|
|
Post by geezerfiddle on Aug 19, 2012 12:26:48 GMT -5
The reason even good schools are less today is because teachers today must deal with increasing family dis function, substance abuse, and moral laxity while maintaining no child left behind. The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... I call it the Leave it to Beaver syndrome; the wingnut revisionist attempt to make us think that there were good old days when we all said grace and behaved ourselves because we were all right thinking conservative Christians. It's like thinking that the 1950's were all Ward and June and Wally and The Beav happiness. Speaking of The Beav... www.youtube.com/watch?v=64_XPLAK1s0 |
|
|
|
Post by thedude on Aug 19, 2012 16:22:53 GMT -5
The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... I call it the Leave it to Beaver syndrome; the wingnut revisionist attempt to make us think that there were good old days when we all said grace and behaved ourselves because we were all right thinking conservative Christians. It's like thinking that the 1950's were all Ward and June and Wally and The Beav happiness. Speaking of The Beav... www.youtube.com/watch?v=64_XPLAK1s0Yep, watching Leave it to Beaver would lead you to believe that America was a perfectly content place with only the Eddie Haskells of the world causing any ripples on an otherwise glass-like pond. |
|
|
|
Post by naill on Aug 19, 2012 19:28:05 GMT -5
The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... Is it your position that morality has improved? Since you are utilizing public education, you must have an opinion. If your child is the victim of this present morality, will you be as dismissive? I wouldn't know if substance abuse is more now than in the past, so I can't argue that point. I was referring to Adderall, anti-anxiety, anti-depressants, etc. When you consider that we now have college age Adderall addicts who become parents and pass the habit to their offspring, I think there is a cause for concern. |
|
|
|
Post by thedude on Aug 19, 2012 20:06:27 GMT -5
The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... Is it your position that morality has improved? Since you are utilizing public education, you must have an opinion. If your child is the victim of this present morality, will you be as dismissive? I think morality tends to change over time, and usually for the better. As such, I see my child as the beneficiary of a better moral outlook in our culture. I haven't had to deal with that, so I can't comment. |
|
|
|
Post by naill on Aug 19, 2012 20:36:46 GMT -5
I haven't had to deal with that, so I can't comment. The teachers, you, and your child are dealing with it everyday if your child is in public schools. Go ask someone who works with the students and prove me incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by thedude on Aug 19, 2012 21:05:44 GMT -5
I haven't had to deal with that, so I can't comment. The teachers, you, and your child are dealing with it everyday if your child is in public schools. Go ask someone who works with the students and prove me incorrect. My son is getting ready to start 3rd grade. He's not on any medication. I don't know what other kids might be on. That's why I'm saying that I don't have any experience. I'm not trying to prove you wrong, so don't be so confrontational. |
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 6:22:20 GMT -5
The reason even good schools are less today is because teachers today must deal with increasing family dis function, substance abuse, and moral laxity while maintaining no child left behind. The reason no one in power wants to say anything is because you cannot get elected by focusing on morality and questioning the diagnosis of ADHD for an increasing population of children and their parents. Linda has apparently found a way to make PE work for her children, but it takes this type of parental involvement to assist the system. Anyone leaving the system to work for them and not be involoved is a fool, even for those in affluent communities. You bring up a good point. Rather than change the way they teach, the publics say there is something wrong with the kids. In my area, fully 20% of the kids are on ADHD meds. The true incidence of ADHD is around 2-3%. Most people are visual learners. So perhaps 80% of the population do OK with standard learning. Someone like my eldest is an auditory learner. He did best blocking out the visual stimulation. The teachers would claim he was 'staring out the window and not paying attention'. In actuality, he was. Interestingly enough, the only teachers who would actually test this out is the male ones. They would ask him a question about what was just said, he would answer it correctly, and they didn't care anymore where he looked. They had determined he was indeed paying attention. The women teachers would complain. Yet those same teachers could not explain why his grades were good.I don't know why this is, was just something my husband and I noted over the years my eldest was in publics. Since my daughter wants to stay in public, the ONLY answer I see is parental involvement. Since she also doesn't want to be singled out, the BEST solution is to listen to she and her friends, understand what's wrong, and bring in someone with clout to 'remind' the school administration and teachers what the law states and that they must conform to that. I cannot begin to tell you the positive feedback I have gotten from the students in my daughter's class. The relief is palpable. |
|
|
|
Post by naill on Aug 20, 2012 6:25:18 GMT -5
