Comments (13) | Add a comment
LETTERS
Education Committee deserves failing grade
Tools
Updated: May 17, 2011 | 10:14 a.m.
To the editor:
Don't need money
To the editor:
The Saturday article "Vote helps math-challenged" is the perfect example of why our educational system is failing. It has nothing to do with money. It has to do with demanding that our children learn the curriculum.
Why even have a proficiency exam? As students fail more parts of the exam, just allow them to pass if they fail two parts, then three parts, etc.
If Nevada would cut school administrative expenses instead of laying off teachers, and if Nevada would stop social promotion in all grades levels, we would see a vast improvement in the education of our children without spending more money.
Nevada should also enact illegal immigration laws similar to those in Oklahoma and Arizona to save money on the health care and education of illegals, which would also help balance the budget and reduce education cuts.
We don't need more money for education. We need more education for our money.
Tom Jones
Las Vegas
No results
To the editor:
Is it myopia or a lack of brain cells in the folks who keep agitating for higher taxes for our schools? Aren't they aware that you can't squeeze blood out of a turnip, what with the state of our economy?
Additionally, since I moved to Nevada, funding for the schools has been going up and up, but the results keep going down and down.
And maybe if the teachers were allowed to apply a little more discipline, we would get better results.
Esmael E. Candelaria
Henderson
Why learn?
To the editor:
The stupidity of our bleeding-heart elected officials never ceases to amaze me ("Vote helps math-challenged," Saturday). It also proves that they have all achieved the Peter Principle, which holds that everyone reaches their level of incompetence, eventually.
Rather than expect our children to learn what they are taught and pass the proficiency tests to prove what they have learned, our politicians have decided to lower the requirements of the test. What exactly is this teaching them? Is it any wonder that American graduates cannot compete against the students graduating in other industrialized nations?
When it takes, in some cases, six times to pass a test, there is something wrong with our public education system. Allowing our elected officials to change the finish line after the race has started because we are afraid to hurt our chilrdren's psyches, is wrong.
Kathleen M. Stone
Pahrump
Thank your union
To the editor:
In response to Sunday's first-person commentary by Clark County School District teacher Justin Brecht, "Teacher of the year rewarded with pink slip":
It is sad that we are losing a highly qualified teacher such as Mr. Brecht, but he misses the true cause of his dismissal.
He states jobs are protected based on the time teachers have spent in the building, and lawmakers should do something to change the system. But he is being dismissed because his union negotiated and demands the protection of seniority.
Whether you are for the teachers unions or against them, you cannot deny that they are the driving force for the system being what it is. Mr. Brecht should register his grievance with the union. That's what doomed him.
Mike Piercy
Henderson
|
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
rwsdao wrote on May 26, 2011 12:26 PM:
@Tom Jones:"We don't need more money for education. We need more education for our money." BINGO We have the winner!
So, now that you have your nice slogan, perhaps you can now show us your genius and tell us how to do that with 400 million dollars less. How about that. Give us the answer. We need to give the school district the same amount of money it had last year. Nice myopic slogan. Another slogan yeller who misses the point. This is a real genius at work. We need to have enough money to run the school district. We do not need more money for education. We need to have the same amount of money for last year, not 400 million less. We need education to have enough funding to operate, NOT more money. There is a difference between spending more money and spending enough to run the school district. We are not even asking to spend more money. I do now know where you got that idiotic notion from. We will have to spend the 400 million we are short before we can spend MORE money on education. So, this is not difficult to understand. The state is not giving CCSD more money for schools. The state is giving CCSD 400 million LESS to do the same job it did with the 400 million in their hands. What is so hard to understand this? Right now, we do not set aside enough money to run CCSD. Those are the numbers and those are the facts.
Allen.Samuels wrote on May 22, 2011 09:59 AM: Globarrvers I am glad you brought that up because the more that is written about my comments the more the Sheeple might go to the website and read all the comments about Dina Titus who makes $107,875 a year for one class. Which I am sure is a lot more money than they make. I will list the website below and let them decide. Thank you for your recognition. http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=129529&page=1 n7v.blogspot.com wrote on May 17, 2011 05:55 PM: I'm convinced these tests are given for the political purpose of making the kids look bad. DEMs use the scores as proof that we need to spend MORE on public education. GOPs as proof that we need to spend the existing amount (adjusted for inflation and population growth) on charter schools and vouchers. Small Government backers say we need to ABOLISH public education and let private schools provide as little or much testing, comprehensive or proficiency, as their customers demand. Miles Monroe wrote on May 17, 2011 02:07 PM: We're now going to be feeding the little ones breakfast too if our dear legislature has its way. I've just got one question, and Dina Titus wouldn't answer it either: If I'm paying to educate and feed all these children can I start taking them as deductions on my federal income tax return? After all what the hell are parents doing for their kids? If you can't afford to feed your child, prepare him/her for school then you aren't prepared to have offspring. globarrvers wrote on May 17, 2011 01:49 PM: Interesting job of picking and choosing, Allen.Samuels. Here are some comments about Titus that you "overlooked." "I thought Dr. Titus was an excellent teacher. I do not know what can prepare someone to teach political science and women in politics better than actually being a woman in politics. She did not show favoritism- despite being a Hillary super delegate she listened to my arguments for McCain with respect and courtesy." There are many more comments like this one. Wonder why you overlooked them? hdstmf wrote on May 17, 2011 11:23 AM: @Tom Jones:"We don't need more money for education. We need more education for our money." BINGO We have the winner! Joe.Homeboy wrote on May 17, 2011 10:52 AM: I suspect 1/2 of what students learn is just memorizing for tests! I agree with bilt, that tests are mandated by idiots! Too bad a common sense test couldn't be made for students to take . Pass that and then you graduate. If you want to go to college then you better study, take, and pass college required courses. Someone tell me about the cat and whiskers thing? hotcnr wrote on May 17, 2011 09:27 AM: Just give a certificate of attendance, socially promote everyone and stop worrying. After all, someone has to be last...why not Nevada. Our priorities are parking cars, making beds and as far as math, if you can count to 21 you're good. That does, however, requires an additional finger or toe. billt wrote on May 17, 2011 09:13 AM: Yes Julia, I am sure you were tramatized. And because you don't work in the system and have never taken that test, you have no reason to write. The math test goes well beyond the math most people consider basics. Most graduates will never use the math that is on this test. The test was mandated by legislators that most likely couldn't pass it themselves. By the way, do you know what a cat and whiskers graph is? One of the basics on the test. lvfacts 101 wrote on May 17, 2011 08:24 AM: Students can't do the work so let's dumb it down to the lowest level instead of finding out why and fixing the problem. That's the answer for the mindless "Progressives" who are killing students chances of "making it" in the real world. Will employers settle for "second-best" efforts. I doubt it, especially if they want to remain in business. "Progressive" thinking and actions are the worst things that have happened to the poor & minorities in the history of the US and that includes segregation by race, gender and/or religion. Apparently, "Progressives" want to keep the "lower class" uninformed and functionally illiterate since it suits their agenda of power and control. Reject the "Progressives" agenda if you want to get ahead in life, folks! Read More Comments |
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Comments (13)
Share your thoughts on this story.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.