Here are two current proposals that illustrate how "the bar is being lowered" in education. My feeling is the bar has been lowered for the past 50 years and look at where we are, as a Country.
#1 - Moving public money to private schools.
#2 - Motion to have children start school later in the morning.
Senate committee considers changes to its version of the proposal
www.wafb.com
BATON ROUGE - Alarm clocks could be set back a little later in the morning for some students and parents, if a bill is passed.
www.wbrz.com
Proving that adults are also stupid. Throwing more money is not going to help. In fact, we are spending more per student than ever before and achieving less. And while I agree that holding schools and teachers to standards, I fear that the threat of losing ESA funding will cause schools to fudge grades even more to qualify for that gummint cheese.
Heinlein spoke of his grandfather who grew up on a farm outside of Butler, Missouri and went to a 1 room school. Chalkboard and chalk, some books, and a teacher paid directly by the townspeople. He had to drop out at the 8th grade level because his father passed away and he had to take over running the farm, which was the family business. Leaving school, he could read and write English, had read Shakespeare and the KJV Holy Bible and other works of the day. He had simple trig memorized. He could differential single variable calculus (using the short-cut) in his head. He could read, write, and speak German. He could read some greek and Hebrew.
We can spend whatever the insane budget is per year on a student and the person would not be able to do one of those things well. Not even English, which is the native language of this country.
It has to to do with standards and expectations. Which they are trying to erode.
I was talking with someone yesterday while we watched the eclipse. I was telling the story I had heard in my course work for a state commission to carry a firearm (early 80s) and that a police officer could be personally sued. It was a case (Chicago, I think. Our instructor had worked for Chicago PD) of a cop answering a call about a man with a gun at some apartments and waving it around and threatening people. He gets there in full uniform and brilliantly marked patrol car with the lights going. Steps out of the car and stays behind the door. There is a guy with a gun waving it at people. The cop pulls out his weapon and takes aim. He instructs the suspect to drop the weapon and take three steps back.
The suspect turns and fires at the police officer and misses. The officer fires back once and kills the suspect. On admin leave, the cop is found not guilty of homicide. He is cleared of criminal wrong-doing. But before I could get to that, the guy I was talking to asked if the suspect understood what the copy was saying or if he understood the culture didn't like that?
Yes, the guy I was talking to is amish, but in a nice way. And no, I don't think the suspect in the story was amish. Eventually, I got to make the point that the family of the suspect sued the police officer personally on the basis of the cop taking away the civil rights of the suspect when he shot and killed after shooting at said cop. I never said the suspect was amish but I think that is where his mind went. And why would he think that? Probably understanding the 13% is real, maybe.
So, there you have it. Culture. Some think it is okay to shoot at a police officer or anyone else trying to stop you from using your gun to intimidate or hurt other people.
So, like the label on a Winnebago that says the cruise control is for speed only, okay, fine, our culture does not like being shot at. Our culture values knowledge and self-discipline. Why do we even have to say that?