McCain's Education Plan - scary?

[VietCowboy]

"We need to encourage programs such as Teach for America and Troops to Teachers where people, after having served in the military, can go right to teaching and not have to take these examinations which -- or have the certification that some are required in some states.

Look, we must improve education in this country."

Why shouldn't teachers be required to take certification? and get re-certified every few years??? Doesn't that lower the standards?

[burmafrd]

Considering the lousy state of our education system below college, and the lack of disicpline and other problems in those schools, ex military would fit the bill quite well. Of course that is too obvious for you to figure it out.

[DaBoys4Life]

Considering the lousy state of our education system below college, and the lack of disicpline and other problems in those schools, ex military would fit the bill quite well. Of course that is too obvious for you to figure it out.

Colleges are BS also

[Hypnotoad]

I was watching CNN and women did not like that at all.

http://img364.imageshack.us/img364/1598/laughja4.gif

It seemed very irresponsible. Just because the education system is lousy doesn't mean we should send ex-military to fit teaching jobs. There has been research conducted that proves that those who served in the military have leadership qualities, are excellent managers of people, are trustworthy and responsible in doing their job. Would they make good teachers? I am not sure, it depends on the person and their expertise in the topic they must teach. I don't know how McCain can just remove some of the qualification and certification checks just because someone is a veteran.

[Heisenberg]

I didn't get that either. The way he made it sound is that if you served in the military, you could walk right out and be employed as a teacher with no certification or test to make sure you're actually qualified to do it.

That seems a bit...off.

[Wheat]

Colleges are BS also

Line of the year!


Colleges are BS also?

I am all for Military Folks becoming teachers. First, I think if they served, they should get a free education at the best institutions in this country. Then go teach wherever you'd like.

Its a shame that McCain voted against a better GI Bill that would go towards providing such education because it might hurt reenlistment.

[dbair1967]

"We need to encourage programs such as Teach for America and Troops to Teachers where people, after having served in the military, can go right to teaching and not have to take these examinations which -- or have the certification that some are required in some states.

Look, we must improve education in this country."

Why shouldn't teachers be required to take certification? and get re-certified every few years??? Doesn't that lower the standards?

Couldnt be any worse than the piss-poor government education system we have in place already. It's pathetic.

Thats why I support school choice and vouchers for private schools.

[NinePointOh]

In McCain's defense, Troops To Teachers is already a fully functioning program with various prerequisites designed to ensure that participants are qualified. There are also plenty of other alternative routes to teacher certification besides military service, which are used by tens of thousands of new teachers every year:

http://www.teach-now.org/intro.cfm

[VietCowboy]

In McCain's defense, Troops To Teachers is already a fully functioning program with various prerequisites designed to ensure that participants are qualified. There are also plenty of other alternative routes to teacher certification besides military service, which are used by tens of thousands of new teachers every year:

http://www.teach-now.org/intro.cfm

but McCain's saying they DON'T need teacher certification.

[burmafrd]

Considering the all too many duds in the system now who HAVE certificates, only a minion of the teachers unions would try and argue THAT point.

[Kangaroo]

"We need to encourage programs such as Teach for America and Troops to Teachers where people, after having served in the military, can go right to teaching and not have to take these examinations which -- or have the certification that some are required in some states.

Look, we must improve education in this country."

Why shouldn't teachers be required to take certification? and get re-certified every few years??? Doesn't that lower the standards?

Teaching certificates are a joke pure and simple. Texas has a certificate process and it is a joke they take all these classes that have nothing to do with any subject they teach and yet they can teach a Biology class having only taken the pre-req in college.

Yet a person who has a Masters Degree can not teach in the Texas School system with out all these worthless classes and stupid certificates.

Please the certificates are a joke kind of like getting an MCSE

[VietCowboy]

Teaching certificates are a joke pure and simple. Texas has a certificate process and it is a joke they take all these classes that have nothing to do with any subject they teach and yet they can teach a Biology class having only taken the pre-req in college.

Yet a person who has a Masters Degree can not teach in the Texas School system with out all these worthless classes and stupid certificates.

Please the certificates are a joke kind of like getting an MCSE

So what you are saying is we should not have ANY standards at all except what that the teachers have a Masters degree in the study they are doing. Who cares if they should learn education or take workshops in child abuse, etc?

I guess since I came from NY, here are their laws regarding teaching certification:

In New York State - Math


To teach in a public school in New York State, prospective teachers first get a provisional certification, then permanent certification. However, you can teach in many private schools with a Bachelor of Arts in mathematics.


