‘Go Back to Auschwitz’ and ‘Go Back to Africa’ Yelled Outside Trump Rally

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Actually, this should start at high school level. 10th-11th grade should be spent taking AP college level courses for the ending result of an associates or technical degree. 12th grade should be spent learning how to budget, interview skills and providing hands on training/internships. The AP courses can be taught by teachers who would have been teaching at a 2 year community college.

Beyond 2 years students should pay for an additional 2 years of college only. Tuition should be flat rated not varying per institution.

Edited March 18, 2016 by Janelle2002

[yuna628 9,676]

Actually, this should start at high school level. 10th-11th grade should be spent taking AP college level courses for the ending result of an associates or technical degree. 12th grade should be spent learning how to budget, interview skills and providing hands on training/internships. The AP courses can be taught by teachers who would have been teaching at a 2 year community college.

Beyond 2 years students should pay for an additional 2 years of college only. Tuition should be flat rated not varying per institution.

I think we can agree on this for sure Janelle, but education varies so wildly from state to state and city to city - both public and private and even homeschool programs there's no set standard. It seems to me no high school level education in the country probably offers this to kids (especially in public school and homeschool). Would this flat rate tuition apply only to state colleges or every single institution in the country and what if one college says they require a higher budget than another? An institution with a degree for medical school or arts programs and possibly tech/math are going to have higher overhead (and of course you've got the obsession with sports).

[Janelle2002 3,865]

I think we can agree on this for sure Janelle, but education varies so wildly from state to state and city to city - both public and private and even homeschool programs there's no set standard. It seems to me no high school level education in the country probably offers this to kids (especially in public school and homeschool). Would this flat rate tuition apply only to state colleges or every single institution in the country and what if one college says they require a higher budget than another? An institution with a degree for medical school or arts programs and possibly tech/math are going to have higher overhead (and of course you've got the obsession with sports).

Yes, and that's why this plan should be implemented at every high school. There is no standard across the board and this is a huge issue. If the school offers med and law then all schools that have medical and law should have the same budget. The community should be responsible for sports. It's time our country stop focusing on hitting each other and more on educating our population. If the students want to contribute to a separate find for the school and the community, they can.

Public colleges only, not private college. But if we correctly educate children from elementary -high private schools would take a hit, except politicians would still want to use them.

Edited March 18, 2016 by Janelle2002

[OriZ 3,157]

Yes, and that's why this plan should be implemented at every high school. There is no standard across the board and this is a huge issue. If the school offers med and law then all schools that have medical and law should have the same budget. The community should be responsible for sports. It's time our country stop focusing on hitting each other and more on educating our population. If the students want to contribute to a separate find for the school and the community, they can.

Public colleges only, not private college. But if we correctly educate children from elementary -high private schools would take a hit, except politicians would still want to use them.

And while we're at it, we can build robots that all look, talk and think the same. Horrid idea.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

And while we're at it, we can build robots that all look, talk and think the same. Horrid idea.

But you give no alternate suggestion nor the reason as to why it's horrible. Students should be taught the same material and given the best education. No reason why state institutions and schools should be choosing who to "better educate" and who not to. Edited March 18, 2016 by Janelle2002

[OriZ 3,157]

But you give no alternate suggestion nor the reason as to why it's horrible. Students should be taught the same material and given the best education. No reason why state institutions and schools should be choosing who to "better educate" and who not to.

I've given plenty of alternate suggestions, actually, and I'm not even done yet.

Lack of competition has been known to destroy anything in its path. I've explained it in my post several pages back. You can't have everyone the same because everybody is different, and people need to find the institution that is most suitable for them.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

I've given plenty of alternate suggestions, actually, and I'm not even done yet.

Lack of competition has been known to destroy anything in its path. I've explained it in my post several pages back. You can't have everyone the same because everybody is different, and people need to find the institution that is most suitable for them.

