Teaching Kids to Save Money
Wide Eyed in Wonder
kids about saving money. I agree. How many of us decided to start
saving for retirement at some point, and we were told how much more we
could've had if we had just started saving sooner? I think it would
be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Rowley
the kids parents.
Martin
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
> the kids parents.
>
> Martin
Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
life. The NEA Today article agrees.
>
> Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>
> > I saw an article in the last NEA Today article about the need to teach
> > kids about saving money. I agree. How many of us decided to start
> > saving for retirement at some point, and we were told how much more we
> > could've had if we had just started saving sooner? I think it would
> > be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
> > of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
> > This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
>
> > Kenneth Clifton
> > christiansuperhero.com
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Rowley
> On Feb 4, 8:53 pm, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
>>the kids parents.
>>
>>Martin
>
>
> Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
> at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
> life. The NEA Today article agrees.
AFAIK, there is no goal to prepare students for 'life'. Seemed to me the
only two goals we had (where I was working) was 1) for the kids to pass
the state's standardized test and 2) for them to go on to 'college'.
But if you want to check for yourself - feel free to dig through the
state's TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills)
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/teks/
Or better yet, this pamplet;
LEARNING STANDARDS FOR TEXAS CHILDREN
A SUMMARY FOR PARENTS
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/LearningStandards.pdf
Guess I'm in disagreement with NEA Today.
Martin
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>
> > On Feb 4, 8:53 pm, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
> >>the kids parents.
>
> >>Martin
>
> > Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
> > at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
> > life. The NEA Today article agrees.
>
> AFAIK, there is no goal to prepare students for 'life'. Seemed to me the
> only two goals we had (where I was working) was 1) for the kids to pass
> the state's standardized test and 2) for them to go on to 'college'.
>
I guess that is why you are a teacher, to help kids be prepared for a
standardized test. Personally, I entered teaching to prepare students
to succeed in life, but every teacher goes into teaching for different
reasons (and you must not share this goal for your students). That
being said, it must confuse you WHY we have standards of what the kids
need to learn. After all, if we're not there to prepare them, why do
we need standards at all...for that matter, we don't need to make them
come to school at all....just give them a paid babysitter.
> But if you want to check for yourself - feel free to dig through the
> state's TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills)
>
> http://www.tea.state.tx.us/teks/
>
> Or better yet, this pamplet;
>
> LEARNING STANDARDS FOR TEXAS CHILDREN
> A SUMMARY FOR PARENTShttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/LearningStandards.pdf
>
> Guess I'm in disagreement with NEA Today.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> >>Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>
> >>>I saw an article in the last NEA Today article about the need to teach
> >>>kids about saving money. I agree. How many of us decided to start
> >>>saving for retirement at some point, and we were told how much more we
> >>>could've had if we had just started saving sooner? I think it would
> >>>be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
> >>>of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
> >>>This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
>
> >>>Kenneth Clifton
> >>>christiansuperhero.com
>
> > Kenneth Clifton
> > christiansuperhero.com
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Bob LeChevalier
>On Feb 5, 6:09 am, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>> > Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
>> > at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
>> > life. The NEA Today article agrees.
>>
>> AFAIK, there is no goal to prepare students for 'life'. Seemed to me the
>> only two goals we had (where I was working) was 1) for the kids to pass
>> the state's standardized test and 2) for them to go on to 'college'.
>
>I guess that is why you are a teacher, to help kids be prepared for a
>standardized test.
No That is what he was HIRED to do, and that is what his bosses want
him to do, and that is what the state law REQUIRES. Why someone wants
to be a teacher has nothing to do with what their job actually is.
They are employees and like all employees they are obliged to make a
damned good effort to follow the boss's wishes, or they won't continue
to be employees.
>Personally, I entered teaching to prepare students to succeed in life,
But to keep your job, you'll have to learn how to keep the adults
above you happy, which also may require keeping your peers happy,
because when you start they will have more clout with your bosses than
you do.
>That being said, it must confuse you WHY we have standards of what the kids
>need to learn.
Because the law says that we shall. "Why" is because the public
demands accountability. Uniform standards are required for fairness,
and also to deal with family mobility (so that 4th grade in one school
is more or less at the same level as 4th grade at a different school.
But the whys and wherefores that the legislature chooses in requiring
standards has little to do with why the employees have to follow those
standards.
