact check time:
California is the 2nd largest job creator in 2012 ( behind Texas). It's trending to take over Texas before the end of the year. This, despite the large decrease in Government payrolls. And I am OK with that.
LHC
Which is a good thing because they are also ranked 49th for unemployment. Source (http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm)
As far as overtaking Texas, well Texas has the 4th fastest growing economy--California is ranked 10th. Source (http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/06/11/why-these-11-states-have-americas-fastest-growing-economies/#photo-14)
Of course, I may be biased :D
Last hard class
10-09-2012, 18:22
As far as overtaking Texas, well Texas has the 4th fastest growing economy--California is ranked 10th.
That is excellent news. At the current rate it will only take you 22 more years to catch us. *
Our states are not that different.
We have a large immigration problem
Texas has a large immigration problem- only smaller
We enjoy a healthy Narco gang problem
Texas enjoys a healthy Narco gang problem - only smaller
We are running a deficit
Texas is running a deficit - only smaller
We are almost the same. Everthing is just smaller in Texas that's all.
Almost forgot:
You have liberal gun laws
We have liberals
Parsing words. Practically the same.
* I may have made that statistic up. :D
LHC
California will be a big job creator in terms of pure numbers by virtue of the size of its economy. But it is not a strong job creator for itself as an economy right now.
In many of California's most populated areas the cost of living is more than 3 times what it costs to live in Texas. So Cali's recovery is not 2-dimensional. It's not just a matter of creating more jobs of any kind. It has to be an abundance of high-paying jobs for people to survive.
Team Sergeant
10-09-2012, 21:01
Point well taken - but agriculture, manufacturing, mining, fishing...even the holliwierd industry generates substantial jobs and revenue. Now factor in the energy potenial off the coast...California is rapidly becoming the poster child for mismanaging assets.
ETA: USANick7 just beat me while I was typing - CA has tremendous advantages - I'll call his Hong Kong and raise you a Singapore.
I'll see your Singapore and raise you a Taiwan.
I need to type this very quietly as my housemate's closest friends and SO work in public education and I almost got my head ripped off for offering the following POV. (This isn't to say that the people who heard this disagreed in principle, but that they understood the implications WRT their union.)
IMO, the first thing that needs to be done is to find ways to evaluate teachers for their effectiveness at teaching rather than seniority, the ability to pass the buck, and political gamesmanship.
Didn't Chicago just try that? Good idea but that's what left-wing unions are for, keeping the idiots safe that would otherwise be fired.
Badger52
10-10-2012, 05:43
IMO, the first thing that needs to be done is to find ways to evaluate teachers for their effectiveness at teaching rather than seniority, the ability to pass the buck, and political gamesmanship.Bravo.Didn't Chicago just try that? Good idea but that's what left-wing unions are for, keeping the idiots safe that would otherwise be fired.The well-covered kerfuffle in Wisconsin has been, in part, over the fact that an employer is going to be requiring their employees to be able to show performance.
From the WI Dept of Public Instruction: The primary purpose of Wisconsin's Educator Effectiveness System is to support a system of continuous improvement of educator practice - from pre-service through inservice - that leads to improved student learning. The system will evaluate teachers and principals through a fair, valid, and reliable process using multiple measures across two main areas: educator practice and student outcomes.
While admittedly in mission statement format above, contrast that with this from the post-Act 10 blathering by the NEA General Counsel's "Rights Watch":
Never, in the 154-year history of NEA, have we witnessed the wholesale assault on teachers and other school employees that is now underway nationwide. In a host of states, tenure has been abolished, seniority no longer exists, collective bargaining has been gutted, employee organizations have been gagged, payroll deduction has been banned, and just cause and due process have been tossed on the dump heap of history.
A question for someone familiar with the LAUSD in the last 40 years. When I was a kid it occasionally happened that someone would be held back a semester or, based on performance, might be considered to skip ahead a bit, even in elementary school. (My parent's were always above board & even when little we discussed these things; besides I hung around the bi-weekly poker table with my mouth shut & listened.) There seemed to be due consideration given as to whether an advancement "seemed" appropriate but might simply place the kid in the target class in over their head, in a general sense. Also, if someone was held back, the goal was not to keep them there - never to graduate with the other kids they'd known - but to get them to a point where they could rejoin their peers.
