We also fire engineers when there is a shortage of work even though we know that in 2 months we are starting up a new project and are going to need to hire to meet program needs. Keeping engineers on overhead for even a day while the program works its way through corporate policy is unacceptable.
I doubt anyone is suggesting that the Charter School accept students who are not yet ready for Algebra. Rather, people are saying that a student not ready for algebra by grade 9 was probably not afforded the same opportunities along their educational career. Probably starting as far back as Kindergarten.
Actually they are. From the post I responded to: "They should have to accept any students in the area (regardless of academic level, just like the public schools)"
And it's not just random people on the internet. During my senior year of high school, the school I went to was sued because a black girl failed the entrance exam. They argued that the test was racist because it expected the students to know who George Washington was and be able to add.
You are right, though. It is often not the child's fault that he/she is not up to par academically. It is often the fault of parents and teachers not willing to give them the support they need and we do have a responsibility to try to break that cycle and help them out. But we cannot punish the children who have managed to do well or take away their opportunities in order to bring up the bottom because it's "not fair" to the less fortunate children.
Cause parents don't need to cook dinner, pee, buy groceries, or clean up all the poop that just exploded out of the baby's butt without the three year old dancing in it?
I let my 3 year old play with my iPad and she doesn't slam it into the floor and treats it pretty nice. She also can't read so every time she gets into a screen that isn't her app she comes running to me cause it's "broken". You are much more likely to have a teenager or other school aged child purchasing things than a toddler.
When I get angry at someone, I don't go and burn their house down or pull a gun on them or run them over with my car or even punch them in the face. What's wrong with you that you are afraid you might? What's wrong with you that you consider expressing your anger violently ok? Every second people get pissed off for one reason or another. The vast majority of people do not resort to violence. If you not resort to violence over stupid bullshit, then you don't have to worry about 'accidentally' murdering someone in the heat of the moment.
Unfortunately, it is often hard to know that someone is going to start shooting random people before they do it. We have laws that say that criminals can't buy guns. People involved in domestic disputes can't have guns. Mentally ill people can't have guns.
In this instance everyone who knows the shooter is apparently surprised he would do something like this.
Part of the cultural problem is that we treat other people like crap. We do not respect strangers and are instead afraid of them. We believe that we are entitled to whatever experience we paid for and if you have the bad manners to disrupt it in any way then we can be belligerent and hostile and possibly shoot you. Everything is zero-tolerance and all the rules are absolutes.
I was at the aquarium the other day and it was insanely crowded. There were adults standing right in front of the exhibits taking photo after photo after photo and often videos with their cell phones while a crowd of small children clamored behind them trying to get close enough to see. It was so bad you had to wait 5 to 10 minutes at a lot of the exhibits. The polite thing to do would have been to take a picture or two (not 20) and move along so the kids who were too short to see from anywhere except right up front could get a turn. But we do not think of others. We only think of ourselves.
If I'm being attacked which am I more likely to be able to defend myself with? Fist, knife, or gun?
You make the assumption that it is possible to proclaim "Guns are now illegal! Thou Shalt Not Own Guns!" and then everyone would hand them over and stop making them. We have empirical evidence that declaring something illegal does not magically make the item disappear. Look at drugs, alcohol, prostitution, exotic pets.
Life is not guaranteed. You cannot guarantee that when you walk out your door a texting/drunk teen isn't going to run you over. We cannot guarantee that a gang of bikers won't run you off the road, pull you out of your car, and then beat you. And we cannot guarantee that the ex-cop sitting behind you in the movie theater isn't going to snap and shoot you. You cannot regulate your way into safety. If you really want to start talking about lowering the body count, lets start with banning cars. Cars kill more people than guns (in the U.S.). Otherwise lets talk about punitive measures and why this guy snapped. Why did he think that violence was the right choice? This is not a simple problem with a simple answer. Life is complicated and will always be complicated.
So it would have been ok if he had stabbed the guy or snapped his neck or slammed his face into the floor and stomped him? But because he used a gun, guns are evil?
People get shot and live. People also get punched in the face and die. The underlying problem is a trivial argument escalating to violence due to the inability of an individual to control their temper.
The shooter left the room (supposedly to get a manager) and then came back and shot another man when he couldn't find a manager. WTF? Why can't we just leave other people alone?
Give me your full name and I bet I can figure out what your home address is and that is way more dangerous than an email address. The point is that you don't need that silly book made out of dead trees to find people any more. You can choose not to list your phone number, but your name is on the deed of you house and that is public information.