The people still have to make the grades. Standard system does not equal everyone will make the dame grades or excel at the same rate. But to deny equal education is inhumane

[smilesammich 10,727]

But you give no alternate suggestion nor the reason as to why it's horrible. Students should be taught the same material and given the best education. No reason why state institutions and schools should be choosing who to "better educate" and who not to.

i think we should get away from the uniform class approach - at the elementary level but more importantly at the middle and high school level. with all the advances of technology, we're still doing school pretty much the same way it was done when i was there. pretty much the same way all of us went to school. no child left behind tried to control what the standard for learning, make it uniform and we certainly haven't had any sort of positive effect from that - not that i've seen. the only reason my kid has made any progress whatsoever in the past few years is because i got him an iep, individual education plan. while it isn't much, it affords him some of the extra one on one that compliments his learning style. he doesn't function well at all in a classroom setting, and i don't mean he is disruptive or gets in trouble, he just doesn't absorb information that way. i think as a country we should be revamping how we teach to individual learning styles and allowing children that excel in a certain area to move ahead of their peers in that area. similarly, if a child is behind or not getting a certain subject or matter - we should give them the time they need to get it or determine if that particular subject or matter is really imperative to that individual child's education. no doubt this would all take a great deal of money, so we'll have to cut back on our military toy appetite a bit..

also i think the vast majority of kids don't know what the hell they want to do when they are in highschool and yet they know that they are supposed to go to college. they know that college costs a lot of money. i wonder how many kids get one or two years into a major and loose all motivation for that field but feel financially stuck in the decision they made.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

i think we should get away from the uniform class approach - at the elementary level but more importantly at the middle and high school level. with all the advances of technology, we're still doing school pretty much the same way it was done when i was there. pretty much the same way all of us went to school. no child left behind tried to control what the standard for learning, make it uniform and we certainly haven't had any sort of positive effect from that - not that i've seen. the only reason my kid has made any progress whatsoever in the past few years is because i got him an iep, individual education plan. while it isn't much, it affords him some of the extra one on one that compliments his learning style. he doesn't function well at all in a classroom setting, and i don't mean he is disruptive or gets in trouble, he just doesn't absorb information that way. i think as a country we should be revamping how we teach to individual learning styles and allowing children that excel in a certain area to move ahead of their peers in that area. similarly, if a child is behind or not getting a certain subject or matter - we should give them the time they need to get it or determine if that particular subject or matter is really imperative to that individual child's education. no doubt this would all take a great deal of money, so we'll have to cut back on our military toy appetite a bit..

also i think the vast majority of kids don't know what the hell they want to do when they are in highschool and yet they know that they are supposed to go to college. they know that college costs a lot of money. i wonder how many kids get one or two years into a major and loose all motivation for that field but feel financially stuck in the decision they made.

Theteaching styles don't have to be the same, but the insurance of the material covered and best equipment should.

Introducing arts and sciences, stem at the high school level is great. If they don't know what they want to do then they would have covered basic general education courses only.

There are plenty of kids who do know and they should have the option to fulfill this by high school. Germany has a similar system.

Hauptschule

In the majority of the federal states, students spend five years at the Hauptschule. The main objective of the Hauptschule is to prepare students for their entry into the world of work. Once students have obtained their Hauptschulabschluss (leaving certificate) at the age of 15-16, they can go into vocational training, start entry-level work in the public sector, or attend a Berufsfachschule (full-time vocational school).

Realschule

Students attend the Realschule for 6 years. It gives them a broader general education and expects them to show greater independence. In comparison with the Gymnasium, the pupils are given a more vocationally-oriented education. At the end of Klasse 10 they obtain the Realschulabschluss (leaving certificate), which gives them different options: in-company vocational training, work in the public sector at entry and executive level, or further school-level education at secondary level II or at a Fachhochschule.

By not allowing equal education we continue down a path of classism

[smilesammich 10,727]

Theteaching styles don't have to be the same, but the insurance of the material covered and best equipment should.

Introducing arts and sciences, stem at the high school level is great. If they don't know what they want to do then they would have covered basic general education courses only.

There are plenty of kids who do know and they should have the option to fulfill this by high school. Germany has a similar system.

Hauptschule

In the majority of the federal states, students spend five years at the Hauptschule. The main objective of the Hauptschule is to prepare students for their entry into the world of work. Once students have obtained their Hauptschulabschluss (leaving certificate) at the age of 15-16, they can go into vocational training, start entry-level work in the public sector, or attend a Berufsfachschule (full-time vocational school).