So how are things now? I suspect - but do not know - that in today's atmosphere of "everyone's a winner" parents get quite exercised over the stigma of having a child held back 1/2 year. I'm curious.
1stindoor
10-10-2012, 06:58
So how are things now? I suspect - but do not know - that in today's atmosphere of "everyone's a winner" parents get quite exercised over the stigma of having a child held back 1/2 year. I'm curious.
I think it entirely depends upon the teacher in question as well as the grade. That's not to say that parents won't still be angry about it, but the right teacher can make the case that it is for the best course of action for the child.
But I know I'm biased. My wife is a kindergarten teacher (currently in her 23rd year) and I've watched her struggle, lose sleep, and meet several times a year with parents, before recommending a child being held back. In almost every single case (only one comes to mind in the last 8 years or so) the parents have agreed with my wife...who also ensures the school will put the child back in her class the following year. This way the child already has a head start. IMO, the "stigmas" happen after elementary school...at which point the child has already been won or loss on the idea of the importance of education.
Badger52
10-10-2012, 07:53
Entire post.Thanks for your thoughtful post. And thanks & best to your wife in her calling. I agree, and was speaking of, primarily at the elementary level. After Jr. High (or as I've found in this part of the world "middle school") I recall age-peers who were either movin' in the right direction, or headed toward the whirlpool. My elementary teachers had a huge influence, bless them all.
Doc Diego
10-10-2012, 09:22
Couldn't agree more with Victor Davis Hanson. I live in Nevada, but work in SoCal. If not for Federal bailouts, the state would be bankrupt. "Cut" is the California Newspeak for reduced programmed increases. The situation is unsustainable. Too many voters receiving too many benefits.
The Reaper
10-10-2012, 16:47
One eighth of the US population lives in Kalifornia.
One third of the welfare recipients live there.
Hmm. Wonder why? :rolleyes:
TR
USANick7
10-10-2012, 23:02
You want to develop a good way to evaluate teacher performance... eliminate public administration of schools...you can keep public financing, but all administration should be private.
USANick7
10-10-2012, 23:09
Hanson's tidy analysis doesn't mention a key factor in California's decline: a referendum/initiative/recall process that allows the electorate to bypass the legislative process to enact spending bills that impact the state's economy without voters having any idea of the long term impact (http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/referenda.htm). He wants to blame this group or another for the sorry state of public education in California, but illegal immigration and the teachers' union are only part of the puzzle. The other part is the role of Proposition 13--a darling of populist Conservatives--in gutting education budgets. (I was in the LAUSD when it was passed and was one step ahead of its rippling impact from the fourth grade until I graduated from Cal.)
Does Hansen pay himself royalties for rehashing his earlier editorials without really contributing to the debate or playing an active role in forming viable solutions? (If he so desired, he could write an awesome piece breaking down support for the key spending initiatives that have helped to bankrupt the state. Then again, such a piece would risk turning a critical eye on his populist minded readers. I guess the mission of historians to tell truth to power only goes so far.)
Hanson was, at one time, a damn good professional academic historian who moved a debate or two forward by light years but that was long ago. Lewis Gould used to lambaste historians who "closed shop" after reaching a certain level of success on a regular basis. He probably didn't have Hanson in mind but he's increasingly a good example of what the man meant.
Other than that, a great editorial, the blogosphere at its finest.
(Clearly, the caffeine buzz I get from drinking Pepsi isn't working for me. I'm generally not this bitter.)
Blaming prop 13 has always been a popular tactic for some, but I fail to see how restricting the CA government from forcing people to pay ever increasing property taxes to prop up an already failed educational system is going to solve things... The argument seems to suggest that a lack of funds explains poor performance in CA. But that is a tendentious argument since higher per pupil spending doesn't seem to have greatly improved educational outcomes in a variety of other areas, nor should it be a fore gone conclusion that the overturning of prop 13 will yield greater revenues. I went through the CA education system through elementary school.
Of course I doubt it will be long before prop 13 will be repealed. The result will be an even larger exodus from CA when the last thing holding many people there is taken away. I wonder what will be the next target of those who seem to believe that the solution generally lies with greater taxation and government control?
