Limited abilities in ‘Rosen’s world’
We all had a good laugh at crybaby conservative Mike Rosen’s Oct. 26 column, “Merrifield raising Hell again.” It’s particularly amusing that yet another right-wing extremist thinks everyone should be in their left brains.
Hey, Mr. Rosen, thanks for helping us prove the old adage that “lefties” are the only ones in their right minds! In fact, with high-stakes testing narrowing the curriculum to math and reading, it’s remarkable that there are any art, history or P.E. classes left for all of the crazy flakes out there.
If only Rosen was in touch with reality, he would realize that the right-brained skills of creativity and critical thinking are the ones that contribute to our ability to innovate, invent and dream as a culture. In Rosen’s world there is only room for smart, conformist psychotics or well-adjusted, creative dopes.
Rick Posner, Evergreen
In Rosen's world there is room for people to make their own choices in education. A prospect which terrifies those in power in education. They don't think they can compete with schools that offer discipline, values, hard academics and accountability. That's true. Most education professionals, especially politicians who come from the education field, never expect to be held accountable for anything. Had a Republican stated there was a special place in hell for any group that person would still be tied to those words in every article or mention in the press.
Any ambition to remain in office would be constantly opposed and would result in resignation. Merrifield just expects the dumb peasants to giggle and forget his "little mistake". Because Rosen, and others, want a more balanced view in charge of decisions on the school system, he is a bad person and too partisan. How anyone thinks there is any value or honesty in this person is a mystery. But no one needs to do anything more than watch and listen. He'll show us how he expects the unwashed masses to obey his education edicts.
Momma y, you said with regard to traditional public schools, "They don't think they can compete with schools that offer discipline, values, hard academics and accountability. That's true."
Really? There are plenty of parents out there who want a balance of traditional academics AND specialized electives for their children who possess particular talents. At my school, we take great pride in our wide elective offerings AND our AP academic courses. Kids attend our school in order to work with our outstanding music, art, and sports programs as well as for the academic rigor of our regular and advanced academic courses.
Please be careful when you generalize because it's NOT always true.
Posted by Tom on November 8, 2007 06:06 AMso tom what is the name of the school?
if it is so good why would you leave the name off? show your true pride and tell us the name of this wonderful public school.
All this author can do is call Rosen names and degrade his intelligence rather than provide solutions to a broken educational system.
Why is it Mr. Posner that Rosen is so wrong on this issue? Is it because what he wants for our children to have a great education? The way you write this opinion piece makes me believe that you don't value education as much as you value protecting the status quo. And by calling him a right wing extremist, crazy flake, smart conformist psychotics or well-adjusted, creative dopes is immature and completely unproductive towards the larger discussion.
Rather than name calling, provide your solutions for fixing our severly dilapidated education system. Otherwise your opinion is just a bunch of name calling.
And Tom, you are right it is not always true that all schools are of poor quality, but then again quite often it is, what is your solution to fix our education system? Do you want to see competition? Doesn't that work in the public sector? It forces businesses to become more effective, better at what they do and alot of time less expensive. Why if you are an educator would you fight any changes needed to make the education of our future better? I realize your school may excel in their processes but alot of other public schools fail across the board. Why not shake it up? Try to fix the problem rather than continue it along the same path? All of you teachers will still have jobs and in fact will be able to better use your skills. So what is the problem or better what is a valid solution?
Hi momma y - Sometimes we agree, sometimes not. The problem here is that we have Mike Rosen who disparages public education at every turn. I have yet to hear him say ANYTHING good about it at any level, from K thru college - and find myself wondering if this means his daughter went to private school & private college.
I am quite sure that public education could be improved; however the teachers are the ones "stuck in the middle" - when there are cuts, the teachers, teachers aids, etc are where they go - not the administration (man - have they learned well from private industry) - and when something like NCLB comes along, the teachers are stuck with that too.