Realschule

Students attend the Realschule for 6 years. It gives them a broader general education and expects them to show greater independence. In comparison with the Gymnasium, the pupils are given a more vocationally-oriented education. At the end of Klasse 10 they obtain the Realschulabschluss (leaving certificate), which gives them different options: in-company vocational training, work in the public sector at entry and executive level, or further school-level education at secondary level II or at a Fachhochschule.

By not allowing equal education we continue down a path of classism

i guess i'm confused then by what you mean when you say 'equal education'. don't all states have their own minimum requirements of learning that are tested in each age group, even homeschooled kids? in virginia they're called SOLs, and the kids take these SOLs are multiple points along their school career. my son, for example, has never passed a single SOL test. he only comes close on the practice tests. teachers and administrators base the results of those tests in the 5th grade and again in the 8th grade to determine if, when he starts highschool next year, he'll be on the diploma trajectory or the college trajectory. they also denote if they consider a child a drop out risk. my son *thinks* college is not even worth considering, pretty much based on the knowledge that he can't pass an SOL. ultimately, he knows that if he can't pass the SOLS required to get a diploma, he won't get one. let's just say, one of the most difficult things i've ever tried to do in my life is to inspire this kid to want to learn something, anything when after so many years of this he feels there is no point. he's 14 so i feel like that's a pretty normally attitude to have you know? but it's really hard to get him into the swing of things when he's never had good grades and he's never passed an SOL. it's hard to care about something you suck at. what's infuriating is that he sucks at taking tests, he has issues with attention, but educational potential is still there - totally. it's just not being properly fed.

i would like to see something similar to germany in the US so far as awarding a general diploma at a younger age and steering toward vocational/arts/specialized training-education. high school anymore seems sort of inefficient for everyone involved..like a holding tank.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

i guess i'm confused then by what you mean when you say 'equal education'. don't all states have their own minimum requirements of learning that are tested in each age group, even homeschooled kids? in virginia they're called SOLs, and the kids take these SOLs are multiple points along their school career. my son, for example, has never passed a single SOL test. he only comes close on the practice tests. teachers and administrators base the results of those tests in the 5th grade and again in the 8th grade to determine if, when he starts highschool next year, he'll be on the diploma trajectory or the college trajectory. they also denote if they consider a child a drop out risk. my son *thinks* college is not even worth considering, pretty much based on the knowledge that he can't pass an SOL. ultimately, he knows that if he can't pass the SOLS required to get a diploma, he won't get one. let's just say, one of the most difficult things i've ever tried to do in my life is to inspire this kid to want to learn something, anything when after so many years of this he feels there is no point. he's 14 so i feel like that's a pretty normally attitude to have you know? but it's really hard to get him into the swing of things when he's never had good grades and he's never passed an SOL. it's hard to care about something you suck at. what's infuriating is that he sucks at taking tests, he has issues with attention, but educational potential is still there - totally. it's just not being properly fed.

i would like to see something similar to germany in the US so far as awarding a general diploma at a younger age and steering toward vocational/arts/specialized training-education. high school anymore seems sort of inefficient for everyone involved..like a holding tank.

Training, vocational, trade all at the high school level. I'm for it. Now vote for me. I'll fix this ;-)

[OriZ 3,157]

my short, concise assertion that college and trade education should be free for anyone who wants to go to a state/community institution was completely ignored by the residing vj patriarchy because i completely failed to pontificate in a long drawn out manner. i also failed to properly use my keen cut and paste skill set as has been exemplified to me, time and time again, in this forum of wise and learned men. for that, i am extremely sorry. in attempt to make amends i have made the intro to this vj post long winded and i'm purposefully dancing around the point all while weaving a stream of words that are a mixture of necessity and extravagance. now, what were we talking to ourselves about, what problem were we solving for the world - oh yes. public education. while seems to me that some posters here can only view higher education as either a government or private institution - as if these two types of institutions of learning can't coexist -much as they do now, at the elementary level. if you have money - pay to go to a private higher institution of learning. good for you money bags! if you cannot afford to go to said private institutions, the government should provide public higher education free of cost. the money is there, i'm sure no one is even reading this anymore so i won't go into detail with 'ideas' as to how to pay for this and insult you with trying to pawn these 'ideas' off as my own. instead, i will utilize the copy and paste skills i spoke of eariler. please do not simply skim, as oriz and other smart ones have so often displayed, a wall of text is never an affront to genuine ingenuity, a wall of text is only an affront to those who chose not to waste their time reading.