In order to get provisional certification in New York State you need: 36 hours of mathematics, 18 hours of education, student teaching practicum, and two workshops (child abuse recognition and drug). You can send a transcript and evidence of taking certain required workshops to the state and get provisional approval. You can later use work experience in lieu of practice teaching. You do not need to go through an accredited program to get certified.
Eventually, you will need a masters to get permanent certification in most states. One good route is to get a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT), a professional degree usually requiring 1.5-2 years after a Bachelor of Arts.

[Jarv]

What I don't get is the whole Tenure thing...Why to teachers get guaranteed jobs ? They should be judged like the rest of the workforce based on their merrits year to year.

I've been in IT in one form or another for 25 years, does this mean I can't be fired ?

That is the one thing I liked about what McCain said, lets get rid of bad teachers !

[NinePointOh]

but McCain's saying they DON'T need teacher certification.

I'm not a McCain fan by any means, but that's not really what he's saying. He said he wants to encourage the Troops To Teachers program - what you're describing would entail completely and drastically overhauling it. Certification through TTT isn't the same route to certification that other teachers would generally receive, but it's still certification with measures and prerequisites to ensure qualification, and it's just one of many widely used alternative routes to the classroom.

[iceberg]

"We need to encourage programs such as Teach for America and Troops to Teachers where people, after having served in the military, can go right to teaching and not have to take these examinations which -- or have the certification that some are required in some states.

Look, we must improve education in this country."

Why shouldn't teachers be required to take certification? and get re-certified every few years??? Doesn't that lower the standards?

i feel the states should decide their own educational system, or at least have more say in it. what scares me is obama saying the government needs to come in and fix it all up.

like they do so well.

the government needs to quit assuming it's the end-all-be-all, but i see obama time and again saying the gov is the answer.

[iceberg]

What I don't get is the whole Tenure thing...Why to teachers get guaranteed jobs ? They should be judged like the rest of the workforce based on their merrits year to year.

I've been in IT in one form or another for 25 years, does this mean I can't be fired ?

That is the one thing I liked about what McCain said, lets get rid of bad teachers !

i may get hammered by teachers, but i feel when you pay $35-$40 a year, you get that level of quality. i know some people are in teaching out of love, and that's great. there are some very talented teachers out there and i've been fortuante enough in my life to have some good ones along the way.

i've had my share of bad ones too.

if i can make $100,000 doing something else, why would i take my mind/skillset to be a teacher for 1/3 that? if we want better quality teachers and people being teachers, we have to pay accordingly.

i don't think this is the *whole* problem to be sure but it's an issue i don't see a way out of with hard talk and more government.

[Kangaroo]

So what you are saying is we should not have ANY standards at all except what that the teachers have a Masters degree in the study they are doing. Who cares if they should learn education or take workshops in child abuse, etc?

I guess since I came from NY, here are their laws regarding teaching certification:

In New York State - Math


To teach in a public school in New York State, prospective teachers first get a provisional certification, then permanent certification. However, you can teach in many private schools with a Bachelor of Arts in mathematics.


In order to get provisional certification in New York State you need: 36 hours of mathematics, 18 hours of education, student teaching practicum, and two workshops (child abuse recognition and drug). You can send a transcript and evidence of taking certain required workshops to the state and get provisional approval. You can later use work experience in lieu of practice teaching. You do not need to go through an accredited program to get certified.
Eventually, you will need a masters to get permanent certification in most states. One good route is to get a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT), a professional degree usually requiring 1.5-2 years after a Bachelor of Arts.

Hahaha

No what should happen is teachers should be evaluated like every real job and you either keep your job or get fired. You can have requirements like a College Degree (hey I worked at places like that) but the certificate process is a joke and nothing more but a bureaucratic nightmare that waste money.

You do like any other job hire and fire on Merit

[VietCowboy]

um, so you don't want lawyers to take the Bar exam or your doctors to take licensing exam. Hey, he's got an MD, who cares??

[MilesAustinforMVP]

I was watching CNN and women did not like that at all.

http://img364.imageshack.us/img364/1598/laughja4.gif

It seemed very irresponsible. Just because the education system is lousy doesn't mean we should send ex-military to fit teaching jobs. There has been research conducted that proves that those who served in the military have leadership qualities, are excellent managers of people, are trustworthy and responsible in doing their job. Would they make good teachers? I am not sure, it depends on the person and their expertise in the topic they must teach. I don't know how McCain can just remove some of the qualification and certification checks just because someone is a veteran.
But but... He's a POW!