I have nothing against teaching "success in life", but that is
enrichment, after you have done your job to teach what the state tells
you to teach.
lojbab
teachrmama
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e762ba65-ede5-4a1f...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 5, 6:09 am, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>>
>> > On Feb 4, 8:53 pm, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
>> >>the kids parents.
>>
>> >>Martin
>>
>> > Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
>> > at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
>> > life. The NEA Today article agrees.
>>
>> AFAIK, there is no goal to prepare students for 'life'. Seemed to me the
>> only two goals we had (where I was working) was 1) for the kids to pass
>> the state's standardized test and 2) for them to go on to 'college'.
>>
>
> I guess that is why you are a teacher, to help kids be prepared for a
> standardized test. Personally, I entered teaching to prepare students
> to succeed in life, but every teacher goes into teaching for different
> reasons (and you must not share this goal for your students). That
> being said, it must confuse you WHY we have standards of what the kids
> need to learn. After all, if we're not there to prepare them, why do
> we need standards at all...for that matter, we don't need to make them
> come to school at all....just give them a paid babysitter.
That was uncalled for, Kenneth. Once you get into the classroom full time,
you will find out that there are academic standards that you are required to
have your children meet. The standards are in place so that when the
students walk out of high school for the last time they can read , write,
and do the math that they need to function in society. Not so that they can
function on a standardized test. (The standardized tests are supposedly in
place to make sure the standards are being met) You will find that there
are not enough hours in the day to teach to the academic standards, let
alone adding in all the other things you think the students might need to be
prepared for the real world. Not that it's not a worthy goal--but when the
rubber meets the road, you will find that time does not permit every worthy
goal--you have to prioritize, and academics comes first, because that is
what you are paid to teach.
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:e762ba65-ede5-4a1f...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
You are preaching to the choir. Apparently, you didn't read the posts
before attacking (down girl). Go back and read the discussion where I
said we should teach kids to save money and help them succeed in life,
and Rowley said that (success in life) wasn't the goal of a teacher.
BTW, want to comment on the thread topic? Do you support teaching
kids to save money (agreeing with the NEA article) or not?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:e762ba65-ede5-4a1f...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
BTW, I note you are home again and not at a school. Kid still sick?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Rowley
> On Feb 5, 6:09 am, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Feb 4, 8:53 pm, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
>>>>the kids parents.
>>
>>>>Martin
>>
>>>Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
>>>at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
>>>life. The NEA Today article agrees.
>>
>>AFAIK, there is no goal to prepare students for 'life'. Seemed to me the
>>only two goals we had (where I was working) was 1) for the kids to pass
>>the state's standardized test and 2) for them to go on to 'college'.
>>
>
>
> I guess that is why you are a teacher, to help kids be prepared for a
> standardized test. Personally, I entered teaching to prepare students
> to succeed in life, but every teacher goes into teaching for different
> reasons (and you must not share this goal for your students).
Bwa-a-a-a-H hhhhhh---a-a-a-aaaaaa - LOL!
You sound just like the Principal that caused me to quite teaching -
except that he was advocating standardized testing. Exact same argument
he used.
> That
> being said, it must confuse you WHY we have standards of what the kids
> need to learn.
Not really, I understand all too well what the state board of education
is attempting to do.
> After all, if we're not there to prepare them, why do
> we need standards at all...for that matter, we don't need to make them
> come to school at all....just give them a paid babysitter.
So... let me get this straight - my take is that it is the parent's
responsiblility to teach their kids something and you disagree with that?
Martin
Rowley
I also posted a link to the Texas Educational Agency's web site with the
state's TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) - so that you could
browse them - assuming you did so, did you find a section that pertained
to "succeed in life"? Just curious - I don't recall there being one, but
maybe I missed it.
Martin
teachrmama
I didn't attack you, Kenneth. I said that your comment about paid
babysitters was uncalled for.
Go back and read the discussion where I
> said we should teach kids to save money and help them succeed in life,
> and Rowley said that (success in life) wasn't the goal of a teacher.
It isn't, Kenneth. Teaching them the academics that they need to succeed in
life is the goal of teacher. We don't write the curriculum--but we are
required to teach it.
>
> BTW, want to comment on the thread topic? Do you support teaching
> kids to save money (agreeing with the NEA article) or not?