In 1877, Rutherford B. Hayes became the first president to make a strong case for universally available public education. “Universal suffrage should rest upon universal education,” he said in his inaugural address, adding that “liberal and permanent provision should be made for the support of free schools.” Hayes, a Republican, didn’t worry that some poor kid might benefit from access to “free stuff,” nor did he believe that the children of wealthy elites should be excluded from the universal nature of the program. For him, education was the basis for full economic and political participation, and full participation was the basis for all prosperity. An education should be available to all regardless of anyone’s station.

Today, there is universal access to free, public schools across the United States for kindergarten through 12th grade. That didn’t happen by presidential decree. It took populist pressure from the progressive movement, beginning in the 1890s, to make widespread access to free public schools a reality. By 1940, half of all young people were graduating from high school. As of 2013, that number was 81 percent. But that achievement is no longer enough. A college degree is the new high school diploma.

[What Bernie Sanders’s rise means for American politics]

In the 1950s and 1960s, it was possible to graduate from high school and move right into a decent-paying job with good benefits. Strong unions offered apprenticeships, and a large manufacturing sector provided opportunities for those without an advanced degree. A couple with a sole breadwinner could buy a home, raise a family and send their kids to college. That was the American dream. Unfortunately, today, for too many Americans, it’s not a possibility.

An important pathway to the middle class now runs through higher education, but rising costs are making it harder and harder for ordinary Americans to get the education they want and need. In 1978, it was possible to earn enough money to pay for a year of college tuition just by working a summer job that paid minimum wage. Today, it would take a minimum wage worker an entire year to earn enough to cover the annual in-state tuition at a public university. And that’s why so many bright young people don’t go to college, don’t finish or graduate deeply in debt. With $1.3 trillion in student loans, Americans are carrying more student debt than credit card or auto-loan debt. That’s a tragedy for our young people and for our nation.

In my view, education is essential for personal and national well-being. We live in a highly competitive, global economy, and if our economy is to be strong, we need the best-educated workforce in the world. We won’t achieve that if, every year, hundreds of thousands of bright young people cannot afford to go to college while millions more leave school deeply in debt. We need to ensure that every young person in this country who wishes to go to college can get the education that he or she desires, without going into debt and regardless of his or her family’s income.

It may seem hard to believe, but there was a time when higher education was pretty close to free in this country, at least for many Americans. After World War II, the GI Bill gave free education to more than 2 million veterans, many of whom would otherwise never have been able to go to college. This benefited them, and it was good for the economy and the country, too. In fact,scholars say that this investment was a major reason for the high productivity and economic growth our nation enjoyed during the postwar years. And, in certain states, such as California and New York, tuition was so low that college was practically free for much of the 20th century. That is no longer the case in America, but free college is still a priority in many parts of the world.

In Finland, Denmark, Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Mexico, public colleges and universities remain tuition-free. They’re free throughout Germany, too, and not just for Germans or Europeans but for international citizens as well. That’s why every year, more than 4,600 students leave the United States and enroll in German universities. For a token fee of about $200 per year, an American can earn a degree in math or engineering from one of the premier universities in Europe. Governments in these countries understand what an important investment they are making, not just in the individuals who are able to acquire knowledge and skills but for the societies these students will serve as teachers, architects, scientists, entrepreneurs and more.

It is time to build on the progressive movement of the past and make public colleges and universities tuition-free in the United States — a development that will be the driver of a new era of American prosperity. We will have a stronger economy and a stronger democracy when all young people with the ambition and the talent can reach their full potential, regardless of their circumstances at birth.

https://www.washingt...eb69_story.html

While cute, I'm afraid that's just still not good enough. While your post tells us what we all already acknowledged about the importance of college tuition being available, it does not address any of the points in this thread on why "free tuition for all" is not the way to go. There are other ways to help people get the tuition they need that were mentioned here. Why are you stuck on "free college for all" without even being able to explain how it is better than other ways? You claim you want equality. Do you really want your tax dollars paying for the tuition of someone whose family makes $200,000 a year?

