4 ms·

I went to high school from 2001 to 2005, and there wasn't any programming course. This was in the small-town US. Any form of VB is still computer programming,

by javert 13y ago

I went to high school from 2001 to 2005, and there wasn't any programming course. This was in the small-town US. Any form of VB is still computer programming, and would have been a big step up. > The state of HS education in this country makes me sad. Yes, and that is not going to change unless we privatize education.

derleth 13y ago
> Yes, and that is not going to change unless we privatize education. Because poor people don't really need to learn how to read! Yeah, go back to the glory days of the Forties. The Eighteen-Forties.
- javert 13y ago
  Poor people not learning to read does not follow from having privatized education. If in 100 years the government provided clothing, and I advocated privatizing clothing, you'd say, "Becuase poor people don't need to wear clothes!" Where I'm from (in the US), many poor people _don't_ achieve a basically acceptable level of education, because the public schools don't ultimately serve them well for various reasons, and they drop out (or just don't learn but keep getting passed on through the grades). We're talking like high schoolers at a 5th grade reading level, for example. So it's not like the status quo is a panacea.
  - derleth 13y ago
    > Poor people not learning to read does not follow from having privatized education. It has in the past. Which is my point.
    - javert 13y ago
      I don't agree that it has in the past.
      - derleth 13y ago
        > I don't agree that it has in the past. Good for you. The rest of us can look at history with less bias on this subject.
        javert 13y ago
        As far as I know, there has never been a society with a public education system that was privatized. Which makes your claim factually incorrect. Since you're making unfounded assumptions, maybe you need to check your whole mental model on this topic.
EdgarVerona 13y ago
> Yes, and that is not going to change unless we privatize education. Or start paying higher taxes so that public education is given the funding they need to implement these programs.
- WoodenChair 13y ago
  We spend the fourth most per pupil of any country in the world: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-education-spending-compared-to-the-rest-of-the-developed-world-2012-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/us-education-spending-compare... Money is not the answer - in fact some of the states that spend the most, have the worst results.
  - EdgarVerona 13y ago
    That is a good point as well - beyond the monetary needs is the need to cut out the bullshit that has impeded our school systems. We've got a lot of people lining their pockets at the expense of quality education, and we've got a lot of terrible teaching strategies/ideologies that have hurt education more than it ever helped. Would a private system help that, or would it stratify who has access to education at all? I don't honestly know the answer to that. But something has got to give.

by javert 13y ago

derleth 13y ago

> Yes, and that is not going to change unless we privatize education. Because poor people don't really need to learn how to read! Yeah, go back to the glory days of the Forties. The Eighteen-Forties.

javert 13y ago
Poor people not learning to read does not follow from having privatized education. If in 100 years the government provided clothing, and I advocated privatizing clothing, you'd say, "Becuase poor people don't need to wear clothes!" Where I'm from (in the US), many poor people _don't_ achieve a basically acceptable level of education, because the public schools don't ultimately serve them well for various reasons, and they drop out (or just don't learn but keep getting passed on through the grades). We're talking like high schoolers at a 5th grade reading level, for example. So it's not like the status quo is a panacea.
- derleth 13y ago
  > Poor people not learning to read does not follow from having privatized education. It has in the past. Which is my point.
  - javert 13y ago
    I don't agree that it has in the past.
    - derleth 13y ago
      > I don't agree that it has in the past. Good for you. The rest of us can look at history with less bias on this subject.
      - javert 13y ago
        As far as I know, there has never been a society with a public education system that was privatized. Which makes your claim factually incorrect. Since you're making unfounded assumptions, maybe you need to check your whole mental model on this topic.

EdgarVerona 13y ago

> Yes, and that is not going to change unless we privatize education. Or start paying higher taxes so that public education is given the funding they need to implement these programs.

WoodenChair 13y ago
We spend the fourth most per pupil of any country in the world: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-education-spending-compared-to-the-rest-of-the-developed-world-2012-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/us-education-spending-compare... Money is not the answer - in fact some of the states that spend the most, have the worst results.
- EdgarVerona 13y ago
  That is a good point as well - beyond the monetary needs is the need to cut out the bullshit that has impeded our school systems. We've got a lot of people lining their pockets at the expense of quality education, and we've got a lot of terrible teaching strategies/ideologies that have hurt education more than it ever helped. Would a private system help that, or would it stratify who has access to education at all? I don't honestly know the answer to that. But something has got to give.