USANick7
10-10-2012, 23:41
I also think it appropriate to point out that it is hard for me to accept the premise that the problem with voters deciding referendums, supposedly without understanding long term consequences is the source of California's financial issues. What evidence can you provide that the full time legislature in CA with plenty of time to debate and vote on these issues has done a better job at understanding the long term financial consequences of legislation than the average voter in CA?
I am afraid that when it comes to budgeting, I would trust the average American more than your average politician, for the simple reason that while everyday Americans may not be privy to every aspect of the budget that a politician may be, they are also not subject to being swayed by the political incentives that prove so highly influential.
V/R
Blaming prop 13 has always been a popular tactic for some, but I fail to see how restricting the CA government from forcing people to pay ever increasing property taxes to prop up an already failed educational system is going to solve things... The argument seems to suggest that a lack of funds explains poor performance in CA. But that is a tendentious argument since higher per pupil spending doesn't seem to have greatly improved educational outcomes in a variety of other areas, nor should it be a fore gone conclusion that the overturning of prop 13 will yield greater revenues. I went through the CA education system through elementary school.
Of course I doubt it will be long before prop 13 will be repealed. The result will be an even larger exodus from CA when the last thing holding many people there is taken away. I wonder what will be the next target of those who seem to believe that the solution generally lies with greater taxation and government control?USANick7--
I think the fact that we spent different amounts of time in the California public education system may play a part in our differing views of the impact of Prop 13 on the quality of education.
As noted, my class was about one and a half academic years ahead of the cascading impact of Prop 13 on education budgets. In day to day terms, this translated to programs/classes disappearing from one year to the next--if not during the school year itself. ("What happened to Francis Ford Coppola? He said he was going to invite us back to Zoetrope Studios.") Fortunately, my old man had made it a mission to move to better school districts when he could. So when the poop was hitting the fan, I was already eligible to attend schools that had mostly motivated students and teachers, balanced rosters in terms of race/ethnicity, and classes for "gifted" students. This meant that when I changed my career path from astronomy to history in middle school, I had many options IRT classes and pretty good teachers. (Oh, would I like to have THAT one back....)
Overall, the experience through high school with this mindset led to some friendly (but ferocious) competition within my classmates and my teachers, a high level of confidence IRT learning, and an understanding that knowledge is something that one goes out and gets rather than sits back and waits to receive. Perhaps most important was being comfortable with the notion that the more one learns, the less one knows. (IMO, this paradoxical understanding of knowledge was quite helpful when it came to not freaking out about the Cold War.)
When it came time to pick a college, many members of my class (some of us had been class mates since elementary school) knew, not guessed, but knew that, at worst, they could attend the University of California at Berkeley. The lesson of this experience was "Study, study, and study, and you will have the opportunity to earn better educational opportunities for yourself."
Once at Cal, this frame of mind competed with the usual stupidity that goes hand in hand with the undergraduate experience. Members of my class, and like minded students from other public schools in California, had a lean forward approach to learning. If we didn't earn the grade we wanted, it was on us to figure out what we need to do to improve--including going to office hours and talking to graduate students and, at times, professors. (Most of the instruction at Cal was/is done by GSIs.)
However, the impact of Prop 13 was catching up. Cal's infrastructure was not growing with the student body. There weren't enough dorm rooms to go around. At times, there weren't' enough class rooms in which to write exams. (Stephen Ambrose did a visiting stint and was really embarrassed that some of us had to take a midterm sitting outside on the pavement.) Moreover, the pittance that graduate students got paid to teach was not keeping pace with their economic needs. So they're organized walk outs. outs.:rolleyes: All the while, registration fees for in state students was creeping upward. While I lucked out by qualifying for one of the UC systems' most lucrative categories of student jobs, had I been a year or two younger, I don't know that I'd have been able to make it through.:boohoo
Jump ahead six or seven years and I'm back in California working as a teaching assistant at a certain university in Southern California and the world has changed. Collegians who graduated from public schools in California with GPA's north of 4.0 no longer know the difference between a novel and a work of non fiction. Nor did they understand what it means to "make an argument." The question "What do you think?" often drew blank stares.