The people still have to make the grades. Standard system does not equal everyone will make the dame grades or excel at the same rate. But to deny equal education is inhumane

No one wants to deny equal education, but people should have the choice. Personally, to be honest with you I'm not big on higher education. Never was, never will be. I know some people think it's a necessity, and in today's world unfortunately it's really hard to get hired otherwise, but I find most school teachers and college professors to be useless. But that's just me. Neither my wife nor I really did the college thing - I'm self taught on everything I do and know. I did attend 2 years of tech college after high school, where I got an associates in practical engineering, but I can tell you today I regret it, it was a waste of time. Hated every moment of it, never worked a second in it. I couldn't stand middle school, high school, or that. I'm not a school person. The only reason I even did it was because there was a program with the IDF, where they pay your tuition basically because they want to train you for their purposes, so that they have highly skilled people to do the work they want them to do. So mine was basically hey we'll pay your practical engineering tuition, then when you're done and start doing your 3 year mandatory service(which in this case starts only when you're 20 instead of 18) you'll be a tank turret technician for us. And so I was. Now why is this important - because it is precisely the example I gave earlier - if it's free, you'll try it, what the heck. Someone else is paying for it anyway so who cares right? Doesn't hurt to try. My wife never attended college. She is also self taught on everything she currently does in our business(and has done for the last 20 years or so).

So I was never one of those who believe you HAVE to go to college to succeed in life. But, just like college itself is not for everyone, the same goes for different colleges. People need to have options and choices, we each have our preferences, personally I'm a firm believer that if someone - say you have a child who doesn't want to attend college - I don't think it is a big deal at all. I would never make my kids feel like they have to(like some parents do).

Next - thoughts on tuition.

Yes Val of course some of it is not always all of our original ideas(although some, indeed are). Of course we learn and adopt certain things, just like we toss some things we disagree with. It's a normal process every person does about every subject in the world.

Edited March 19, 2016 by OriZ

[yuna628 9,676]

I've given plenty of alternate suggestions, actually, and I'm not even done yet.

Lack of competition has been known to destroy anything in its path. I've explained it in my post several pages back. You can't have everyone the same because everybody is different, and people need to find the institution that is most suitable for them.

In theory lack of competition does cause a lot of harm in a capitalistic economy, and there is some merit to having one school offering something another school might not (for instance some schools have names that are synonymous with high quality and standards.. we all know the ones, and this often draws in the best and brightest) but... here's a slight problem in the idea that everyone needs to just find the institution that is most suitable. A kid may be the best and brightest but also the poorest. How many times have we heard of kids wanting to go to a dream college but as always end up picking the cheapest college and not the one that may be the best to suit them? It becomes nothing about a school's educational value and about money in the end. Years ago when my sister graduated, she had offers from a couple very good universities, but ended up never going because there was no way she'd ever afford it. She's been working hard all these years at her job but in her youth she probably would have taken a very different path if she'd had the opportunity to.

i think we should get away from the uniform class approach - at the elementary level but more importantly at the middle and high school level. with all the advances of technology, we're still doing school pretty much the same way it was done when i was there. pretty much the same way all of us went to school. no child left behind tried to control what the standard for learning, make it uniform and we certainly haven't had any sort of positive effect from that - not that i've seen. the only reason my kid has made any progress whatsoever in the past few years is because i got him an iep, individual education plan. while it isn't much, it affords him some of the extra one on one that compliments his learning style. he doesn't function well at all in a classroom setting, and i don't mean he is disruptive or gets in trouble, he just doesn't absorb information that way. i think as a country we should be revamping how we teach to individual learning styles and allowing children that excel in a certain area to move ahead of their peers in that area. similarly, if a child is behind or not getting a certain subject or matter - we should give them the time they need to get it or determine if that particular subject or matter is really imperative to that individual child's education. no doubt this would all take a great deal of money, so we'll have to cut back on our military toy appetite a bit..

also i think the vast majority of kids don't know what the hell they want to do when they are in highschool and yet they know that they are supposed to go to college. they know that college costs a lot of money. i wonder how many kids get one or two years into a major and loose all motivation for that field but feel financially stuck in the decision they made.