I was a product of a combination of both parochial schools & public schools - and saw good & bad teachers in both. The parochial schools were excellent at math and English basics (I cringe when I see some of the writing in these blogs & wonder how some of these folks passed basic English without knowing the difference between their, there & they're for instance), but couldn't deal with science & advance math. Public schools teachers (especially in high school) were great for advanced studies & teaching critical thinking. Both had hide-bound teachers who hated to be corrected or questioned, even when they were wrong.
There are 3 issues to consider when discussing the concept of vouchers:
1) who will pay for them? Rosen spoke of the voucher plan in Utah which he claims will neither affect public education funding, nor will raise taxes as the vouchers will come from the general fund. It seems to me that means that taxpayers will be paying twice - and/or - that something else in the general fund (like infrastructure) will have a budget reduction to cover the costs of the vouchers. In addition, the Utah plan will have no means testing - should a parent who can easily afford private education get even $500/year?
2) Even with vouchers, where will the private (including parochial & charter) schools come from? As I understand it , many if not most private schools have waiting lists, so just having the money to cover some/all of the cost isn't enough.
3) Finally, as I understand it, the private schools aren't bound by NCLB - so how exactly are we making the determination that they are "better"? Are we supposed to believe that simply by virtue of being a private school the education is better without some form of comparison?
I don't know the answers. The only thing I am sure of is that one advantage that private schools have is that because the parents are actually spending money, they become more involved with their children's education - helping to make sure the kids are getting the best education possible, doing homework, assisting the teachers, fund-raising, etc. Wouldn't public schools also benefit from parental involvement?
Posted by Mary on November 8, 2007 06:47 AMI just wish Rosen and his "truth police" buddies, like O'Riles, Caplis, Newman, Hannity, Lim(P)baugh, Andrews, etc., would try writing and reporting the truth. Newman, Rosen, and Andrews are all military veterans. They know "cold" Bush (PHONY AIRMAN) is a 40+ years UCMJ-felon; AWOL, deserter, and guilty of illegal separation and discharge. GHWB (high crimes and misdeameanors) violated Truman's executive order (Civil Rights Act of 1964 too), which desegregated all of our military units. GHWB resegregated all of our military units when he carved out a NAM sanctuary slot for "W" and his rich white home-boys, in the Texas Air National Guard (racially segregated). Every officer, "dead or alive", that served in this Guard country-club, should be investigated to determine if they too are UCMJ-felons (PHONY AIRMEN). Lim(P)baugh should take up this investigation. Oops! My Bad! This takes a set of "NADS".
They also know former US Army ROTC cadet, Sam Alito (PHONY SOLDIER), USSC Judge, is a also a UCMJ-felon; AWOL, deserter, and guilty of illegal separation and discharge. Alito pimped and exploited taxpayers for 7 years of free college education (JD/undergrad degrees). He blew off his 11 years obligated active duty military service, using the guise of him being a federal law clerk. Law clerk isn't mentioned in my copies of the UCMJ and Manual of Court Martial. Rosen and his posse are Benedict Arnolds, just like US Sen. Shamnesty Salazar (El Capitan, S.S. Amnesty-just another slave ship). Bush and Alito would make great SuperMax or Ft. Leavenworth, KS "wives". Heck, if they were black like me, they would already be there.
Posted by ucmjfelonsawoldeserterillegal separationanddischarge on November 8, 2007 07:03 AMI am confused yet again by the lefties on here. The first poster says he is surprised there are any art or physical education classes left. Last time i checked art and social studies classes are on the rise with p.c. curriculem. As to the p.e. classes. It is the left who are and succeding in removeing these classes from the system. No longer are children to go to p.e. because thye may find out they do ot have the same athletic ability as another child. Recess is being reduced to nap times.
Then the questionof who pays for the school vouchers. Is this not simple. When you pay your taxes you submit attendance evidance in a charter of voucher program. Then the money is taken from the failed public school system and dispersed to the appropriate school of choice. It does not take a failed DPS student to figure this one out. However it does seem to be over the heads of those who want to enforce thier beliefs and values upon all children and indoctrinate them into P.C. ways.