Actually, I do not have the power to teach children to save money. In math
class I can demonstrate the power of saving during math lessons. In social
studies, I can point out how those who saved fared better than those who did
not. But to actually teach it as a subject? I have no idea where I would
fit another subject into my already overcrowded day. (Not that it is a
subject I would teach to kindergartners) Along the same lines, I think it
is extremely important that children know their phone numbers. I don't
teach my kindergartners their phone numbers because I would have to do it
one on one and I simply do not have time to do so. But I do send home a
paper that suggests that parets teach this important info (and other
important individual info as well). Some things simply have to be left to
the parents, even though we know that some will not follow through. Schools
cannot possibly take up every bit of slack that is left by less-than-optimum
parenting.
teachrmama
Uh, I posted that post before we left for school this morning. We are in
different time zones.
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:44de3940-96b1-4dac...@k39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Since my comment was that we should NOT just be paid babysitters, does
that mean you disagree and think we should be?
>
> Go back and read the discussion where I
>
> > said we should teach kids to save money and help them succeed in life,
> > and Rowley said that (success in life) wasn't the goal of a teacher.
>
> It isn't, Kenneth. Teaching them the academics that they need to succeed in
> life is the goal of teacher.
Are you reading my words at all...or your own? Look...right above. I
said that we should help students succeed in life..that is our goal.
You said that it WASN'T the goal of the teacher to help them succeed
in life and then said it was the goal of the teacher to help them
succeed in life. Make up your mind.
>
>
>
> > BTW, want to comment on the thread topic? Do you support teaching
> > kids to save money (agreeing with the NEA article) or not?
>
> Actually, I do not have the power to teach children to save money. In math
> class I can demonstrate the power of saving during math lessons. In social
> studies, I can point out how those who saved fared better than those who did
> not. But to actually teach it as a subject? I have no idea where I would
> fit another subject into my already overcrowded day. (Not that it is a
> subject I would teach to kindergartners) Along the same lines, I think it
> is extremely important that children know their phone numbers. I don't
> teach my kindergartners their phone numbers because I would have to do it
> one on one and I simply do not have time to do so. But I do send home a
> paper that suggests that parets teach this important info (and other
> important individual info as well). Some things simply have to be left to
> the parents, even though we know that some will not follow through. Schools
> cannot possibly take up every bit of slack that is left by less-than-optimum
> parenting.
So, you disagree with the NEA.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:92a85025-20dd-49e9...@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Where do you teach? California?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 5, 6:09 am, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>
> >>>On Feb 4, 8:53 pm, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
> >>>>the kids parents.
>
> >>>>Martin
>
> >>>Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
> >>>at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
> >>>life. The NEA Today article agrees.
>
> >>AFAIK, there is no goal to prepare students for 'life'. Seemed to me the
> >>only two goals we had (where I was working) was 1) for the kids to pass
> >>the state's standardized test and 2) for them to go on to 'college'.
>
> > I guess that is why you are a teacher, to help kids be prepared for a
> > standardized test. Personally, I entered teaching to prepare students
> > to succeed in life, but every teacher goes into teaching for different
> > reasons (and you must not share this goal for your students).
>
> Bwa-a-a-a-H hhhhhh---a-a-a-aaaaaa - LOL!
>
> You sound just like the Principal that caused me to quite teaching -
> except that he was advocating standardized testing. Exact same argument
> he used.
Enlightening. So, you are a fired teacher, a teacher that refused to
work with his school, or what? Apparently, since the Principal was
conferencing with you, you were having a problem with something that
was making your teaching ineffective (since, apparently, you weren't
teaching to the standards).
>
> > That
> > being said, it must confuse you WHY we have standards of what the kids
> > need to learn.
>
> Not really, I understand all too well what the state board of education
> is attempting to do.
>
> > After all, if we're not there to prepare them, why do
> > we need standards at all...for that matter, we don't need to make them
> > come to school at all....just give them a paid babysitter.
>
> So... let me get this straight - my take is that it is the parent's
> responsiblility to teach their kids something and you disagree with that?
>
Here are my words...
"Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
life. The NEA Today article agrees."