[VietCowboy]

I'm not a McCain fan by any means, but that's not really what he's saying. He said he wants to encourage the Troops To Teachers program - what you're describing would entail completely and drastically overhauling it. Certification through TTT isn't the same route to certification that other teachers would generally receive, but it's still certification with measures and prerequisites to ensure qualification, and it's just one of many widely used alternative routes to the classroom.

he did not say alternate route, he said they don't have to be certified, that are required in some states. I can understand going through different routes, I actually contemplated and looked at TFA's application process.

They can get provisionally license, but I feel at the end of the day, the should strive to continue to take workshops, maybe go on to get a masters, to get permanently license, just like many professional fields that work directly with people. I know in my field and medicine, people need to get licensed and re-certified every few years to make sure they up to snuff on the latest stuff, ethics (especially important). I think teachers should have that same standard.

[Hoofbite]

Couldnt be any worse than the piss-poor government education system we have in place already. It's pathetic.

Thats why I support school choice and vouchers for private schools.

School choice sounds like it could eventually lead to school closings resulting in the good schools getting flooded with too many students.

Can't say that I am a big fan of that.

[Bach]

School choice sounds like it could eventually lead to school closings resulting in the good schools getting flooded with too many students.

Can't say that I am a big fan of that.

Yeah, who would want bad schools to close? :rolleyes:

[Kangaroo]

School choice sounds like it could eventually lead to school closings resulting in the good schools getting flooded with too many students.

Can't say that I am a big fan of that.

Oh the horror someone has to compete ! Which means more schools would open and it would force the Public School Districts to do a better job. They do not want to be held accountable the school districts love to be able to waste 100's of millions of dollars on football stadiums for Highschools

[Viper]

"We need to encourage programs such as Teach for America and Troops to Teachers where people, after having served in the military, can go right to teaching and not have to take these examinations which -- or have the certification that some are required in some states.

Look, we must improve education in this country."

Why shouldn't teachers be required to take certification? and get re-certified every few years??? Doesn't that lower the standards?

I agree with you here. McCain's problem, his explainations are all over the place. I'm not sure what he meant here, but I do want qualified teachers. The only way to ensure we do have qualified individuals to teach is by having a degree or certification.

Now if he meant a soldiers education and experience should count, I agree with him. My nephew was a navy medic for the last six years. All of the education and experience he recieved while being a medic for a Marine unit means nothing to the outside world. To be a EMT, he would have to go back to school, essentially starting over. His military training should count for something, but it doesn't.

[iceberg]

I agree with you here. McCain's problem, his explainations are all over the place. I'm not sure what he meant here, but I do want qualified teachers. The only way to ensure we do have qualified individuals to teach is by having a degree or certification.

Now if he meant a soldiers education and experience should count, I agree with him. My nephew was a navy medic for the last six years. All of the education and experience he recieved while being a medic for a Marine unit means nothing to the outside world. To be a EMT, he would have to go back to school, essentially starting over. His military training should count for something, but it doesn't.

how "specific" can one get in 2 minutes? i understand and agree we didn't get much "meat" from mccain, but obama "i want the government" to fix this was just as lacking in details.

i grow weary of standards being applied to only 1 side.

[Hoofbite]

Yeah, who would want bad schools to close? :rolleyes:

I don't. That's not a reasonable solution the the problem. Aside from creating a student-to-teacher ratio so far from being close to an actual "learning environment", it does nothing to fix the problem.

Instead of schools being forced to close because the student body has packed up and moved elsewhere, those schools should be fixed. How they would do that, I haven't the slightest clue and I don't think anyone on this board has the answer either.

I can tell you that I think its a horrible idea. Just from the minimalist issue of being able to accommodate that many kids, how do you do it? How do you all of sudden handle that many more students? Classroom sizes don't respond to miracle grow.

I know its just my opinion but I think its a horrible plan. I think it will eventually lead to school closings and a huge influx of students into the good schools.

I think it will increase the reliability that schools have on standardized testing because that is really the only way you can gauge academic progress with such skewed numbers. You just won't get enough 1-on-1 time with students to be able to accurately judge their ability and progress. And with standardized tests being what they are today, the education system will continue to stumble.

Eventually what I think you will see is an increase in distance between the students who are capable and the students who are not. You'll end up having highly capable students wasting time as they aren't challenged enough while the kids on the opposite side of the spectrum get left behind as the teacher's only real option is to teach to the middle.