Posted by The Shadow on November 8, 2007 07:09 AMWow...take an hour away from these discussions and the comments really pile up. I'm at school right now, taking a little bit of my planning period to answer some questions that came up.
My school? Bear Creek High School in Lakewood. And no, we're not some special, remarkable school. We're very typical of "good, average" high schools in the Denver area. The reality is nearly all such schools offer a terrific balance of electives and academics. But as usual, instead of acknowledging the positives, we only hear about the few negatives out there. Quit reading the conservatives who haven't been inside a public school for decades and visit one yourself!
And Jack Bauer, the way to improve public schools is NOT to run them like businesses. Yes, we are in the "business" of educating, of teaching to students' needs, whether they be academic or affective (hence the necessity of offering both academic rigor AND elective specialization). Teaching is an art, not a business. Sorry, but it's true. Ask any teacher who makes it past ten years before burning out on the "business details". If one wants to make this a lifelong career, it MUST be considered an art.
The obvious way to improve public schools is (1) for parents to SUPPORT their school by being active partners in their kids' education and getting involved at the school itself. One earlier poster mentioned that that was probably why private schools seem to work better (beyond the fact that they do not have to take anyone at all who does not meet academic potential or tuition requirements). The parents are paying for it directly, so they tend to get involved more. But the same can work in public schools as soon as parents stop seeing their neighborhood school as a taxpayer-funded babysitting service.
Sorry, but that's all I have time for now. Here come the kids! Yay!
Posted by Tom on November 8, 2007 07:33 AMShadow wants to send his kid to snake handling and speaking in tongues classes but wants tax money to pay for it.
Posted by it's true on November 8, 2007 07:35 AMI don't care if you want to teach your kids that there's a giant frog on the other side of Saturn that made the entire universe in a week and continues to monitor and manipulate it as he sees fit. I don't care if you teach your kids that when they die their ghosts will party forever with this frog in the lily pad covered pond in the sky.....but what makes you think you have the right to tax dollars to do so? What makes you think that you can force that kind of belief system on the other kids in school?
NO PUBLIC FUNDS FOR RELIGION INDOCRINATION!
Posted by jay on November 8, 2007 08:05 AMAre you saying Tom that I'm not paying for it directly when sending my child to a public school? If so you are flat out wrong - I pay my property taxes, I pay local taxes when I purchase anything, I pay my state and federal income taxes. so if I sent my child to a public school I would be just as involved as I am with his private education - out of a desrire for him to be ready to enter college. I also pay for my childs private education on top of paying for your public education system - out of choice for more quality - less indoctrination, and less bullcrap of some of the public schools teachers agendas. But I do not complain too loudly I mostly advocate for some choices with that money I've been forced to pay, which goes into a system I'm don't use and don't beleive is best for our children.
You dodged the question of adding competition to the fray - instead changing it to teaching itself not being a business, but of course it doesn't keep you and the teachers unions going.
Face it, if your school had to compete with the private school down the street that is turning out much higher test scoresand children ready to enter college without suplemental classes, you would be forced to do something about it because those parents would take their children there instead of to your school- that is true competition, competetion for the best education of the child - not the interests of the school district and the teachers.
NO PUBLIC FUNDS FOR LIBERAL INDOCRINATION!
Posted by B on November 8, 2007 08:29 AMB, how is that being done? Is science a "liberal" subject?
Posted by jay on November 8, 2007 08:34 AMNo, science is not a liberal subject, but it can be taught in such a way that promotes liberal viewpoints (global warming, etc.).
What about Jay Bennish (is that you?)? I suppose you think he was teaching critical thinking? People like that teaching kids is as frightening to me as James Dobson would be to you. The difference is, you get your way-my money goes to fund liberal indoctrination in schools. Does your money fund any religious indoctrination?
I am not particularly religious, I am just an advocate of choice. The public school apologists and the unions will always fight against parents having a choice because they know they would not be able to compete.
B
Global Warming a liberal viewpoint?
You just lost your credibility- faint as it was..
Posted by Charles B on November 8, 2007 09:13 AMCharles-Good thing I have absolutely no concern for your opinion about my credibility.