This shows you to be intentionally deceptive, since I told you I
agreed, you cut out my agreeing words and claimed something you KNEW
was false about me.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
teachrmama
Please pay closer attention, Kenneth. Our goal is NOT to "help them succeed
in life." It is to teach them the skills required to succeed in life.
IOW, reading, writing, and 'rithmetic. We cannot possibly teach them
everything that they need to succeed in life.
You will read into it whatever you ant to read into it, Kenneth. You seem
to see life in terms of black and whaite, and see no shades of gray at all.
teachrmama
Somewhere on the west coaset anyway.
teachrmama
<chuckle> You are droll, Kenneth.
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:a7c89417-6646-4049...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
You are still contradicting yourself. I (and the NEA article) say
that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
You said that it is not our goal to help the succeed in life...just to
give them the skills TO SUCCEED IN LIFE, as if I disagree. Where did
I say that we shouldn't do that? The question, then, comes down to
two things...and I'll stick around to hear your response.
1. Do you think money skills will help them in life (as the NEA and I
am saying)?
2. If not, do you actually disagree with me or just want to argue?
The NEA article says we should teach them money skills and how to
save. You say we should not. That seems pretty clear to me.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:6ae87dfa-2777-4933...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
You'd think you would listen to the NEA, then.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Where exactly was I wrong? Both things I pointed out (his ineffective
teaching of the standards and his intentional deception of me) were
confirmed by HIS OWN WORDS.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Bob LeChevalier
>> Please pay closer attention, Kenneth. Our goal is NOT to "help them succeed
>> in life." It is to teach them the skills required to succeed in life.
>> IOW, reading, writing, and 'rithmetic. We cannot possibly teach them
>> everything that they need to succeed in life.
>
>You are still contradicting yourself. I (and the NEA article)
Please provide a cite to the NEA article. I wonder if it really says
what you are claiming that it says. I also wonder if it is "the NEA
says" or if it is "someone who wrote an article for the NEA
publication suggests".
I took a quick look, and I didn't see an article specifically on this
topic in the last two issues, but it was a quick look.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
In posting insulting and incendiary material without doing research
(something you complained about my doing to you, and then continued to
complain about even after I showed you your own words that I was using
as the basis for my comments).
If you read the archives, you would know exactly why Rowley is no
longer teaching. You would know that he taught a subject that is
elective and therefore probably doesn't have state standards. You
would also know that he lives in a state where the NEA has little
power or respect, so that "the NEA says" even if it were true" doesn't
carry a lot of weight.
You also erred in making a really stupid assumption that because he
talked to his principal he was "conferencing with" him about a problem
with his teaching. (Actually, he said that the principal had
"advocated" certain things, which might have been something done in a
memo or an ordinary faculty meeting. The principal may not have been
talking to Rowley in particular. But even if he had been, it
apparently has never occurred to you that he might talk to the
principal about education philosophy as part of ordinary conversation.
> Both things I pointed out (his ineffective teaching of the standards
something which you don't know is the case
>and his intentional deception of me)
What deception was that?
I suspect that we will find that it was your self-deception; i.e that
you made ASSumptions that were entirely unwarranted.
lojbab
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Then, if I'm wrong, Rowley will correct me. Since you don't know any
more than you claim I don't know, your comments seem hardly relevant,
unless you want to assume the judges-without-research label, again.
> > Both things I pointed out (his ineffective teaching of the standards
>
> something which you don't know is the case
>
> >and his intentional deception of me)
>
> What deception was that?
>
> I suspect that we will find that it was your self-deception; i.e that
> you made ASSumptions that were entirely unwarranted.
>
> lojbab
If you cannot read very post to which you reply before concluding
things, you prove my point.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0802/theguide.html
See half way down the page for the links about teaching kids about
money responsibility.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Bob LeChevalier
>On Feb 6, 9:46 am, Bob LeChevalier <loj...@lojban.org> wrote:
>> Wide Eyed in Wonder <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> Please pay closer attention, Kenneth. Our goal is NOT to "help them succeed
>> >> in life." It is to teach them the skills required to succeed in life.
>> >> IOW, reading, writing, and 'rithmetic. We cannot possibly teach them
>> >> everything that they need to succeed in life.
>>
>> >You are still contradicting yourself. I (and the NEA article)
>>
>> Please provide a cite to the NEA article. I wonder if it really says
>> what you are claiming that it says. I also wonder if it is "the NEA
>> says" or if it is "someone who wrote an article for the NEA
>> publication suggests".