However, I notice that the definition of "success" for a school seems to always be the same regardless of the talent and preparedness of the student population.
And that, sir, is the kicker. I have noticed a trend to simply redefine success until everyone meets it. It is not fair that those students are studying calculus while those students are barely literate so lets not teach anyone calculus...
The sad truth is the success of a student is largely dependent on the individual student. A student who is motivated and cares about learning cannot be stopped. A student who doesn't care cannot be started. You can look at those high end charter schools and private schools and see students that have been handed everything to them going out and cutting class and getting high. You can also see inner city kids who have struggled their entire lives determined to better themselves and get out of the ghetto.
Alternately, we could evaluate individual situations individually. Instead of having some magic core curriculum that will solve the countries problems we instead ask the teachers and parents to identify the individual needs of their children. But that takes time and effort and will lead us to the underlying socioeconomic and cultural issues that it is not PC to address. When we tell children they cannot succeed, they believe us. When we tell them they can build a rocket ship and go to Mars if they try hard enough we end up with Space-X.
Since we are being pedantic, it should have been "A run-on sentence, the use of an inappropriate ellipses, and some quotation marks would have improved readability." We could then argue about the need of ; instead of , given the complexity of the list items.
I attended a charter school when I was in high school.
We had to take all the standardized tests and meet all the state requirements to graduate. I ended up having to take American History from the local university because I could not fit the required course into the art curriculum I has elected to pursue.
We also had admission requirements. We had admission requirements because in 9th grade we were expected to take Algebra. If you did not have the math background to succeed in Algebra, you were not going to do well. It was a college prep school and you were expected to be able to handle the curriculum upon admittance. This school expected it's students to graduate with gobs of AP credits and to test out of a lot of freshmen college classes. I started college with almost 30 credits from AP tests. Admitting someone who could not read or add numbers would have done no one any favors. It does not help the students who are prepared and ready for the advanced curriculum if they have to be held back for students who aren't. It does not help the students who aren't ready to throw them into a curriculum they are not prepared for.
My brother did not attend the same high school. Instead, he attended the public high school down the street from our house because he always struggled with school work and would not have done well in the high pressure environment.
This idea that every child should get exactly the same education is ludicrous. Not everyone can do calculus in high school. Not everyone wants to play football. Not everyone wants to study art. There is a difference between opportunity and forcing everyone into cookie cutter education. My brother could have also attended the college prep charter school I went to, but it was not an environment he would have succeeded in so he didn't.
I take it in 12 years of EMT work you also never saw a guy drive a car through a crowd of people?
I would also submit that the Boston Marathon bombers successfully used a concealed bomb. The Brits and the Israelies along with everyone in the middle east will also tell you that bombs are successfully concealed on a regular basis.
There was a mass stabbing in China not too long ago where something like 30 some people were stabbed.
Acid and bleach have been gaining popularity. And there is always good old fashioned gasoline.
Seriously though... The deadliest attack on a school in the U.S. did not involve firearms. It involved a member of the school board rigging the school with explosives. History suggests that if you want a higher body count, don't use guns. And if you suggest that making a bomb is hard or the materials are difficult to obtain, you need to go back to high school chemistry or learn how to use google.
I also really really really want to know how you "accidentally" shoot someone from a moving car. Do people drive around waving guns out their windows for fun where you live? If that is the case then those people have serious problems.
No! Technology destroys jobs! Its the tech's fault! We must all go back to wearing grass skirts in mud huts because anything man made or modified is bad and anything that occurs naturally is good.
You need ID to drive a car. You need ID to have a bank account. You need ID to buy compressed air, cigarettes, alcohol, medication... ID is issued to us at birth or when we become citizen.
Please explain to me WHY black/Hispanic/poor people don't have IDs and why they can't get them.
Isn't 'political affiliation' one of those things that is protected? Like being black or a woman? Whenever we have 'don't get us sued for discrimination' training, political affiliation is always on the list along with age, gender, and ethnicity.
Slashdot Mirror
Already there :). Kind of.
We also fire engineers when there is a shortage of work even though we know that in 2 months we are starting up a new project and are going to need to hire to meet program needs. Keeping engineers on overhead for even a day while the program works its way through corporate policy is unacceptable.