Name a conservative that profits from the Global Warming hysteria the way Gore does.
Posted by B on November 8, 2007 09:49 AMB,
Mike Rosen. He writes about it in his columns and talks about it on his radio show all the time, in hopes the controversial subject attracts listeners, which in turn attracts ad revenue.
Dan - That's a stretch at best. Rosen had a successful radio show long before chicken little started running around.
Gore is only relevant as the voice of our rapidly dying planet. Does he do that for free?
Posted by B on November 8, 2007 10:29 AMjay, "What makes you think that you can force that kind of belief system on the other kids in school?"
As the saying goes, "Those who pay the fiddler get to call the tunes." As long as schools are paid for by taxes, then religious people who pay the taxes have just as much right to determine what is taught as any other taxpayer.
I'd like to see a school system not supported by taxes, but rather paid for by the parents themselves in direct proportion to the number of their children they send there. Just like it's done for colleges, universities, trade schools, music lessons, tutoring...
That way, parents can sent their kids to what ever school fits their belief system. And you wouldn't have to worry about your taxes funding religion, because your taxes wouldn't be involved at all.
Posted by Dave on November 8, 2007 10:39 AMB,
I'm not defending Gore, and I couldn't care less about his movie. I haven't seen it and I don't care to see it. Also, to use your point, Gore was successful long before "An Inconvenient Truth".
You asked if there is a conservative that profits from the G.W. hysteria. Does Rosen discuss global warming for free (i.e. not on a venue where he is supported and paid for by advertising)?
Since he makes a profit discussing what is an extremely controversial topic on his show, and is sure to attract listeners due to said topic, he is profiting. Granted, his profits aren't 100% from G.W., since he discusses other topics, but he does make money from the controversy.
Posted by Dan on November 8, 2007 10:44 AMB- What is the conservatives problem with admitting that global warming is a FACT?...what's being discussed is NOT that global warming is totally human caused, but that human's contributions have speeded global warming up to the point of crisis....are you only trying to defend the conservatives' idea that global warming might cause loss of revenue for your precious, selfish adminstration??? Your credibility certainly IS suspect!
Posted by on November 8, 2007 10:46 AMB,
Here's yet another question. Doesn't Gore have the right, in a free market, to produce whatever product he wishes, and let the market decide if it is good or not?
Why is it today's conservatives are hypocritically selective of who can participate in the free market? If Limbaugh, Hannity, and Rosen can make money discussing the subject, that is okay. If Gore does it, he is the spawn of evil.
B, if you are, sincerely, an "advocate of choice", then let the public decide for itself if Gore's movie contains any validity or deserves merit.
Posted by Dan on November 8, 2007 10:56 AMDan-You're right, Rosen does profit from Global Warming. However, it is not nearly as direct as Gore, nor is it as much as Gore. If the theory were completely debunked tomorrow, his show would continue. What would Gore do?
I have no problem at all with Gore profiting in the free market. I have a problem with teachers teaching his theories as if they are complete fact. Did I say anything about silencing him?
10:46-I tried to make some sense of your post. Global Warming is a theory. This sentence in particular makes no sense - "are you only trying to defend the conservatives' idea that global warming might cause loss of revenue for your precious, selfish adminstration???"
To get back on topic, why are all of you public school apologists so afraid of allowing parents to have a choice as to where even some of their tax dollarsgo?
Posted by B on November 8, 2007 11:30 AMWhew...fast, productive morning and now a brief lunch break.
Thank you, B, for getting this back on topic. First of all, I am a teacher, proud of it, and I apologize for nothing. (Your thanks, as if we teachers ever get it, I'd accept, but apologize? No.) As far as parents choosing to send their kids elsewhere...go ahead. Doesn't scare me. Lots of folks like their neighborhood schools and will continue to send their kids to us. Also, many parents who home-school their kids or send them to private schools early on, realize they're not getting that much more for their money and send their kids to public middle or high schools because they get great quality and value there.
