Neutrality of Teachers

And still, no link that backs up what you say. Figures.

And BTW, to be clear, I am not saying that academic success is a product of wealth, but it is an uneven playing field for those who don't have wealth.

 

The point isn't to have nothing but wonderful teachers, but to teach your children how to spot them, and then make a game out of figuring out what crazy old Mr. Ballsack was talking about today, and then trying to piece the pieces of batshit together to figure out what kind of lunatic the school hired.

I constantly gave my daughter a hard time throwing out complete craziness that sounded like it might be sane until she wised up and realized that if she wanted to win an argument with me, she had to spot the crazy. It was a proud day for me when she finally put me in my place. I forget what it was exactly, but probably something alone the lines of me telling her that I would get her the pink girls bicycle with the heart shaped basket instead of the mountain bike she really wanted because all little girls love pink bicycles, she's a girl, so what a lucky little girl she is to be getting a bicycle she loves.

 

We need to parent for good character, self-respect, and survival. It's up to the individual to find what makes them happy. We can't decide such things for our kids. Contentment comes with maturity, so is difficult to 'teach'.

 

The two (low levels of education and poverty) are both symptoms of the same thing. That's why they co-exist.

Yes, of course I have. That's pretty much ALL of my experience of public education (going back to my own school days). In particular, I have about 20 years of involvement in academically advanced students and programs. I guarantee it has nothing to do with money. The only thing those advanced students have in common is parents who take education seriously - whether rich or poor.

 

You can find the stats for such schools easily, if you want them.

And again, I can't agree that the playing field isn't level. I've seen far too many working class migrant families make good (to Ivy League level) in a single generation.

 

True.

I disagree here. Earlier you brought up parents teaching by example. I believe contentment is easily taught by example.

 

The difficulty is that contentment is a nuance thing. Hard to spot from the outside, and especially difficult for kids to spot (given children don't really do nuance). We can model things like stability, which IMPLY contentment, but encompass much more. We can model long term marriages, which also imply contentment, but encompass more. Etc Etc.

 

In this case, the exceptions break the rule. If even one family in poverty can steer their kids to academic excellence via their own effort and dedication, then any family can. ESPECIALLY when we're talking about poor families who can't even speak the language.

 

Maybe it depends on the overall environment kids are in or something. I always thought kids were better at nuance than adults. In school, us kids knew when adults weren’t content before they did. I remember many divorces and other interpersonal conflicts predicted by children long before other adults had an inkling. Children are observing all the time. At least they used to. Maybe in the electronic age they don’t have the time.

 

Yes. Data or statistics is just measuring how many suck it up and succeed and how many don’t. Has nothing to do with the potential of the individual or individual family. Most people prefer comfort in being part of a majority, even if that majority are actually the “losers”.

 

It really seems to me you're trying to oversimplify this, possibly as a means of justifying your own prejudices.

I asked you earlier what country you're from and you have avoided answering. Odds are the culture of where you live plays a part in this, but because you're purposely being obtuse, you're just pontificating in a vacuum to find like minded prejudiced people.

 

She's not telling you because that's not information you need to know. It's just trying to dig into personalia that probably has more to do with looking for possible ad homs to throw out, rather than addressing the subject being discussed.

I'm the same way. Nobody here needs to know what state I live in or what I look like. I made that mistake before, and it was then thrown back in my face as a reason for why I'm wrong. "Oh, you're just a X from Y, therefore you're stupid".

It's the reason why lefties always pull those loaded questions starting with "So you mean that ______?" and then wait for people to step right into that trap.

btw: why are you asking for personal information from members?

 

I'm asking for context, to better understand what she (had no idea the poster was a "she", so you're the one that is providing personal info) to better understand the basis of her position.

Is that clear enough for you?

 

Somebody's personal information like their address isn't necessary information, and has nothing to do with the subject.

In other words, "context" is the wrong answer. Try again. Why are you asking for personal information from people who post here?

 

Please point out where I asked for an address. Go ahead, I dare you!

You're just trolling.

 

You're asking for personal information that has nothing to do with the subject, so I used address as a way of pointing out how it's incredibly inappropriate.

Do you have any idea how easy it is to figure out exactly who somebody is if given just a few random scraps of information? I know because I've found quite a few old friends that way. I knew they went to a particular high school because I was there with them. Can remember a first name, and can guess at the age because we're both the same. In half an hour, I'm looking at a google earth street map view of their car parked outside their house.

so on that basis alone, you really shouldn't ask questions like where somebody is from. What crank has publicly stated, she's a she and has traveled extensively. That means your question of where she is from is irrelevant. You learn things as you travel, which makes where she lives now unimportant. I've traveled to quite a few places myself, so when I talk to people who really haven't been anywhere, there is precious little we have in common. There is no context that can substitute for having been there and done that. It's like trying to describe colors to the blind.

On the subject of poverty and education, you don't need to know where somebody lives. You need to know that the children of asian parents are generally better educated than children of white or black parents. When they enter the job market, they make more money because they went to afternoon school after their day school sent them home. They stayed up studying instead of watching TV. When mom asks "have you done your homework yet" the wrong answer is "not yet". The correct answer is "Yes, I did. Will you look it over and let me know if I made any mistakes?".

 

Kids are good at animal signals, but that's a little different to nuance. And it's unlikely that they can spot a troubled marriage before the partners involved. They're spotting it despite the partners trying to show a happy face, is all.

I will say, though, that MALcontents are really just dysfunctional people. It's not actually the opposite of contented.

 

Exactly.

 

Prejudice? What a bizarre thing to extract. Prejudice would involve some kind of antagonistic comment about accidents of birth (race, gender, age, etc). I CLEARLY said that educational success is a result of effort, not wealth. I even used the example of non-English speaking migrants (of colour, obviously) succeeding where more advantaged citizens fail.

PS: I didn't 'over simplify' it at all. It's actually even simpler than I suggested.

And FTR, I live in a typical First World multi-cultural democracy. And no, I'm not Swedish.

 

I can't tell you my former (I left it to raise my kids) profession, no. I prefer not to disclose that, in order to retain accessibility to/for the most members. Suffice to say it pertained to the human animal / human condition, hence my acceptance of the reality of First World poverty (ie, that it's a lifestyle choice).

My involvement in education was via my work, AND raising three kids who were academically driven (and in specialist classes/schools etc). I also know specialist teachers of the academically gifted, and have spent many many hours researching the subject via personal interest. I've also spent months/years travelling and learning from those who take education far more seriously than we do in the West.

 

Thanks Belch, couldn't have said any of it better!

 

I wasn’t clear apparently. Clearly partners would (should) be aware first. Although I’ve had people on this board claim it’s impossible to see spousal abandonment coming.

My point was kids can see contentment (or lack thereof) in adults when other adults can’t. I don’t have any preference for what we call it. Nuance or animal signals or something else. Kids growing up can learn about being content from watching their parents. I did. My brother did. And a lot of people I know who grew up poor did. But yeh, that’s all anecdotal—not data or statistics. I’m sorry this thread has apparently been a bad influence on me...

Good point.

 

Hey everyone participating in this thread. It’s a good one I’m enjoying and learning a lot from. I’m encouraged to hear from so many who care about education even if we don’t all see completely eye to eye.