While members of this cohort were mostly good kids, the notion of working hard to earn a grade was increasingly alien to many of them. Many, if not most, wanted high marks not because they earned them, but because they needed high marks to get into law school/graduate school. Some professors held the line against grade inflation and insisted that T.A.'s should as well. Others, weary of complaining undergraduates, caved and gave higher grades just to make the bitching stop.
As I'd been trained/tasked to hold the line on grade inflation, and I'm not exactly a people person (although one would never guess upon my posts), students bitched, moaned, and, at times, actually wept. And, on at least one occasion, parents called. WTF. So when a job in the private sector fells into my lap, it is off to the salt mines without a backward look.
Jump ahead again ten years or so to this past academic year and I'm over at another BB geared towards aspiring graduate students. The environment and mindset that collegians now have is pretty much unrecognizable from the 1980s. Overall, they now have that sense of entitlement we old coots see in every sector of society.
They reek of their fear and their ignorance. Many have next to zero idea of how they should have used their time in college to prepare themselves not just to apply to graduate school, but to attend graduate school. Specifically, they don't know how to write statements of purpose and, more importantly, they don't know how to develop relationships with potential mentors nor how to ask for letters of recommendation.
Moreover, there's an absence of confidence, an inability to focus on the immediate goal. Clearly evident are the larger fear of what might happen in a couple of years, and, most alarmingly, a growing willingness to game the system in ways that were unimaginable in the 1980s (ghost written statements of purpose, deliberately deceiving POIs, punting as T.A.s).
As far as I could figure, the heart of the issue is that the bond of trust between collegians and those charged with educating them has been broken. In my time, if I got a grade I didn't like, I figured out why/how I got the grade I deserved, and went and talked to someone about ways to improve. Now, the notion of self accountability has been replaced by claims like "My professor/T.A. is incompetent / out to get me / yadda yadda." To be certain, a large part of this dynamic is young people being young people. As a kid, it is easier for some to say "It wasn't my fault" than it is to say "Yeah, I probably fucked that up" like we do as we grow older. But the other side of the equation also matters. To put it politely, adults are disinterested in mentoring and many are not really committing themselves to teaching.
Why? A part of it is that academics can be self interested arrogant navel gazing asshats.^ Another part of it is the wonderful game of Publish or Perish. But, IMO, another reason is money. Many academics on the low end of the stick don't get paid enough.
Now, to avoid rebooting the dormant debate over in Richard's tests/education/teaching thread about the value of this field of study compared to that one, let me say that I can empathize with those who ask (rhetorically) "Why should my tax dollars go to fund a domain of knowledge that has an undetermined value to American society today?"
While I would like to think that what is good for historians of the American navy is good for America--see what I did there--I can understand that not everyone is going to agree with this POV. (Despite the clear fact that it is the correct conclusion.) On the other hand, look at some of the discussions about history that are going on in America today. (But I'm not bitter.)
Beyond the specifics of study of history and other disciplines in the humanities, as well as domains of knowledge in the social sciences, I think what we're losing (if not lost already) is an avenue in which citizens can "buy in" to two core value of American civilization. First, the notion that if you want something, you have to work to earn it. Second, the acquisition of knowledge for its own sake is a worthwhile pursuit.
Is public education the most economically efficient way to send these messages? Is it the best way to send these messages? Are these messages the ones we want to send at all?
__________________________________________________ ____
* And for the QP who got a kick out of the Lucy Liu anecdote, I'll build on this point on FB in a short while. Meanwhile, truffles inbound.
** To put it candidly, my conclusion from this experience is that most of the undergraduates on that BB were either not the cream of the crop or that higher education in America has pretty much failed to empower today's undergraduate.
^ I hear laughter from a St. Louis Cardnials fan. My reply--here come more truffles.:D
USANick7
10-12-2012, 07:50
Sigba, thank you for this well thought out response...the only thing I can say is that it seems to be highly anecdotal and focused on attributing all of the problems to one data point...
Your premises' seem to be that
1. property taxes are the only way you can assess taxes for education...
2. spending is the primary consideration when assessing education.
I think we would first need to debate your premises' before I could be convinced of your position on prop 13.