Me, I'd much rather fix the problem. Can Obama do that, I really don't know. What I believe is that McCain's plan won't and I guess by default I would much rather see the alternative on the issue of education.

[jrumann59]

The education system is a joke, certifications are about as useful as an MCSE is today. Why you ask, cirriculum, the school board approves what can be taught and what text should be used anyone with half a brain and above average reading comprehension could be a teacher. I know when I went through school it wasn't uncommon for the shop or PE teacher to be teaching a core subject the following year. Really what difference does it make the pharmacuetical companies are now part of the education system, if your kid seems bored he has ADHD, if your kid is not smiling he is depressed, if your kid is failing it must be mental issues.

[Kangaroo]

I don't. That's not a reasonable solution the the problem. Aside from creating a student-to-teacher ratio so far from being close to an actual "learning environment", it does nothing to fix the problem.

Instead of schools being forced to close because the student body has packed up and moved elsewhere, those schools should be fixed. How they would do that, I haven't the slightest clue and I don't think anyone on this board has the answer either.

I can tell you that I think its a horrible idea. Just from the minimalist issue of being able to accommodate that many kids, how do you do it? How do you all of sudden handle that many more students? Classroom sizes don't respond to miracle grow.

I know its just my opinion but I think its a horrible plan. I think it will eventually lead to school closings and a huge influx of students into the good schools.

I think it will increase the reliability that schools have on standardized testing because that is really the only way you can gauge academic progress with such skewed numbers. You just won't get enough 1-on-1 time with students to be able to accurately judge their ability and progress. And with standardized tests being what they are today, the education system will continue to stumble.

Eventually what I think you will see is an increase in distance between the students who are capable and the students who are not. You'll end up having highly capable students wasting time as they aren't challenged enough while the kids on the opposite side of the spectrum get left behind as the teacher's only real option is to teach to the middle.

Me, I'd much rather fix the problem. Can Obama do that, I really don't know. What I believe is that McCain's plan won't and I guess by default I would much rather see the alternative on the issue of education.

We already have an increase in distance between students and it starts at home.

Guess what my son understands in no uncertain terms what i expect from in school and I add in supplemental education he is ahead of most kids in his class.

Guess what the voucher programs force the school districts to fix the issue to get leaner and do things the right way. They have no incentive to fix the issue as is.

[burmafrd]

The primary school system in this country in all too many places is broken.
And yet the libs want to do nothing except through more money at it- like that has worked SO well. The democrats are in hock to the teachers union so that is why they don't want to do anything.

Teachers should be subject to the same competition that just about every other job has- do well or get replaced. A certificate means NOTHING.
It certainly does not measure how well you teach.

ANd then there are the school systems- bloated bureacracy's that in some places puts the federal government to shame - which is apretty sad comment on both sides. We have story after story of moronic principals and administrators trying to act like little Hitlers. And the school boards do nothing.

Then there are the parents- who basically consider the school systems babysitters and that is all. Parents should have the right to pick and choose which school they send their children too- just like we have the right to pick and choose colleges, where we shop, which doctor or lawyer we want to represent us. The libs talk about being pro choice, but ask them about schools and suddenly there is no such thing as pro choice. There are a lot of private schools that are NOT religious, but they hide behind the bogus church /state separation BS to try and deny ANY CHOICE AT ALL.
The PRIORITY should be to TEACH the children: but NONE of these groups appear interested in something SMALL like that.

What I would do:

Pick one of the worst systems in the US (New York, LA, Wash DC) whichever-and do a full test of the School Voucher program for 5 years. The children in those systems are already being flushed down the toilet so trying something radical is NECESSARY. And its not like those systems could get much worse then they are. Sometimes radical surgery is necessary.

As part of that, allow the schools to be strict with discipline. I know paddling is considered taboo, but it was done for centuries and we nev er had the problems in schools we have had since you could not do it anymore.
If not paddling, something that will embarras the kid- not make him look like a tough guy to the rest of the class/school. If it embarrases him/her, it will make them that much less likely to do it again and will not encourage any one else to copy him (outside of the real losers and mental cases, and you will always have them).