I doubt anyone is suggesting that the Charter School accept students who are not yet ready for Algebra. Rather, people are saying that a student not ready for algebra by grade 9 was probably not afforded the same opportunities along their educational career. Probably starting as far back as Kindergarten.
Actually they are. From the post I responded to: "They should have to accept any students in the area (regardless of academic level, just like the public schools)"
And it's not just random people on the internet. During my senior year of high school, the school I went to was sued because a black girl failed the entrance exam. They argued that the test was racist because it expected the students to know who George Washington was and be able to add.
You are right, though. It is often not the child's fault that he/she is not up to par academically. It is often the fault of parents and teachers not willing to give them the support they need and we do have a responsibility to try to break that cycle and help them out. But we cannot punish the children who have managed to do well or take away their opportunities in order to bring up the bottom because it's "not fair" to the less fortunate children.
Or they could... drain the pool.
Cause parents don't need to cook dinner, pee, buy groceries, or clean up all the poop that just exploded out of the baby's butt without the three year old dancing in it?
I let my 3 year old play with my iPad and she doesn't slam it into the floor and treats it pretty nice. She also can't read so every time she gets into a screen that isn't her app she comes running to me cause it's "broken". You are much more likely to have a teenager or other school aged child purchasing things than a toddler.
When I get angry at someone, I don't go and burn their house down or pull a gun on them or run them over with my car or even punch them in the face. What's wrong with you that you are afraid you might? What's wrong with you that you consider expressing your anger violently ok? Every second people get pissed off for one reason or another. The vast majority of people do not resort to violence. If you not resort to violence over stupid bullshit, then you don't have to worry about 'accidentally' murdering someone in the heat of the moment.
No... the lawyers will get rich, the workers will get fired, and the company will continue business as usual.
Unfortunately, it is often hard to know that someone is going to start shooting random people before they do it. We have laws that say that criminals can't buy guns. People involved in domestic disputes can't have guns. Mentally ill people can't have guns.
In this instance everyone who knows the shooter is apparently surprised he would do something like this.
Part of the cultural problem is that we treat other people like crap. We do not respect strangers and are instead afraid of them. We believe that we are entitled to whatever experience we paid for and if you have the bad manners to disrupt it in any way then we can be belligerent and hostile and possibly shoot you. Everything is zero-tolerance and all the rules are absolutes.
I was at the aquarium the other day and it was insanely crowded. There were adults standing right in front of the exhibits taking photo after photo after photo and often videos with their cell phones while a crowd of small children clamored behind them trying to get close enough to see. It was so bad you had to wait 5 to 10 minutes at a lot of the exhibits. The polite thing to do would have been to take a picture or two (not 20) and move along so the kids who were too short to see from anywhere except right up front could get a turn. But we do not think of others. We only think of ourselves.
If I'm being attacked which am I more likely to be able to defend myself with? Fist, knife, or gun?
You make the assumption that it is possible to proclaim "Guns are now illegal! Thou Shalt Not Own Guns!" and then everyone would hand them over and stop making them. We have empirical evidence that declaring something illegal does not magically make the item disappear. Look at drugs, alcohol, prostitution, exotic pets.
Life is not guaranteed. You cannot guarantee that when you walk out your door a texting/drunk teen isn't going to run you over. We cannot guarantee that a gang of bikers won't run you off the road, pull you out of your car, and then beat you. And we cannot guarantee that the ex-cop sitting behind you in the movie theater isn't going to snap and shoot you. You cannot regulate your way into safety. If you really want to start talking about lowering the body count, lets start with banning cars. Cars kill more people than guns (in the U.S.). Otherwise lets talk about punitive measures and why this guy snapped. Why did he think that violence was the right choice? This is not a simple problem with a simple answer. Life is complicated and will always be complicated.
My 3 year old told me that she needed cake. Some people are just needy.
So it would have been ok if he had stabbed the guy or snapped his neck or slammed his face into the floor and stomped him? But because he used a gun, guns are evil?
People get shot and live. People also get punched in the face and die. The underlying problem is a trivial argument escalating to violence due to the inability of an individual to control their temper.
The shooter left the room (supposedly to get a manager) and then came back and shot another man when he couldn't find a manager. WTF? Why can't we just leave other people alone?
Give me your full name and I bet I can figure out what your home address is and that is way more dangerous than an email address. The point is that you don't need that silly book made out of dead trees to find people any more. You can choose not to list your phone number, but your name is on the deed of you house and that is public information.