There were a number of cultural and philosophical changes taking place in education at the same time that prop 13 was passed. To suggest that learning standards are directly tied to property taxes is non starter in my mind.
The small private school which was established by middle class parents in northern California had around 3K per student to work with and no state assistance. Which is well under the public school average. We had no computers the first couple years, no fancy labs, etc. Yet we consistently out performed the public schools which were by all accounts good public schools.
Now there were a number of differences. cultural, philosophical etc. which must be accounted for when drawing comparisons, but the point is that funding does not automatically ensure quality.
Doc Diego
10-12-2012, 08:38
USANick7- Very concise and I agree with you, Prop 13 is not the problem.
Pericles
10-12-2012, 13:44
USANick7- Very concise and I agree with you, Prop 13 is not the problem.
I like to point out that at the Lyceum, Geometry was worked out with a sand box and a pointed stick. Money is never a substitute for brains.
USANick7--
I agree that my argument is anecdotal. In fact, I make it clear that it is by making it clear I'm talking about my individual experiences. I would point out that it was offered in response to your anecdotal comment IRT the impact of Proposition 13 on California's public education system:I went through the CA education system through elementary school. This is to say that you offered a perspective based upon your experience in the California public school system, and then I offered mine. At the risk of sounding cheeky, I think we're drifting into the land of the double standard if only some arguments (i.e. the ones that challenge a widely shared interpretation) are going to be dismissed out of hand for being anecdotal.
Moreover, your summary of my premises is flatly off. As I make clear in post #10, the impact of Proposition 13 on the California educational system is "only part of the problem" in addition to the issues of illegal immigration and teachers unions.
Third, nowhere do I argue that Proposition 13 should be repealed. Nor do I argue in this thread that property taxes-or taxes of any sort-should be increased. Nor do I argue that increasing the budget is the number one item on the "to do" list for fixing the broken education system in California. Just because someone attributes factor A as one causal factor among many in a complex issue doesn't automatically imply that reversing factor A will solve the problem.
In fact, in post #15, I clearly state what I think ought to be done first: refine the standards by which teachers are evaluated. Moreover, in posts #12 and #31, I offer the POV that the task of solving the issues Californians face does not center around the state spending more money but instead the debate should center around the unintended consequences of a political system in which populism is a driving force in policy formation. (A discussion of this dynamic is available here (http://www.economist.com/node/18563638).)
Fourth, because of your inference that I'm arguing something that I am not, I think you have overlooked a key point upon which you and I agree. The broader social, economic, and cultural contexts in which a student learn are crucial to that student's success. Verily, a central theme in post #31 is a comparison between educational environments in which students were encouraged to learn and those in which students were distracted by other issues.
Fifth, in regards to the negative impact of Proposition 13 on the California public school system, I offer the following to support my position that it has played a role: <<LINK (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1904938,00.html)>><<LINK (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDkQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.edsource.org%2Fassets%2Ffiles %2Ffinance%2FEdS_hist_Prop13fs.pdf&ei=iJt4UMrvLIzQigLJtYDoCQ&usg=AFQjCNHUPZ7StcOMeMOjg1My_H1eWreX8w&cad=rja)>><<LINK (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CD8QFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ascd.org%2FASCD%2Fpdf%2Fjourn als%2Fed_lead%2Fel_198201_savage.pdf&ei=iJt4UMrvLIzQigLJtYDoCQ&usg=AFQjCNGNCp6NMeyvp0HPCVCZ9L_d8luamA&cad=rja)>><<LINK (http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/mar/29/sorting-out-prop-13s-impact-education/)>><<LINK (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-12/california-schools-suffering-as-proposition-13-tax-cap-breeds-fiscal-chaos.html)>><<LINK (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEIQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ccsce.com%2FPDF%2FJVSV_2012_I ndex_Special_Analysis.pdf&ei=FZ14UM7QHcKdiQLfuICgAg&usg=AFQjCNFMjp8K1vvT1oRZWZjLyylp_D5sbw&cad=rja)>><<LINK (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904233404576460131182881982.html)>>
Sixth, hey, it is Sigaba! I put a lot of a meager R&D budget into picking this user name. (Well, it came to me while I was drinking a Starbucks mocha. But still, the effort diverted resources I could have spent writing a wry--but not bitter--note about Starbucks in-store culture at that time as well as a spry--but not salacious--comment about a good looking woman sitting a couple of tables over.)