Jack, as far as paying for public schools goes, you may opt not to drive on the highways or visit the national forests, or send your kids to public schools. But as a member of society, you cannot simply opt out of paying for these essential parts of the national infrastructure. It's part of the "deal" of being a citizen and living under the social contract. Of course, you can choose to pay tuition to send your kids anywhere you want, but you can't opt out of your obligations as a citizen.
Bottom line: help your public schools improve by supporting them in their mission. Get involved. Call teachers and administrators when you have a problem or a question. Don't rely on the conservative pundits towing the party line who haven't visited a real school since they attended one.
That was a quick lunch! Once more unto the breach!
Posted by Tom on November 8, 2007 12:12 PMB:
Global warming is a FACT! Because yoiu believe that it is a "theory" doesn't make it so! And, what i meant about that sentence that you can't understand, is those nations who refused to sign the Kyoto accord claim they did not because it is fiscally not advantageous...........what is the reason for your paranoia??? .or you just don't give a damn about this planet?
B,
" However, it is not nearly as direct as Gore, nor is it as much as Gore."
Doesn't matter. He still makes money off of it. In fact, using the controversy of G.W. is part of his strategic objective to garner more listeners. Spin it however you want-- G.W. does well for Rosen's pocketbook.
"If the theory were completely debunked tomorrow, his show would continue. What would Gore do?"
He'd go back to doing what he does. Talking about Global Warming theories is not his only activity.
"I have a problem with teachers teaching his theories as if they are complete fact."
I would agree. However, I don't have a problem with them discussing his theories as long as they are premised as theories. In fact, I would hope teachers would use the opportunity for students to engage in scientific research and debate.
To get back on topic, why are all of you public school apologists so afraid of allowing parents to have a choice as to where even some of their tax dollarsgo?
Posted by B
My kids are grown. Can I direct where my tax dollars go? I would like to use the money to join a country club and play a little golf.
Posted by just sayin' on November 8, 2007 02:18 PMJack Bauer-
The private school down the road can decide which students it wants to come through its doors. BCHS does not have that luxury. I think the problem we have here is that while you DO care about your kid's education (which is good), you are assuming that ALL parents care. You only have to care about your kid. Teachers have to care about all of them. We have 2 different perspectives. Unfortunately, many parents don't care about their kids' schooling. Currently, school is mandatory for all children under 16. Having a voucher system in place won't change the fact that a good student will thrive at any school (be it public or private), and a slug will be a slug. Society's problems, which plague our schools, won't go away with vouchers.
Imagine we have a voucher system in place. Bear Creek gets inundated with students who are more interested in causing problems in math class than solving them. This is due to the "good" kids leaving for the private school down the road. BCHS is now left with the troublemakers. BCHS closes. Again, we have mandatory schooling. Where do these kids end up? You have 3 options under our laws of mandatory schooling. 1) Another public school, which too will close; 2) jail (btw- more will need to be built, which equals more tax $), or 3) your favorite charter or private school (once all the regular public ones are closed), hence continuing the cycle. Vouchers aren't automatically going to make kids that don't care about school into rocket scientists. Private schools can kick out kids for poor performance or behavior issues. Where do they go? The public school.
Most private schools don't touch SPED or ESL kids, either. Pretty hard for a kid to do well on CSAP when he arrives from Mexico, not knowing English, a week before the test (yes he still has to take it).
I have to go. I need to get ready for a parent to tell me that it is my fault her child doesn't hand in assignments.
Enjoy the debate.
Posted by BO on November 8, 2007 02:49 PMTom
My grand daughter attends a great public school where there is a standard of behavior, hard academics and real communication between teachers and parents.
Problem is that this is the exception instead of the rule. Vouchers would make it possible for parents to support the schools and there are many different viewpoints. We need to see what can be done with our parents in charge.
Remember that the non-public schools provide a service to the public schools. Check out what happened when the Pueblo Diocese closed all the parochial schools at once. Made a real mess of funding, and space and teacher availability. What we need most is to see what we can do before another generation of kids becomes the guinea pigs in an educational test lab. They can't wait.
Posted by momma y on November 8, 2007 02:49 PM