Once again, SD Legislators get their yearly dose of ridicule for their backwoods thinking;
Recently it was Utah trying to use the political arena to bludgeon climate science using the same old debunked denialist nonsense. Now South Dakota has upped the ante. Besides the expected idiocy as in Utah’s resolution, the South Dakota House passed aresolution that included (presumably, though that may be giving too much credit) basic errors in wording – even simply being wrong they got wrong!
Plenty of people are getting good laughs about the use of “astrological” when “astronomical” may have been meant, and “thermological” when, uh, not sure what they meant. It is funny to see someone who gets the science quite wrong, trumpets errors that are trivial in the big picture, and declares, “[g]lobal warming alarmism is politics, not science” turn around anddefend the SD legislature’s action.
Reason number 47 we should have education vouchers. The government should keep their filthy hands out of education.
Huh? The problem with public education is that we don’t spend enough on it. I am amazed that people like you piss and moan about spending a couple of bucks on public education, but parade in the street with an American Flagpole stuck up your ass promoting wars with countries that have done nothing to us. We can’t spend a couple million on rebuilding a school in America. But we can spend billions on bombs killing innocent foreigners that have done nothing to us. Dan, I hope you were being sarcastic. Seriously.
I was not being sarcastic. I didn’t go to government schools and my children will not go to government schools. Our state spends PLENTY on education and most states spend more. Governments across the country keep throwing more and more money at education in the feeble hopes that it will get better yet it keeps getting worse. So the answer of course is —- throw more money at it! The real answer is to get the government out of the picture. I believe that education should be supported by the public but not dictated by the government. The private schools I attended and my children attend do a far better job educating students for far less money that the state. Provide vouchers for each student to attend the ACCREDITED school of choice and we as a society will reap the rewards.
Dan,
What are “the rewards”?
The rewards? The rewards are the real goal of education; a better educated populace. That’s why we as a society support public education —- to better our society.
And what has throwing trillions at war accomplished? World Peace? You wanna compare apples to oranges, let’s go.
I’m not comparing apples to oranges. My comments have been directed at keeping government’s filthy hands out of education as exampled by the pinheads in Pierre floating this ridiculous legislative pile.
If you want to battle about the money our government has spent on wars I’ll be happy to do so next time there’s a relevant post on this site. In the meantime, if you’d like to discuss education, the government’s role in education or the funding of education — which is the subject I was commenting on — blaze away.
I disagree, I think that a very large percentage of our taxes should be spent on public healthcare and public education.
Why would you want to rely on the government to know better how to spend your money than you? Keep the government out of our pockets and follow the Constitution. PROMOTE the general welfare. Not PROVIDE but PROMOTE. I have no argument with public funding of education or health care — I have a big problem with the DELIVERY of that funding. With regard to education (the topic of discussion) I say we are already spending PLENTY. I’d much rather the state of South Dakota send me and every other parent in South Dakota the $4,805 per student that the state education funding formula provides and allow me to take it the accredited school of my choice. Schools and school systems that provide good educations will flourish and the poor ones will fail and be flushed.
Actually, I think the discussion was about legislators not telling educators what to do. Legislators jobs are clear, fund education, let educators take of the rest.
I didn’t go to government schools and my children will not go to government schools.
Funny, I went to public schools for 13 years (including Jr. kindergarten) and then went to a state school for my BS. I turned out just fine and recieved a wonderful education – though not all of it was here in SF. My daughter will also be attending our wonderful public schools in SF. Unless you want religion in your kids’ education, there is no reason to go to a private school in SF. If you lived in Houston or Baltimore, then it would be advisable.
Keep the government out of our pockets and follow the Constitution. PROMOTE the general welfare. Not PROVIDE but PROMOTE.
Check what our STATE constitution says about education. Last time I checked, the federal constitution doesn’t say anything one way or another about providing public education. But the SD constitution does. Good luck trying to change that.
I’m not saying the SF public schools don’t provide an adequate education. However, religion aside, there are private schools in SF that provide a substantially better education than the SF public schools. Never mind the test scores, if you ever get the chance to spend an appreciable amount of time in both a SF public school and a SF private school class room the difference is glaringly obvious. The issues of the SF public school district may not be comparable to larger metropolitan areas but the waste and top-heaviness of the SFPSS is clearly a problem. There are reasons aside from religion to send your children to private schools. But my comment wasn’t here to debate public vs private schools, rather the involvement of the legislature. I think we agree on the fact that the legislature should fund education but shouldn’t control it.