Teach facts not opinions. A lot of revisionist BS is now taught as true and its not. A standard curriculum of proven ideas not garbage. At the primary level you teach the basics to build a foundation. Higher education is where you do the weird and out there stuff. Grades 1-3 should be the basic 3 R's ( and NO CALCULATORS ALLOWED. Make them learn to do simple math in THEIR heads and more difficult math on paper. Hardly any kids are taught to do that anymore and its another reason so many are just plain unable to function).
Grades 4-6 you build on that and broaden it. Grades 7-9 you START higher learning. Grades 10-12 you finish it off. And the classes get tougher and tougher as the years go by. No basket weaving, etc untill 11 or 12 at best.
School is for learning not having fun in class. The best teachers will do that but it is STUPID to excpect it as the norm.
And after every year there will be standard tests to measure progress. And these tests will be taken by the teachers and the administrators as well as the students. ALL are being tested. On top of that there will be boards there strictly to measure progress as a check on the test.

[VietCowboy]

The education system is a joke, certifications are about as useful as an MCSE is today. Why you ask, cirriculum, the school board approves what can be taught and what text should be used anyone with half a brain and above average reading comprehension could be a teacher. I know when I went through school it wasn't uncommon for the shop or PE teacher to be teaching a core subject the following year. Really what difference does it make the pharmacuetical companies are now part of the education system, if your kid seems bored he has ADHD, if your kid is not smiling he is depressed, if your kid is failing it must be mental issues.

If you are interested, my field's been discussing this a little bit.

http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1817260,00.html

Are You Turning Your Child Into a Wimp?

Monday, Jun. 23, 2008 By ANDREA SACHS (http://javascript%3cb%3e%3c/b%3E:void%280%29)

Are American parents smothering their children? Hara Estroff Marano, an editor-at-large at Psychology Today magazine and the grandmother of three small children, is convinced that they are. In her provocative new book, A Nation of Wimps: The High Cost of Invasive Parenting (Broadway), she writes, "Behold the wholly sanitized childhood, without skinned knees or the occasional C in history! Kids need to learn that you need to feel bad sometimes. We learn through experience, and we learn especially through bad experiences. Through disappointment and failure we learn how to cope." TIME senior reporter Andrea Sachs spoke with Marano:

TIME: How did you become interested in this subject?
HARA ESTROFF MARANO: I had done intensive reporting on what I call the crisis on the campus. Why were college kids breaking down now in record numbers? Genetically they're not different. My kids had gone to college not long before. This was not a problem when they went to school. So I began looking at why, and I began talking to everyone on the front lines. There were hundreds and hundreds of people who were treating these kids, and they all said the same thing: these kids lack coping skills because they've not been allowed to fully function. They are the products of parental anxiety and all the lumps and bumps have been taken out of life for them, so they have no idea how to manage the normal vicissitudes of life.


Why has that occurred?
The world has changed on our watch. I didn't grow up knowing how to use a computer. So that instrument alone is highly symbolic that the world has changed. It's very fast, very dynamic, very fluid. A kid in Bangalore can come up with a program that could make Microsoft obsolete in two years. This is scary. This makes for great uncertainty. So what we're really worried about is the success of our kids. That's why we push them to achieve. And that's why we're focused on the Harvard, Yale, Princeton brand-name education. In a world of uncertainty, a brand name carries some cachet and it's the closest thing you can get to a guarantee of some kind of success or achievement.

You consider medicating kids with drugs like Ritalin over-parenting.
Parents go out of their way to have their kids declared defective so that they can get the drug and so that they can also have "accommodations." This is a big deal. It has been going on for five or seven years now. Parents go out of their way and spend fortunes. Neuropsychologists do the testing. It's a huge business. "Accommodations" is not an informal word. It's a formal thing that schools do. Almost all of the accommodations are centered around prolonging the test time the kids have. It's no longer something that gets marked on your record. So colleges don't know if you had twice the time to take your SATs. That's why parents find it so highly desirable. But in the course of doing it, they have their kids tested to find some little quirk, some little vulnerability� And that's a measure of parental anxiety. And the parental anxiety is willing to put a negative label on kids. That's really something very new. You don't boast your strengths. You boast your weaknesses.