The Reaper
10-12-2012, 17:45
Does parental involvement play any role in educational excellence, or can The Village do it all by themselves?
TR
Does parental involvement play any role in educational excellence, or can The Village do it all by themselves?
TRIME, it depends. FWIW, the trajectory of my own experience went from parental leadership that was, at best, characterized as "salutary neglect" to a spiraling dynamic of intense opposition and intentional acts of sabotage. (Not for nothing is The Orestia my favorite work of classical literature.) Fortunately, onlookers in "the village" stepped in at key moments, I had some awesome instructors, and I had a subscription to the Newsletter of the Samuel L. Jackson Institute for Young Men to keep me focused.
My pie in the sky is this. I'd like to see a three-legged stool approach in which a student's parents, teachers, and "village" provide the legs and the student's own efforts the seat on which she/he can sit and focus on learning. (IMO, the most important of these three legs is the teachers. YMMV.)
1stindoor
10-15-2012, 06:50
My pie in the sky is this. I'd like to see a three-legged stool approach in which a student's parents, teachers, and "village" provide the legs and the student's own efforts the seat on which she/he can sit and focus on learning. (IMO, the most important of these three legs is the teachers. YMMV.)
An interesting approach...although hardly novel in its concept, if you consider the "village" as the money garnered through taxes to support education. However, my anecdotal evidence suggests the most important "leg" of that stool will have to be the parents. The best teachers in the classroom still have only a limited amount of time with the student. The parents, grandparents, step parents, foster parents, etc. have a much larger block of time in which to influence the child to the importance of an education.
An interesting approach...although hardly novel in its concept, if you consider the "village" as the money garnered through taxes to support education. However, my anecdotal evidence suggests the most important "leg" of that stool will have to be the parents. The best teachers in the classroom still have only a limited amount of time with the student. The parents, grandparents, step parents, foster parents, etc. have a much larger block of time in which to influence the child to the importance of an education.
I would have to agree. From experience within my own family, with my kids. All 4 of my kids went through the same schools with the same teachers, for the most part. The youngest is an outstanding student in all honors classes. Her 2 brothers and sister were all lucky to graduate. What was the difference? Parental involvement.
The oldest 3 are technically my step kids. They lived in their mother's house during their formative years. She did not value education, because her parents didn't, and so on and so on. It was easier to lable them special needs than it was to.sit down with them every night to.do the homework, to show up in the classroom to help out etc. So they all struggled. Carl wasn't around enough due to deployments to make much difference. So he is at fault as well to some extent.
When Jake came to live with us when he was 15 he was doing third grade English. I just about lost my mind. We both showed up in his clasroom on a weekly basis to help out. We had weekly meetings with his teacher. We fought to get him mainstreamed as much as possible. He would get mad at me because I was pushing him so hard. I told him it was about.damn time someone did. When he graduated high school he was mainstreamed into 3/4 of his classes. He actually was able to go to college.
Jordan learned to read when she was 3 1/2. She was living with my parents at the time due to my remote. They valued education, which in turn made me value it. They helped in her classroom, they went on fieldtrips etc... When I got back to the States I did the same. I have never had to ask that child if her homework was done.
You can have the best teachers in the world, but if the parents don't care, it doesn't matter. Conversely you can have the shittiest teacher in the world and a very involved parent. That parent is going to ensure their child is taken care of. If it means changing classrooms, if it means being in the classroom more to be able to speak of first hand knowledge to the administrators, moving to a new school, etc... PARENTS are the key to a child's education
The Reaper
10-15-2012, 21:07
You can have the best teachers in the world, but if the parents don't care, it doesn't matter. Conversely you can have the shittiest teacher in the world and a very involved parent. That parent is going to ensure their child is taken care of. If it means changing classrooms, if it means being in the classroom more to be able to speak of first hand knowledge to the administrators, moving to a new school, etc... PARENTS are the key to a child's education
Concur.
TR