at Bing How the Rich View communal instruction
As a Cash Cow to be Milked for All It is Worth:
How the Rich View communal instruction
There are so many ways to siphon money from our social school theory that I can only list the most coarse here. The most lucrative formula of milking money is with new school building as there is money to be siphoned from beginning to end. Upfront, the land the school is built on must be purchased. This allows the rich citizen who are behind your school board members to buy a worthless property then sell to the school theory at a principal markup; sometimes as much as 50%! All too often these properties are later found to be toxic waste cleanup sites.
Next, costly architectural plans must be ready (you would think that there would be standard school plans but every school is custom!), a normal undertaker of a package deal (almost always a crony) is hired who will then hire many subcontractors (also cronies). Huge amounts of building materials must be purchased and after building the school must be furnished (lavishly and expensively.) Every step of the way is an chance for sweetheart deals, duplicate invoicing, inflated prices, and unspecified "consultants." If the funds are available there will be "cost overruns." But it doesn't end here, down the road, sometimes within two years, there are building refurbishments and updating.
In expanding to this there are many other ways for the rich to steal from our schools together with overpriced textbook purchases, sweetheart deals for supplies, reciprocal nepotistic hiring (you hire my son and I'll hire your daughter), bogus "teacher training" contracts, overly costly or non-existent afterschool programs, computers and other technology purchased in bulk at full price (with some tool landing in the homes of administrators), nebulous "consulting" fees, purchasing supplies and tool with school funds which are returned for secret credit, and lucrative school lunch schedule contracts. And it doesn't end there: the proliferation of high stakes testing have led to an entire manufactures that provides "Sat Prep Services", endless workbooks, and the costs of taking the damn tests themselves. Is it any wonder why the rich view our social study theory as their cow to milk as they see fit?
As a formula to Make the Children of the 99% Far Less Competitive:
Our social study theory spews out "graduates" who, let's face it, on median are not in fact ready for college, yet we send the majority of them to college anyway. How does the theory insure large numbers of unprepared high school grads? This is in fact quite simple; our children are denied the underlying knowledge and tools required to do well in college. In the guise of making the curriculum more "challenging", "applicable", and "diverse" two methods are used to deny students underlying knowledge. First, our school theory quickly gives up trying to teach your child to read well, to add and subtract, to write coherently, to touch type, to use Microsoft office, to devotee meaningful geography, to learn leading world and U.S. History, and to apply the scientific method. They instead contribute your child with lessons that will "engage" them. If you replace engage with "entertain" you will understand what they are in fact doing.
Their other formula to deny your child a good study is to pile on as much extraneous curriculum as possible: ethnic diversity units, emotionally manipulative lessons, very trivial math and science applications, "baby think it over" programs, politically precise topics, "don't do drugs" programs, lots of "test prep", as many national-international-cultural celebrations as possible, special "anything-but-academic" fun projects, etc. Add to this the nonsensically long "block" periods, 40 to 50 student per classroom, disruption by constant announcements, and students being pulled out to see administrators; the consequent is very minute actual learning of fundamentals, key knowledge, and college skills.
Why do this? Simple, the Rich have kids too and they don't want your children competitive with theirs.
As a gismo to condition Our Behavior:
Have you ever wondered about the bell systems in schools? And why are there no bells announcing the beginning and end of classes in college? The acknowledge is that this is a holdover from the days when most citizen worked in factories (where bells and whistles were used to queue the workers for starting, ending, and break times.) Bells were put into the schools to condition children to factory timing.
Today, there is a more subtle conditioning going on. One that is still designed, oddly enough, to put and keep your children in their place: Obedience to Authority. From your child's first day of school our social study theory is molding them to blindly accept authority, not to ask what is told to them, and not to think for themselves. It takes a very concerted exertion to achieve this but consider that the social Schools have your child for thirteen years! How is this accomplished? Well, first as mentioned above they purposely fail at teaching fundamentals (especially underlying reasoning.) Next, they fabricate a capricious and arbitrary "standards based" (I like to correctly call it "low standards based") curriculum that revolves colse to trivial unconnected and compartmentalized knowledge that, for the most part, your child will never need and is fully foreseen, to memorize, regurgitate, then forget. A feedback theory (grades) is rigorously applied to reinforce "good scholastic behavior" and punish bad "performance." Add to this a mountain of homework designed to use up any free time your child has for personal explorations. The children who, quite reasonably, rebel against this theory are labeled as: special ed, Add, Adhd, issue makers, "not college bound", etc. Those students who do learn to think for themselves in spite of this are labeled pejoratively as "geeks."
Finally, we do one more thing to drive the nail into the coffin of reasoning for themselves: we readily contribute them with the answers to all their queries whether we should or not. I understand this seems contradictory and I will try to explain. Our schools do not force our children to figure out things for themselves. When our children after a few seconds of struggling ask to know "the answer" from their teacher, their teacher always gives it to them (they are required to by school policy.) After seven or so years of this our children are conditioned to believe they are incapable of figuring out an acknowledge for themselves and will accept as truth both what they read and what authority figures tell them.
Why do this? Very simple, the Rich don't want you or your children questioning the political system, the economic system, the school system, the governmental system, foreign wars, high levels of personal and social debt, the nightly news, company bailouts, pork barrel spending, the buying of our government, etc. The most productive way to achieve this is by short circuiting the ability to figure things out for ourselves and get us to accept the idea that authority figures (often with questionable Ph.D.s and master's degrees) are the citizen with the answers and we only need ask them.
As a Place Where They Would Never Send Their Own Children:
Let us be honest. The Rich do not send their children to social School; would you if you had a viable choice. Please comprehend that lease Schools are "chartered" by the social School theory and therefore teach the standard (aka "low standards") curriculum. Many are better than quarterly social schools and too damn many are scams by rich citizen to steal money while providing a very crappy study for your child. But None of them are where The Rich send their children to school!
The benefit the Rich's children receive from this theory is incredible. They are virtually assured acceptance into the most prestigious Universities which they have been determined ready to do well in. Further, competition has been lowered by filling the slots they don't wish with ill-prepared social school students and, even better, many students attending on "athletic" scholarships. Further, Rich people's children have employment lined up for them before they graduate-virtually no unemployment for them. They also do not have huge student loans hanging over their heads for the first 10 years or more of their post college lives. And how about grad school; do you in fact think they don't have a huge benefit there too?
So what is the solution, because, let's face it, this theory is running our country into the ground and putting our children's futures at greatest risk. Many things could be done but I suggest to you that social study will always be second rate compared to what the Rich contribute for their children. For that presuppose I suggest that we wish that the Rich send their children to quarterly social school (not lease schools.) How long do you think our social schools will remain crappy if we do this?
No comments:
Post a Comment