You write about the importance of play and how it's not valued to the degree it should be.
Right. It's so counterintuitive. Play builds brains and gives children the ability to impose self-control and creates within brain circuitry the ability to pay attention. When you look at kids playing, adults see it as a waste of time. They have no clue what play does. Vigorous social play stimulates the growth of brain cells in the executive portion of the brain in the frontal cortex, and that lays the foundation for the circuitry of self-regulation, which is what you need to pay attention when you're at school. I'll just give you a very, very clear little example. We're talking about free play, not play that's monitored by adults. Because we know that when the adults are near kids, kids change what they talk about and change the content of their play. We've known that for a long time. But just picture two little kids in free play. They're inventing what they're going to do. Okay, we're going to play house. You're going to be the doggie and I'm going to be the mommy. So these kids, what are they doing? They're creating the rules that they then agree to subordinate their impulses to. I mean, that's extraordinarily powerful. But that doesn't hit you in the face when you see kids playing. It looks like, oh, we could use this time for workbook work.

Are parents over-involved in kids' sports?
Oh, absolutely. There is enormous difficulty of getting referees these days. Referees, especially in youth sports, are either paid minimally or are not paid at all. It's something they've done for the love of the sport. I wrote a piece about this, and the referee organization contacted me. They can't get referees because the referees now have to put up with the abuse of the parents and they just don't want to do it. It's not worth it to them. Parents push their kids to the point of... abuse. You have eight-year-old kids who have injuries that grown athletes, professional athletes don't get until their thirties or forties. Overuse injuries, repetitive strain injuries. That's a clear reflection of parental pushing of kids, and it's so wrong for so many reasons. Kids' bodies can't support that. Their bones are growing. It's the adult values, the adult psychological needs that are being met, not the kids' developmental needs.

There was recently an outcry in New York City when a journalist wrote about letting her son go on the subway at nine years old. What's your opinion about that?
You know, the kid was giving every sign in the world that he was ready. Here's the thing: What's the goal of raising kids? It's to produce an independent, autonomous adult, right? It doesn't happen overnight. There's a long march towards independence, and it begins at birth. Parents have to continually let out the leash. You quietly from the sidelines monitor your kids, see whether they're ready for the next step. That kid was giving every sign that he was ready for the next step.

But aren't deviant adults also ready to pounce?
I think the problem now is that the adults just totally unleash their anxieties on their children. There was a time not very long ago when you had the same worries. You just took the leap of trust, a very important word. You trusted your child to take the next step of growth. And I think it's really important because society is founded on trust. That's the glue of society, of culture, the glue of intimate relationships.

Don't urban parents need to be more protective of their children?
It could be argued that it's the other way around. There are many more people around to see if there is something untoward. Why would urban parents need to be more protective? My older son took the subway when he was about nine or ten years old by himself. We were sitting at the dinner table one night and we were talking. He said, "I've figured out that if it ever looks like there's going to be trouble on the subway, I act like I'm a little bit crazy and no one goes near me. Okay?" This is just a classic case of problem-solving which kids can do if they're given some lumps and bumps to cut their teeth on. He figured that out by himself.

But you see stories all the time on TV about the sexual abuse of kids.
That is so out of proportion to the reality. Parents think I'm a child molester when I say it, but the Department of Justice data for the last fifteen years is very clear on the subject. As parental hysteria has escalated due to anxieties, the actual data show that this is not a legitimate fear. When you look at the Department of Justice data, this is just not a major phenomenon. You've got to know the kids are in far more danger inside the home than outside the home. Stepfathers are a big problem. Sexual abuse happens in the home.

What is your main advice for parents?
One, back off and give kids some credit and some leeway to demonstrate their competence. Two, let kids play freely without monitoring. Three, eat dinner together at least five nights a week: aside from the sense of cohesiveness, it gives all that security that is the breeding ground for success. No matter where you are on the socioeconomic spectrum, it is more correlated with school adjustment and achievement than any other single thing that parents can do.
----------------------------------------------

I highlighted two things in particular that stuck out, but I thought it was an interesting read in general....not because I agree with everything, but because this is what the masses are reading and taking in as fact.

[burmafrd]

Sadly its only the richer parents that have the time to smother their kids. The poorer hard working ones don't have the time or energy. Soccer moms are probably the worst offenders.
The ritalin thing is a total scandal that the teachers union buys off on.
I totally agree about the anxiety and paranoia.But then look at all the libs who use their kids at political rallies and the like. Nothing new about that.

[Kangaroo]

Sadly its only the richer parents that have the time to smother their kids. The poorer hard working ones don't have the time or energy. Soccer moms are probably the worst offenders.
The ritalin thing is a total scandal that the teachers union buys off on.
I totally agree about the anxiety and paranoia.But then look at all the libs who use their kids at political rallies and the like. Nothing new about that.

I will save the rant but I know all to well about schools I have a daughter with Autism and we have extra dealing with them due to her Autism.