My son is getting ready to start 3rd grade. He's not on any medication. I don't know what other kids might be on. That's why I'm saying that I don't have any experience. I'm not trying to prove you wrong, so don't be so confrontational. I am reacting to your attitude toward Don who was trying to explain something to you that you are obviously not familar with given your son's positive experience. My information comes from public teachers in my family, working at one time for the marketers of Adderall, the knowledge of a world wide shortage of the drug, and speaking to doctors who tell me that the children and their parents are taking the same prescription. Children increasingly are coming from homes in which they are not prepared for school. Day care has become the norm. If you cannot afford a good day care your babies are being influenced by the people who work there. These are not skilled or well educated positions. Moral laxity can be observed in the broken families suffering from alcohol abuse and promiscuous sexual activity. I am happy for you and your son, but you cannot address Don's comments based on your own experience. |
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 6:30:30 GMT -5
The reason even good schools are less today is because teachers today must deal with increasing family dis function, substance abuse, and moral laxity while maintaining no child left behind. The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... I wouldn't know if substance abuse is more now than in the past, so I can't argue that point. I'm sure we have more information about it, though, and I assume that more drugs are available to kids than when I was in school. When I was a kid (I'm 47 now), kids started smoking pot in the 7th grade. I remember starting junior high and all of a sudden there were all these 'stoners' (as we used to call them). Alcohol use was much less than pot (pot was cheaper and easier to get for kids), at least until high school and even then, there were rare cases where kids drank alcohol during school hours. Lots of weekend drinking, of course. I heard rumors of cocaine use but never saw anyone use it. My high school was kind of middle class to lower middle class, so most kids probably couldn't afford it. I never heard of anyone doing anything else, with the possible exception of mushrooms or speed, but it certainly wasn't popular. This would have been in the late 70s and early 80s, and I think most of the kids of my generation and where I lived had older siblings or knew older people who had done the hippie thing in the 60s. I grew up close to Berkeley, so there were lots of those people still around (still are!), and I think that for many of us (me, definitely), we made the connection between doing drugs and what it can lead to. What's changed, according to the consultant, is definitely the amount of pressure put on young, developing brains. Good example is AP classes. Back in the late 70s, early 80s, most school systems would not let a kid take an AP class until senior year and maybe an exceptional kid in junior year. Now these classes are being pushed on kids as early as sophomore year, and according to the consultant, there's a huge body of evidence out there saying that it is of no benefit to anyone but the school itself, and detrimental to the kids. In fact, most colleges do not even care about early APs. Yet the kids are not told this by the school administration, in fact, they are pushed to take APs because it boosts school rankings. They know if the kids found out the truth, they would not take these classes until later; that only the kid pursuing Ivy would opt to take APs earlier (or those forced by their parents). The publics use our kids; there's no doubt about that. The consultant helps separate the myth from reality and lets the kids make important decisions in an informed, much less stressed manner. |
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 6:31:11 GMT -5
The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... Is it your position that morality has improved? Since you are utilizing public education, you must have an opinion. If your child is the victim of this present morality, will you be as dismissive? I wouldn't know if substance abuse is more now than in the past, so I can't argue that point. I was referring to Adderall, anti-anxiety, anti-depressants, etc. When you consider that we now have college age Adderall addicts who become parents and pass the habit to their offspring, I think there is a cause for concern. Yep to the latter. |
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 6:33:03 GMT -5
I haven't had to deal with that, so I can't comment. The teachers, you, and your child are dealing with it everyday if your child is in public schools. Go ask someone who works with the students and prove me incorrect. Tod's kids are still young Niall. As they age, he'll see this issue for what it is - Tod's a logical guy. It used to be that teachers could tell parents to seek medication for their kids. Now they cannot and that's with good reason. |
|
|
|
Post by herbhunter on Aug 20, 2012 6:45:45 GMT -5
...The true incidence of ADHD is around 2-3%. ... From the CDC: The American Psychiatric Association states in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) that 3%-7% of school-aged children have ADHD*. However, studies have estimated higher rates in community samples.
*American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR. Washington: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.
|
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 6:47:16 GMT -5
...The true incidence of ADHD is around 2-3%. ... From the CDC: The American Psychiatric Association states in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) that 3%-7% of school-aged children have ADHD*. However, studies have estimated higher rates in community samples.
*American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR. Washington: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.