Congratulations on your educational experience and the best of luck to you for your daughter’s. It’s your choice. In fact, you could choose any public school through open enrollment.
Which goes WAY back in a circuitous route to my original point of getting the government out of education.
I’m not certain which portion of the state constitution you’re referring to but the folks who wrote our state’s constitution borrowed heavily (read plagiarized) from Gouvernuer Morris — it’s nearly identical to the US Constitution. Look it up. I would agree with you that the US Constitution doesn’t address education insofar as I know, however, that doesn’t stop the federal government from getting their filthy hands into the mix with both public money and ridiculous federal policy requirements.
Again, back to my point. Our tax dollars should fund education for the betterment of our society. The legislature should not have control over the manner of education, but rather the outcome. There are and should be requirements for education. Parents should be able to decide where their children go to school and if it happens to be a sectarian school that meets the generally accepted educational requirements then so be it.
Clearly it will take a change to the constitution, but I know I can count on the solid civic mindedness of good citizens like you to back me on that when the time comes.
DB: if you ever get the chance to spend an appreciable amount of time in both a SF public school and a SF private school class room the difference is glaringly obvious.
You mean like the fact that the private schools don’t have to deal with immigrants who don’t speak (or read or write) English as a primary language nor do they have to deal with groups of kids with learning disabilities, ADHD, Autism, or other mental disabilities?
Private schools also don’t have to deal with kids who only get one good meal a day which is at school, nor do they have to deal with kids who have unemployed parents, parents with raging alcohol or drug addictions, kids who are in foster homes, kids with abuse issues etc etc.
So yea – take away all the imperfect kids who don’t have the luxury of having parents with enough disposable income to afford private school tuition and it seems pretty damn obvious you are going to see “glaringly obvious” differences.
I guess they didn’t teach logic in that private school of yours huh Dan?
Or did you mean you would notice “glaringly obvious” differences in dress codes such as the higher rate of popped collars and Abercrombie insignias found in private schools in relation to their public equivalents?
However, religion aside, there are private schools in SF that provide a substantially better education than the SF public schools. Never mind the test scores, if you ever get the chance to spend an appreciable amount of time in both a SF public school and a SF private school class room the difference is glaringly obvious.
If they’re indeed “glaringly obvious”, then lay them out for us. Otherwise, you’re just throwing around useless platitudes.
I think we agree on the fact that the legislature should fund education but shouldn’t control it.
The districts aren’t required to take state money as far as I can tell. If a district wants to self fund, they can do whatever they want.
I’m not certain which portion of the state constitution you’re referring to but the folks who wrote our state’s constitution borrowed heavily (read plagiarized) from Gouvernuer Morris — it’s nearly identical to the US Constitution. Look it up.
I did. From section 8 of the SD constitution:
§ 1. Uniform system of free public schools. The stability of a republican form of government depending on the morality and intelligence of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature to establish and maintain a general and uniform system of public schools wherein tuition shall be without charge, and equally open to all; and to adopt all suitable means to secure to the people the advantages and opportunities of education
The legislature should not have control over the manner of education, but rather the outcome.
How do you have control over one without having any control over the other? Your private school didn’t teach you logic, did it?
There are and should be requirements for education.
Lay them out. Otherwise, you’re just spewing platitudes again.
The only area where we might be in agreement is if you support repealing the “no child left behind” act. It’s quite possibly the dumbest major piece of legislation to come out in the last 20 years.
The one thing the private schools I went to did teach was civil discourse. Clearly you guys missed that day. I have no problem having a serious discussion of differing views but that seems unlikely given the participants.
At the risk of dropping down to your level I’ll just close my comments on this and any other topic on this site by saying that you four douchebags; 3wis, anominous, Ghost of Dude and Costner and the rest of your Keith Olberman-Rachel Maddow sycophants can continue your conversations among yourselves and the other chickenshits on this site that hide behind fake names.
PS – Have a nice day
Your’e just mad Dan that you got your ass handed to you.
