Ambrosia Software Web Board: Books - Ambrosia Software Web Board

Ahh, things will turn around. Schools, like anything else, are cyclic.

Yeah, but not in time. My brother is getting screwed over right now. :/

Avatara, on Apr 8 2005, 11:58 PM, said:

Ah, they're not all that bad. Certainly no worse now than they ever were (as a whole, they're actually doing better according to the state education department's statistics than they were ten years ago).

Where's your bro going?

-Pufer

Los Alamos Middle School. The teachers there are horrible (with maybe two exceptions) - they don't care about the students or even the subjects. And my parents hear a lot of other parents complaining the high school isn't any better.

Tell him to do his own independent study. Or just get the book and plan your own curiculum.

I took online courses for two years, and I liked it a lot. I took them because where I was living at the time didn't have any good public schools and we didn't want to get up early to take the ferry to the next island to go to a private school.

Swithich, on Apr 9 2005, 11:20 PM, said:

He also has a serious work ethic problem and my mother doesn't have the patience to home-school him. Not to mention, both of my parents will be working soon.

Well, then in my opinion he's screwing himself. A school is just one of many places to get an education. If you can't get a good one there then you must find another way and if your too lazy that's your problem, and you will serve the consequences.

The problem still remains that the school, funded by taxpayers' money, is not up to the standards it should be.

Or are you suggesting all 1000+ kids that attend the school should also get home-schooling if they want a decent education? If so, then why pay money for an education system that is not being effective?

I also think you've misjudged the age range we're dealing with here and the amount of responsibility the average child in that range is willing to handle.

Avatara, on Apr 9 2005, 10:09 PM, said:

Heh. LAHS and LAMS are both rated as exceptional schools by the state education board, both possessing above average staff education levels, drawing from the most intelligent (and wealthy, over $70k/yr median income instead of the $24k or so in the rest of the state) population in the state, and both possessing the highest standardized test scores in the state for their levels by a fair margin. LAMS (considered among the best public middle schools in the southwest), on the 03/04 Terra Nova, pulled a school average of 77 reading and 81 math score. To put that in perspective, my former middle school (generally held as being one of the worst in the entire nation, go WMS!), in the same year, pulled a 25 reading and 14 math (an increase over previous years, my class, back in the 90's, was the last to do better, something along the lines of 25 and 17, respectively) yet it didn't entirely ruin our academic lives.

Now this is not to say that the school is perfect by any means, but you can assure your parents that it is the best in the state among public schools and you can expect the same at the high school (the Albuquerque Acadamy has better stats, but at the prices they charge, they had better).

-Pufer

Swithich, on Apr 10 2005, 09:00 PM, said:

As a matter of interest, are you yourself pursuing alternative methods of education at the present time?
Or are you just spouting rightist bull**** with no real idea of the situation, possibilities and difficulties involved?

Pufer, on Apr 10 2005, 10:44 PM, said:

That's what surprises me. A community of scientists and bright individuals, and the attitude around the schools is such a de-emphasis on education. The students probably score high more due to their parents than the school.

Sundered Angel, on Apr 10 2005, 10:16 PM, said:

Actually, I have (EPGY) pursued alternative methods to advance my mind. But if you want to see a real example read a Ben Carson's biography. Anyway, this country has more libraries per capita then any other in the world. If you want an education there are buildings full of book right down town, but from what Pufer says it really isn't that bad at your brother's school so I wouldn't worry.

Test scores are hardly indicative of how well a school teaches children, they just show how well children can take standardized tests. They might not even have learned that material at the school, but picked it up on their own. (highly likely, its that way up in here in CO as well)

Pufer doesn't go to the school mentioned. I have the second-hand opinions of a large number of parents whose children attend that school. I have yet to hear a single positive appraisal of the education system there. What Pufer did say, is that its better than the rest of the state, which may be true. But its still poor quality compared to most states.

Are you really expecting 11 and 12-year-olds to teach themselves what schools their age should be teaching them by reading books at the library? You must either have been (or will be) an exceptionally motivated 11-year-old, or you have no idea what you're talking about.

Sundered Angel, on Apr 11 2005, 07:16 AM, said:

I do believe it's that second one...

Avatara, on Apr 11 2005, 07:29 PM, said:

As much as I would like to agree with you about Swit-whatever's stupidness, I myself was home educated from a few days after my 11th birthday.

my sister is heavily dyslexic, which runs in the family, and as a result my mother spent most of her time with her. I pretty much taught myself for the duration. Getting up and sitting down with a text book, and working my way through it. This did teach me a lot about the importance of self motivation, and I think I did well from it. I went to college a few years later, at age 14, to do my GCSEs. I was top of almost all the classes I was in. And the youngest person in each, after me, was 17 or over.

But then again, I guess you could say that I wasn't your normal 11yr old...

This post has been edited by Lektor: 11 April 2005 - 01:56 PM

[oops, double post...]