Still not the 20% rate in our county. When my son was in 3rd grade, the numbers were 2-3%. He's now 17. No doubt there's been more recent research. Seems a lot of this is parent-reported? www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/data.html/Curious though - a good part of the time, your sources are governmental. Any reason? |
|
|
|
Post by thedude on Aug 20, 2012 7:20:49 GMT -5
My son is getting ready to start 3rd grade. He's not on any medication. I don't know what other kids might be on. That's why I'm saying that I don't have any experience. I'm not trying to prove you wrong, so don't be so confrontational. I am reacting to your attitude toward Don who was trying to explain something to you that you are obviously not familar with given your son's positive experience. My attitude towards Don? My attitude toward him was to call BS on a statement that wasn't true. The statement was that today's good schools are on par with the bad schools 10 years ago. He later backed off because it's obviously not true. OK, so you're making the broken home argument as your evidence of moral laxity. I don't like broken homes any more than the next person, but I also don't like kids growing up in a family that fights all the time. Both are bad, but they are also different. Your argument is that one is superior. I don't agree. Also, with respect to medication, you're also making the implicit argument that all kids taking any kind of medication for anxiety or depression or whatever shouldn't be doing so, and that it impedes the ability of the teacher to educate them. I don't doubt that this is true for some because drugs always get abused and over prescribed, but you make it sound like every kid in my son's class is juiced but him. Sorry, Charlie, I know that's not the case. I tend to know my son's classmates fairly well because I spend a lot of time with them via cub scouts and little league, along with visiting the school for lunch and volunteering in the classroom once in awhile. The kids aren't climbing the walls or behaving poorly in any of these environments. In fact, I was struck early on that the kids at his school aren't supposed to talk in the halls, and that even kindergartners obey those laws. I don't remember ever being that disciplined as a kid. Anyway, I think when it comes to public schools that there are lots of bad ones out there, and that large school districts tend to be a problem as well because they try to do too much along with having a lot of kids who don't come to school prepared. I am not dismissing the issue as not existing. But, I am also explaining that there are also good public systems out there. We moved into our neighborhood precisely because the schools here are excellent. As far as sexual promiscuity, people have always been promiscuous. You like to make these blanket statements without making an effort to demonstrate a cause and effect. That's the product of a lazy mind. |
|
|
|
Post by thedude on Aug 20, 2012 7:26:03 GMT -5
The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... I wouldn't know if substance abuse is more now than in the past, so I can't argue that point. I'm sure we have more information about it, though, and I assume that more drugs are available to kids than when I was in school. When I was a kid (I'm 47 now), kids started smoking pot in the 7th grade. I remember starting junior high and all of a sudden there were all these 'stoners' (as we used to call them). Alcohol use was much less than pot (pot was cheaper and easier to get for kids), at least until high school and even then, there were rare cases where kids drank alcohol during school hours. Lots of weekend drinking, of course. I heard rumors of cocaine use but never saw anyone use it. My high school was kind of middle class to lower middle class, so most kids probably couldn't afford it. I never heard of anyone doing anything else, with the possible exception of mushrooms or speed, but it certainly wasn't popular. This would have been in the late 70s and early 80s, and I think most of the kids of my generation and where I lived had older siblings or knew older people who had done the hippie thing in the 60s. I grew up close to Berkeley, so there were lots of those people still around (still are!), and I think that for many of us (me, definitely), we made the connection between doing drugs and what it can lead to. What's changed, according to the consultant, is definitely the amount of pressure put on young, developing brains. Good example is AP classes. Back in the late 70s, early 80s, most school systems would not let a kid take an AP class until senior year and maybe an exceptional kid in junior year. Now these classes are being pushed on kids as early as sophomore year, and according to the consultant, there's a huge body of evidence out there saying that it is of no benefit to anyone but the school itself, and detrimental to the kids. In fact, most colleges do not even care about early APs. Yet the kids are not told this by the school administration, in fact, they are pushed to take APs because it boosts school rankings. They know if the kids found out the truth, they would not take these classes until later; that only the kid pursuing Ivy would opt to take APs earlier (or those forced by their parents). The publics use our kids; there's no doubt about that. The consultant helps separate the myth from reality and lets the kids make important decisions in an informed, much less stressed manner. I don't doubt that a bit. I have argued for a long, long time that schools shouldn't be so focused on college prep. But, our culture has developed this attitude that if a kid doesn't go to college that they are a failure, and that's just flat out crazy. |
|