I’m not mad and my ass was not handed to me. If anyone could come back with substantive arguments that didn’t attack the motives or intelligence of the presenter then maybe you’d have something. Of courser it wouldn’t be the snarkiest political blog in South Dakota but it might be something that was actually worthwhile.
1) I think they presented some pretty good arguments 2) GoD and Costner are hardly liberals, just realists.
At the risk of dropping down to your level I’ll just close my comments on this and any other topic on this site by saying that you four douchebags; 3wis, anominous, Ghost of Dude and Costner and the rest of your Keith Olberman-Rachel Maddow sycophants can continue your conversations among yourselves and the other chickenshits on this site that hide behind fake names.
Ah, so you’re an asshole. It all makes sense now. You’re no standard-issue asshole either. You make the assumption that because we post regularly on a site where links to lefties like Maddow are posted, we must all agree with what she and the others say. Not so. You are just a terrible debater and can’t back up your claims with experience or relevent statistics, hence the diversion into the ad hominim attack area.
As to being a “chickenshit” for hiding behind a psuedonym: First, look up the original definition and usage of the term chickenshit. You’ll find it doesn’t mean what you think it means. Second, I can’t speack for everyone here, but I use a psuedonym on the internet because I don’t know who’s reading this blog, and I want my identity protected.
I’m not mad and my ass was not handed to me. If anyone could come back with substantive arguments that didn’t attack the motives or intelligence of the presenter then maybe you’d have something. Of courser it wouldn’t be the snarkiest political blog in South Dakota but it might be something that was actually worthwhile.
Lay out your case, Dan. I asked two questions in my post that left it open for you to state your case for private schools. Either you can’t come up with any good points, or there aren’t any.
Until you can prove otherwise, l3wis’ comment abou you getting your ass handed to you stands.
Sorry Dan, but I don’t recall seeing a colorful insult directly at you anywhere in my post, and my points about the differences between public and private schools are very valid.
As to your accusation that I’m a liberal or that I’m hiding behind a fake name… yea, those are pretty popular retorts when someone doesn’t have a legitimate point to debate. Nice going – is your next tactic going to be pointing out a grammatical error in my post?
Of course it seems “glaringly obvious” that you have never really considered the fact that private schools don’t have to deal with troubled students as I pointed out in my initial post, and rather than counter my points you felt it was more fitting to put your tail between your legs and scurry off into the darkness.
Well played Dan… at least we didn’t need to sit through 20 or 30 of your posts to learn you have absolutely no clue what the hell you are talking about.
He must be a friend of the Minuteman…
Does he even have friends?
Addressing all points:
1. Chickenshit – Cowardice, in general terms, is the perceived failure to demonstrate sufficient robustness in the face of a challenging situation. This is the definition I was going for and it fits.
2. I don’t use a pseudonym ANYWHERE because I have no fear of who may be reading what I am saying. Mostly because I’m not a chickenshit. See definition above.
3. If you have spent any time in BOTH public and private school classrooms as I have, you would see substantially different levels of behavior, discipline, respect and participation of students and their families.
4. The state already has control over the OUTCOME of education based on the requirements set forth for accreditation and graduation. I don’t need to lay them out, they have been laid out by the state and I have no issue with the requirements. That’s as far as it should go. There should be no direct influence on the day to day curriculum. In other words the MANNER in which it is delivered.
5. Your points about differences between public and private schools are stereotypes. Are there rich kids in private schools? Yes. And there are rich kids in public schools. But there are also upper middle class and middle class and working class and poor kids in private schools. I can’t speak for other private schools in Sioux Falls but it’s not “disposable income” that puts the majority of students (including my children) through the Sioux Falls Catholic School system. It is substantial financial sacrifice on the part of families for the sake of the education of their children. The private schools I attended took in many Vietnamese refugees in the 70’s and in recent years the schools my children attend have taken in families and students from Central America and the Sudan. Also, families of private school students are not somehow magically immune to hunger, unemployment, raging alcohol and drug addictions, abuse, etc. Those problems are here as well. The manner in which they are dealt with however is significantly different.
I think that about covers it. Have a nice life, chickenshits.
“You! Yes, you behind the bike sheds! STAND STILL LADDY!”
“3. If you have spent any time in BOTH public and private school classrooms as I have, you would see substantially different levels of behavior, discipline, respect and participation of students and their families.”