This post has been edited by Lektor: 11 April 2005 - 01:55 PM

Avatara, on Apr 11 2005, 12:29 PM, said:

If there is one thing I've learned about the public school system from my mother, a long-time teacher and school administrator, is that there are exactly two things that parents are good for: screwing up their kids and bitching about how goddamned terrible the schools are. The three highest ranked schools in the Albuquerque Public School district in complaints are the three located in the three wealthiest and best educated communities in the city. None of these three schools are over 15 years old, but have huge parental involvement rates, posess the best educated staffs in the district, have the highest test scores, have the largest budgets, the lowest special-ed rates, and possess the smallest student to teacher ratios in the city, yet they are the most often complained about schools in the state. Want to know what schools have the lowest rates of complaints? You guessed it, the three lowest performing schools in the district. You know, the only ones where there is any justification for any complaints.

Let's put this in in perspective here. My former middle school had the highest dropout rate of any middle school in the western US (nobody has dropped out of LAMS in the past ten years, at least who has been recorded as doing so), it averaged two fights per day and one gang brawl per two weeks, the test scores ranked among the worst in the nation, it was the only school in the state to have two full time police officers on campus, my eighth grade year only had three teachers who went to the methodone clinic at lunch every day, there were exactly four students in the entire school who were not on the federal free-lunch program (I was one of only two who didn't qualify for reduced lunch), of the four main hallways, each one was "owned" by a specific gang that wouldn't allow other gang members through regardless of whether their class was down that way or not, two of my teachers committed suicide and one died of cancer while I was enrolled in their classes, of my 6th grade english class peers, four would be dead by 8th grade, and there were over a dozen pregnant women in my 8th grade class. Of the over 100 students in my eighth grade class, fewer than 30 of us graduated from high school and I can count the number of us now in college on my fingers. Yet, through all of this, WMS had the lowest parent complaint rate of all the schools in the district. The parents didn't care enough to complain. I'm curious about what the main concerns are with your brother's school? Total lack of unshredded textbooks? Students having to be personally escorted to the locked bathrooms so they aren't killed? The ever increasing pregnancy rate amongst twelve year olds? The fact that there hasn't been a teacher in that seventh grade spanish class for a week and nobody has seen the teacher in an equal quantity of time, and you're wondering which college undergraduate they're going to assign to teach that class? I rather think not.

If a parent, or a brother, gives enough of a s### to complain, then they are taking an interest in a student's education and there is no chance that kid will fail. Likewise, if you are dealing with a school full of people doing nothing but complaining, then that school is doing something right (counterintuitive, I know). There aren't any perfect schools, but you only hear about it if they're pretty damn good.

-Pufer

Edit: I also managed to miss actually stating one of my points. I survived a school that was, by all accounts, easily the worst in the state and was able to shrug off those three years of a near total lack of education (mainly because nothing much of substance is taught in middle school anyway) and go on to have absolutely no problem in high school or, now, in college. What does it matter that my middle school experience could have, nay, should have, thrown me down the "wrong" path in life? Many of my peers' futures contained never showing up for the first day of high school, getting involved with drugs/gangs, and ending up either dead or in jail, but that doesn't matter to me just like whatever stuff happens to be befalling your brother doesn't have to affect him.

From what I've read and heard about the Los Alamos school district, even a goodly percentage of the worst kids at the middle school will wind up being college bound, regardless of what the school does to or for them. I suppose that all I'm really saying here is that, while you certainly have the right to complain (perhaps reasonably), simply due to your brother's environment both in the school and (I'm making a leap here with this, but I feel safe making this assumption based on what I know of you) at home, I don't think that there is any worry about your brother ending up as an eighth-grade dropout who dies in a gang shooting before age eighteen. Of course, you may always feel free to simply write off everything I'm talking about and call me a nut, but I assure you that I'm not making this stuff up.

(Also, I'd like to add that I had a good time in middle school. While all this stuff was happening around me, I went along completely oblivious to it (it was the "norm" as far as I could tell) and it is only in hindsight that I realize what a horrible situation I was in. I'd also like to mention that while the place did have some of the worst teachers in existence, there were also a strong number of excellent teachers who were there because it was one of the few places where they could actually make a difference. Of course, they mostly failed miserably, but it is rare to find a teacher in today's post-elementary school system who actually gives a damn about his/her students, and there were certainly a few there.)

This post has been edited by Pufer: 12 April 2005 - 11:41 PM

Thank you for injecting a little perspective into the discussion Pufer. It's been sorely lacking. And incidentally, Swithich, if you feel that the students of Pufer's school could benefit from "seeking education from other sources", ie libraries, I think you need to consider the ramifications of such an environment further.

Attribution of situational factors to individual characteristics is a socio-cognitive bias we've all been guilty of succumbing to at one stage or other. To wallow in it, on the other hand, is an indulgence of the over-privileged.