Cause they totally didn't go and post them on the internet
However, I notice that the definition of "success" for a school seems to always be the same regardless of the talent and preparedness of the student population.
And that, sir, is the kicker. I have noticed a trend to simply redefine success until everyone meets it. It is not fair that those students are studying calculus while those students are barely literate so lets not teach anyone calculus...
The sad truth is the success of a student is largely dependent on the individual student. A student who is motivated and cares about learning cannot be stopped. A student who doesn't care cannot be started. You can look at those high end charter schools and private schools and see students that have been handed everything to them going out and cutting class and getting high. You can also see inner city kids who have struggled their entire lives determined to better themselves and get out of the ghetto.
Alternately, we could evaluate individual situations individually. Instead of having some magic core curriculum that will solve the countries problems we instead ask the teachers and parents to identify the individual needs of their children. But that takes time and effort and will lead us to the underlying socioeconomic and cultural issues that it is not PC to address. When we tell children they cannot succeed, they believe us. When we tell them they can build a rocket ship and go to Mars if they try hard enough we end up with Space-X.
Run on sentence would have improved readability?
Since we are being pedantic, it should have been "A run-on sentence, the use of an inappropriate ellipses, and some quotation marks would have improved readability." We could then argue about the need of ; instead of , given the complexity of the list items.
Cause you have never fucked up its and it's before and always use perfect grammer and never make typos when typing on the internet...
I attended a charter school when I was in high school.
We had to take all the standardized tests and meet all the state requirements to graduate. I ended up having to take American History from the local university because I could not fit the required course into the art curriculum I has elected to pursue.
We also had admission requirements. We had admission requirements because in 9th grade we were expected to take Algebra. If you did not have the math background to succeed in Algebra, you were not going to do well. It was a college prep school and you were expected to be able to handle the curriculum upon admittance. This school expected it's students to graduate with gobs of AP credits and to test out of a lot of freshmen college classes. I started college with almost 30 credits from AP tests. Admitting someone who could not read or add numbers would have done no one any favors. It does not help the students who are prepared and ready for the advanced curriculum if they have to be held back for students who aren't. It does not help the students who aren't ready to throw them into a curriculum they are not prepared for.
My brother did not attend the same high school. Instead, he attended the public high school down the street from our house because he always struggled with school work and would not have done well in the high pressure environment.
This idea that every child should get exactly the same education is ludicrous. Not everyone can do calculus in high school. Not everyone wants to play football. Not everyone wants to study art. There is a difference between opportunity and forcing everyone into cookie cutter education. My brother could have also attended the college prep charter school I went to, but it was not an environment he would have succeeded in so he didn't.
They have also all been tried by real people and succeeded. If you need a gun to kill a person, you need to learn how to use the internet better.
I take it in 12 years of EMT work you also never saw a guy drive a car through a crowd of people?
I would also submit that the Boston Marathon bombers successfully used a concealed bomb. The Brits and the Israelies along with everyone in the middle east will also tell you that bombs are successfully concealed on a regular basis.
There was a mass stabbing in China not too long ago where something like 30 some people were stabbed.
Acid and bleach have been gaining popularity. And there is always good old fashioned gasoline.
Seriously though... The deadliest attack on a school in the U.S. did not involve firearms. It involved a member of the school board rigging the school with explosives. History suggests that if you want a higher body count, don't use guns. And if you suggest that making a bomb is hard or the materials are difficult to obtain, you need to go back to high school chemistry or learn how to use google.
I also really really really want to know how you "accidentally" shoot someone from a moving car. Do people drive around waving guns out their windows for fun where you live? If that is the case then those people have serious problems.
Gas? Bow and arrow? Slingshot? Bomb? Large boulder falling on your head? The number of ways of killing someone are limited only to your creativity.
No! Technology destroys jobs! Its the tech's fault! We must all go back to wearing grass skirts in mud huts because anything man made or modified is bad and anything that occurs naturally is good.
Where is global warming when you need it?
You need ID to drive a car. You need ID to have a bank account. You need ID to buy compressed air, cigarettes, alcohol, medication... ID is issued to us at birth or when we become citizen.
Please explain to me WHY black/Hispanic/poor people don't have IDs and why they can't get them.
Isn't 'political affiliation' one of those things that is protected? Like being black or a woman? Whenever we have 'don't get us sued for discrimination' training, political affiliation is always on the list along with age, gender, and ethnicity.