I have and I didn’t.
Dan- You kinda sound like most parents who send their kids to private school, you don’t think you should have to pay property taxes to fund public education. Poppycock. I have NO children and never intend to, but I look at public education as an investment, educated communities do better then uneducated ones, the proof is in the pudding. If you get a voucher, I should get one to since I don’t have children, so should anyone who doesn’t have kids currently in public school. But let’s go a step farther, if I think a war is unjust and illegal, I shouldn’t have to pay federal income taxes to fund it. I want a voucher for that.
Dan- You kinda sound like most parents who send their kids to private school, you don’t think you should have to pay property taxes to fund public education.
Not only that, but what I find funny about private school parents is how much they bash public schools and throw out platitudes about how much better of an education their kids are getting. To me, it just seems like they’re trying to rationalize spending all the money they do to pay for school.
My two brothers went to a private middle school, and I went to one of the evening family activities. After the principal ranted for a while about how bad public schools were and how the “lie” of evolution was presented to children there as fact (not true, it’s a generally accepted scientific theory, and that’s how they taught it), he extolled the virtues of the new AP classes offered at the attached high school – all three of them – and how they were challenging their students in ways the public schools couldn’t.
At WHS, I was able to finish nearly a year’s worth of college credit my Jr. and Sr. years. I could take nearly every AP class imaginable.
In short, there’s a lot of propaganda out there private schools use to keep enrollments steady.
A lot of other parents seem to really want to use my money to send their kids to private schools. What happened to bootstraps and sacrifice?
1. Chickenshit – Cowardice, in general terms, is the perceived failure to demonstrate sufficient robustness in the face of a challenging situation. This is the definition I was going for and it fits.
The term originated during WWII, when soldiers would refer to seemingly idiotic abuses of authority by junior officers (called “90-day wonders” because of the short OCS course that turned them from civilian to officer) on a power trip as “chickenshit”. I suppose the term could be expanded to include cowardice, but it seems that just saying “chicken” would do just fine.
BTW, I learned that at a public university.
2. I don’t use a pseudonym ANYWHERE because I have no fear of who may be reading what I am saying. Mostly because I’m not a chickenshit. See definition above.
Then you’re either not very smart or haven’t spent much time around the internets. Don’t be surprised when you get spammed.
Addressing all points:
No, no you didn’t.
You mentioned behavior and attitude of students as a difference. Others have shot that one down. I asked you to lay out specific differences between public and private schools. I’ll qualify that further by asking about differences in the quality of education. What are they?
You also said there should be requirements for education. Lay them out.
Dan… there is a “glaringly obvious” reason you continue to claim you are leaving only to find yourself posting again… and it has something to do with the fact that you still have no idea what you are talking about.
The fact is, private schools do not have to deal with the same level of troubled youth as do public schools. If you even try to argue this point you are incredibly ignorant and prove that you are disconnected from reality.
I never said private schools don’t have to deal with any of these types of kids, but we both know the average student at a private school comes from a middle class to upper class family whereas the number of students from lower income families or from families with substance or physical abuse issues could be counted on one hand.
The simple fact is you are comparing apples to oranges and then bragging about the chocolate flavoring. Put a private school against a public school with the same types of kids and you would see your precious test scores would level out. The costs would also start to level out because as you might expect, it costs exponentially more to education a student with a mental disability than it does to education a ‘normal’ student.
Essentially, private schools get to cherry pick which kids they want and which they do not either by blatant choice or via exclusion due to tuition requirements. Public schools get the wheat and the chaff together and have no choice on the matter… so I’d say the deck is stacked against them from the start.
So would vouchers really work the way you expect? If you get some low income parents using those vouchers to send their mildly autistic kids to your Catholic school where they become a distraction and hamper the entire classroom due to their antics, would you really think vouchers are as great of an idea or would your tune change faster than Rosie Odonell’s promise to go out a diet when a slice of cheesecake is placed in front of her?
The fact is – parents who send their kids to private schools don’t want all the troubled kids who go to public schools. They might not like to admit it, but that is the reality and part of the reason they send their kids to a private school.