Uniform class approaches never work, especially when every student may learn very differently. And a lot of kids these days are getting left behind and struggling, I think some teachers are struggling too, because they aren't given the freedom and tools to teach either. My sister-in-law changed her major so many times I lost count in college... the same could be said for my brother-in-law who still hasn't figured out what on earth to do with himself. I think this is very much about not getting comfortable with or learning a whole variety of applicable skills in high school that helps them figure out what they'd like to do. If we could start teaching kids trades even internships it may help.

i guess i'm confused then by what you mean when you say 'equal education'. don't all states have their own minimum requirements of learning that are tested in each age group, even homeschooled kids? in virginia they're called SOLs, and the kids take these SOLs are multiple points along their school career. my son, for example, has never passed a single SOL test. he only comes close on the practice tests. teachers and administrators base the results of those tests in the 5th grade and again in the 8th grade to determine if, when he starts highschool next year, he'll be on the diploma trajectory or the college trajectory. they also denote if they consider a child a drop out risk. my son *thinks* college is not even worth considering, pretty much based on the knowledge that he can't pass an SOL. ultimately, he knows that if he can't pass the SOLS required to get a diploma, he won't get one. let's just say, one of the most difficult things i've ever tried to do in my life is to inspire this kid to want to learn something, anything when after so many years of this he feels there is no point. he's 14 so i feel like that's a pretty normally attitude to have you know? but it's really hard to get him into the swing of things when he's never had good grades and he's never passed an SOL. it's hard to care about something you suck at. what's infuriating is that he sucks at taking tests, he has issues with attention, but educational potential is still there - totally. it's just not being properly fed.

i would like to see something similar to germany in the US so far as awarding a general diploma at a younger age and steering toward vocational/arts/specialized training-education. high school anymore seems sort of inefficient for everyone involved..like a holding tank.

Every state has their own standards and ridiculous amount of tests (MD is a bit crazy with their nonsense tests).. homeschool though works a little different. You've got people that homeschool through good programs that use curriculum through private schools and standardized testing, you've got people that just cobble together their own curriculum, and you've got people that 'unschool'. All of these methods though can leave the same gaps you'd find as in any other school today. The student may be very book smart but not a lot in the science and math department (depending on how strong the parent is in teaching this and the tools they have available), and not a lot in the arts either (unless the parent brings in extra materials or classes on their own). The standards for what is allowed for homeschool varies from state to state with little oversight due to intense lobbying, and there is often pushback when a student would like to join public school functions for extra-curricular learning for arts or sports. I don't think we should be in the habit of measuring a child's educational worth through tests. They are finding this problem more and more with all of the tests here. There's no joy in learning any more.. college is not for everyone, but if more and more jobs are being offered of some worth are *only* to those with a college degree? Then kids are being left behind off the bat.

[smilesammich 10,727]

While cute, I'm afraid that's just still not good enough. While your post tells us what we all already acknowledged about the importance of college tuition being available, it does not address any of the points in this thread on why "free tuition for all" is not the way to go. There are other ways to help people get the tuition they need that were mentioned here. Why are you stuck on "free college for all" without even being able to explain how it is better than other ways? You claim you want equality. Do you really want your tax dollars paying for the tuition of someone whose family makes $200,000 a year?

it doesn't matter to me what any other family earns. it's about everyone having access to further education. a well educated society is ideal, no? like healthcare, i believe access to public higher education is a human right. paying for higher knowledge breeds a permanent, ignorant (easily manipulated) underclass that aspire toward nothing. higher learning has only recently become ridiculously expensive and we can already see the affects on the value of a 'degree'. imo, that's where the dangerous lack of competition comes in..as is, degrees can essentially be purchased. not saying all or even most people with degrees didn't earn them..just saying affordability shouldn't matter when it comes to education.

[Jacque67 7,328]

it doesn't matter to me what any other family earns. it's about everyone having access to further education. a well educated society is ideal, no? like healthcare, i believe access to public higher education is a human right. paying for higher knowledge breeds a permanent, ignorant (easily manipulated) underclass that aspire toward nothing. higher learning has only recently become ridiculously expensive and we can already see the affects on the value of a 'degree'. imo, that's where the dangerous lack of competition comes in..as is, degrees can essentially be purchased. not saying all or even most people with degrees didn't earn them..just saying affordability shouldn't matter when it comes to education.

great post. The vulgarity of some of the posts here,,, sigh