Sundered Angel, on Apr 12 2005, 08:22 PM, said:

What are you trying to say here? I'm cofused. Do you really think I expect all of Pufers school to just hop skip and a jump down to the library. No. Obviously, I was discussing Avatara's brother. Not Pufer's school. I'm really confused because first of all Pufer himself stands as an example of the will to succeed overriding the temptations of joining gangs and doing drugs. My point was if you are an individual truly motivated to get an education, it's there. I don't expect all of pufer's school to run down to the local library. I go to a very nice school that his well maintained classes, small class sizes, many higher level classes,....blah, blah, blah, blah, and yet I know tons of kids who have just frittered it away. The decision to get an eductation is purely individual, my point was if you are truly motivated, the tools are there for you. Did I help clarify my position or are we still on two different frequencies?

P.S. I think you are looking into my position on this issue a little too much. I'm just trying to address an individual case.

Swithich, on Apr 14 2005, 04:15 AM, said:

I understand your position perfectly. The trouble is that it stems from a documented socio-cognitive bias, and is underwritten by a logical fallacy.

"Everyone who has succeeded in escaping poverty has been motivated and hard-working" does not mean "Everyone who is motivated and hard-working will escape poverty".

Sure, it may be that children of rich or middle class backgrounds can "choose" to succeed or not. However, the choices presented to poor children are very different. This isn't a matter of doing your homework or going to the mall. This isn't a matter of watching TV or reading a book (did you grow up surrounded by books? Poor kids certainly don't). This is a matter of running with the right crowds or being beaten up on a regular basis. This is a matter of facing constant difficulties and distractions in the everyday things which make choosing uncertain future benefits that much more unlikely. This is about not having the information available to make informed choices in the first place.

You can choose to live in your bubble where the beauty of choice separates the worthy from the unworthy. But if you prefer to ground your life in real phenomena and modern psychology, you'd be making the wrong choice.

Sundered Angel, on Apr 13 2005, 09:43 PM, said:

Thank you. I realize this thank you. I do not expect everyone to escape poverty. As I stated before I am dealing with an isolated case.

Sundered Angel, on Apr 13 2005, 09:43 PM, said:

Is that the position of Avatara's brother? I wasn't aware, or perhaps you are just trying to classify my thinking as narrow minded an the issue as too big. I however, am trying to address a single issue, of a single person, who apparently doesn't fit these guidelines. If you would like to make a general statement that is fine. But I am dealing with one thing.

Sundered Angel, on Apr 13 2005, 09:43 PM, said:

I would ask you what this has too do with Avatara's brother, but I think I've already made that point.

Sundered Angel, on Apr 13 2005, 09:43 PM, said:

Obviously not. Why are you trying to turn this into some idealogical argument? I am simply addressing Avatara's brother and you have come in and tried to say that I'm addressing all poor people and that all poor people that come from unfortuate circumstances can work their way up in society and access all the benefits of wealth. That's not what I'm saying at all. I realize that some situations (like Pufer's) are dang near impossible to get out of. But I'm not the type of person who, when in a bind sits around and do nothing. I would rather help those kids then just let them sink. And that is why I'm trying to give some helpful advice. The least you could do is let me do that and go on with my business, instead of berading me with you percieve my political stance to be and what's wrong, in your opinion with it. Thank you very much for your concern, I work with poor people often and know there plight. I don't need some ivy league kid to tell me what is wrong with them and how I should treat them! (rant, I'm really getting tired of this. )

If you truly were only addressing your comments towards a single person, then my apologies. Your statements came across as broad ideological statements - furthermore, they were part of a widely-held ideological platform which it would not be implausible for you to hold.

So long as you recognise the complexities of the issues surrounding poverty, choice and equal opportunity, I'm happy. Altogether too many people don't.


Oh, and be careful of dismissing someone based on broad stereotypes. Not everyone at Yale comes from an old-money New England family and went to a preppy private school. You'd be surprised at how many Yalies are on financial aid (~40%), and how deeply involved in the community the social activists (often from that same 40%) are.

I myself am sorry I did not make my statements clear. I will try harder to make myself understood in the future. I am also sorry about mentioning you ivy league status. However, I happen to know a kid that just got accepted to Princeton...on a full ride and he pisses me off. Honestly, when you were analysing my statements above I was thinking of you as him. You might be able to understand why I got so angry, because he always wants to argue philosophy and make a mountain out of a mole hill. My mistake.

I truly do understand the uphill battle that many teens and young adults face in this country and I do not wish to apply nor believe that a single ideology can solve all their problems, however, for many people the problem is not their school, their parents, or their life. It is them. I go to school with many people like this (who really have everything and just choose not to do anything with it) and that is why I am get so angry about people who are lazy. However, it is not my problem and therefore I should just keep my thoughts to myself. Anyway, I'm sorry about the misunderstanding and will try harder to be clear in the future with my thoughts.

Don't worry about it man. I know exactly the type you're talking about - those lazy idiots whose parents pave their way for them in all respects. They don't put in an ounce of effort unless they're forced to, and coast along as best they can. And the worst thing is that with enough money and influence behind them, they'll still go places in life. Thank god they're a dying breed at Yale...

Anyway, it looks like we have no real differences on the issue, so that's that.