As to my comment about disposable income, again you miss the point. If a family with four kids wants to send their kid to a private school in Sioux Falls they can’t afford an extra $3,500 per kid for a total of $14,000 a year if their family income is just shy of $40k combined. No matter how you slice it – they simply could not in any way afford that unless they were given scholarships… and there are not enough scholarships to go around nor would they be given to a kid who suffers from ADHD or has a track record of being disruptive.
A single mother of three kids can’t afford over $10,000 to send her kids to private school when she makes $25k a year either, so yes Dan it does come down to disposable income. If you have the income to send your kids to a private school that is stellar, but that income is in fact disposable because you obviously did not need it to buy food, to pay rent, or to put clothes on your back…thus the term DISPOSABLE.
In a perfect world all kids would be able to get the best possible education for the least amount of money, but this isn’t a perfect world and all things considered I’d say the public school systems do an amazing job when you consider the amount of money they have to work with and the cross section of students they deal with on a daily basis. Sure they aren’t perfect and there are a lot of ways they could trim the fat, but they still do one hell of a job.
There is probably a reason your initials are “DB” Dan… because you sure fit the part.
Since I see I used the term education rather than educate… twice no less… I feel the need to correct myself since it makes me sound like the public school system failed me.
Really… I’m not that ‘stoopid’. 😉
I just checked the demographics data for O’Gorman High School… so you tell me what this means.
Number of Black students who attend O’Gorman… 9. No not 90, not even 19… but 9. Number of Hispanics… 15. Keep in mind about 85% of Hispanics are Catholic, yet there are only 15 who are lucky enough to attend O’Gorman. Number of Native Americans who attend O’Gorman… 0. Yes you read that correctly….ZERO. From a state that has a huge Native American population, not a single one attends O’Gorman.
But they do have 711 white kids… so I guess diversity isn’t exactly part of the ciriculum.
So do we really think they have to deal with the same issues as public schools? The answer seems clear. Granted I’m not suggesting race alone is a factor because it isn’t, but we all know there is a correlation between race and incomes in this city, so clearly the numbers are skewed here which suggests there aren’t many (any?) low income families sending their kids to O’Gorman.
I just wish we could see a breakdown of incomes, because I can promise you it is far different from what you would see in a public school. I also didn’t see anything on the O’Gorman website about how they deal with students who have a mental disability such as Downs Syndrome nor did I see a mention of such a program on their faculty and staff page… do they even deal with those types of students or do they not fit into their image?
How many Asian kids?
23 – and we know they love them all because they raise the GPA of the place!
If they really had a typical cross section of Sioux Falls residents, there is no way they would have zero Native Americans, 15 Hispanics, and 23 Asians.
http://www.sfcss.org/OGHS.cfm?ContentId=54
Heck I could have the highest test scores in the state if I got to hand pick my students. A private school bragging about test scores is sort of like a Sorority bragging about the attractiveness of their members. When you get to pick who gets through the doors…. you generally have a much better chance at being “above average”.
Well, Costner, not all white people are smart. Remember, GW Bush was elected at least once.
Islamic schools is private schools! Maybe Dan supports vouchers for those too. It would “better our society”, right? No more “filthy hands” of government in education? Dan?
Yeah, Barry went to a Madrassa, and look how he turned out, he’s president.
Well, Costner, not all white people are smart.
Obviously, but the law of averages dictates that white kids generally don’t suffer the same problems as minorities that much is merely a statistical fact. First there is the income issue… like it or not minorities generally have lower incomes on average.
Then you have the foreign language issue for many immigrants, then you have the higher incidence of drug and alcohol abuse issues.. the list goes on an on. I wish it wasn’t the case and it is sad that there is such a racial divide even in the year 2010, but that is the world we live in so it makes sense that fewer minorities would have a legitimate chance to attend a private school.
If DB was honest about the situation, he would acknowledge that private schools never have to deal with the kids that cause issues or have learning disabilities or who have serious home issues. The fact is, private schools have been known to kick out troublemakers and send them back to public schools – and in some cases they even have grade requirements which prevent slackers from impacting their test scores.
There are a lot of pros to private schools but it is obvious they can’t be compared to public schools unless you level the playing field. If vouchers were allowed, then private schools would need to be required to accept ALL students who apply rather than just those who happen to meet their income or intellect standards. Then we would see how much better their test scores are.
Yeah, Barry went to a Madrassa, and look how he turned out, he’s president.
He went to a public school in Jakarta. Big difference.