(06-12-2019 10:28 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 10:16 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 10:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 10:10 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 09:53 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Don't you see, supporting a strong public school system that extends before/after kindergarten and 12th grade is just about controlling people!

Your word choice seems revealing: stating one's objective as making the system strong rather than the education effective does not necessarily mean that it's "just" about control, but it certainly suggests that it's at least as much about control of education as it as about learning.

You're just seeing what you want to see here, George.

On the contrary: I did not want to see that at all, Lad; I was disappointed and surprised. It seems you may have revealed what you did not want people to see.

Disappointed by me using the word strong? My goodness.

Strong doesn't have to mean rigid and inflexible. Flexible programs can be strong. Effective programs can be strong. Why would you not want a system that is strong and able to withstand hardships?

Now, if I had said supporting a strong school administration, or leadership, I would understand your comment. But I specifically said the system, which is all inclusive - pupils, leaders, teachers, etc. But go ahead and continue to prove that it's not just progressives that can be smug.

I explained my disappointment: that you stated your objective as a strong system rather than effective education. Being disappointed in that is not smugness on my part. I think you were caught in your error and now are trying to backtrack.

More generally, education is very much an area in which "progressives" seem more committed to control than to results. In city after city, time after time, we have seen "progressives" go to the barricades to fight against accountability of schools and teachers for student learning, and to shut down mechanisms that might allow kids to get a good education outside the union-dominated "public school system". Their priority is the "system", not the outcomes. By all evidence, that's what makes "progressives" tick.