>>
>> I took a quick look, and I didn't see an article specifically on this
>> topic in the last two issues, but it was a quick look.
>http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0802/theguide.html
>
>See half way down the page for the links about teaching kids about
>money responsibility.
Context, context, context!
The article is in fact suggesting NOTHING about what should be taught
in schools. As is obvious from the first several paragraphs, this is
advice to adults, usually with partners, on how to manage finances.
Teachers are adults, and often are parents. It is also located in a
regular monthly section called "The Guide ..." which offers practical
advice to union members on how to live effectively and professionally.
The links in the inset you refer to all are pretty much designed for
kids to learn on their own, or under parental guidance. I saw nothing
in any of them about curriculum. The header on the section is
<You spend your allowance on candy?
<Web sites that help you and your kids learn about money
Not "your students", but "your kids".
You wrote
<I (and the NEA article) say that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
in the context of which you made the following proposal
>I think it would
>be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
>of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
>This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
which is clearly about classroom education, and not about parents
teaching their kids about money, and that is what people have been
responding to.
The NEA article says nothing in support of schools teaching kids about
saving money.
I would claim that ***you*** misled *us*, except that from experience,
I know that you probably didn't understand what you read, and thought
that because it was in NEA Today, it was about teaching.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
>>
>> In posting insulting and incendiary material without doing research
>> (something you complained about my doing to you, and then continued to
>> complain about even after I showed you your own words that I was using
>> as the basis for my comments).
>>
>> If you read the archives, you would know exactly why Rowley is no
>> longer teaching. You would know that he taught a subject that is
>> elective and therefore probably doesn't have state standards. You
>> would also know that he lives in a state where the NEA has little
>> power or respect, so that "the NEA says" even if it were true" doesn't
>> carry a lot of weight.
>>
>> You also erred in making a really stupid assumption that because he
>> talked to his principal he was "conferencing with" him about a problem
>> with his teaching. (Actually, he said that the principal had
>> "advocated" certain things, which might have been something done in a
>> memo or an ordinary faculty meeting. The principal may not have been
>> talking to Rowley in particular. But even if he had been, it
>> apparently has never occurred to you that he might talk to the
>> principal about education philosophy as part of ordinary conversation.
>
>Then, if I'm wrong, Rowley will correct me. Since you don't know any
>more than you claim I don't know,
Actually, I do, since I have been reading his posts throughout the
last several years, in which time he discussed these things multiple
times.
>> >and his intentional deception of me)
>>
>> What deception was that?
>>
>> I suspect that we will find that it was your self-deception; i.e that
>> you made ASSumptions that were entirely unwarranted.
>
>If you cannot read very post to which you reply before concluding
>things, you prove my point.
I just read another post where you made an unwarranted assumption -
this one - where the false assumption was that I didn't know any more
than you.
Now what was "his intentional deception" specifically?
lojbab
SumBuny
"teachrmama" <teach...@iwon.com> wrote in message
news:fobcs...@news1.newsguy.com...
I can understand this one....one can teach the math involved in "accounting"
for the money management, but one cannot really teach the values system in
"saving money" now can one? When my brother and I were kids, we were polar
opposites in our money management--one of us would spend like there was no
tomorrow, the other would pinch pennies until they would squeak.
Fortunately, as we matured, things changed and we "grew up," so the speak.
(and, no, I will not "fess up" ans say which was which <g>) But we were
raised in the same household, in the same conditions--you would think we
should have the same money management style, the same "money values"...we
should both have the same idea bout saving--but we did not until we were a
bit older.
Even in the Boy Scouts, there is an Eagle Merit Badge (Personal Management)
that attempts to do something along these lines--teach some sort of personal
responsibility for one's personal finances, but this is mostly to teach
awareness of finance, budgeting, and planning. I can tell you from
experience, that this does not always "take" with the young men...sometimes
it does, sometimes it does not <sigh>
http://www.meritbadge.com/files/mb-pdfs/PersonalManagement.pdf
As my kids have said, "You can lead a horse to water, shove its face into
it, but if it doesn't want to drink, you can only succeed in making it
drown..."
--
Buny
--Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal." ~ Albert Camus
SumBuny
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ae0fd288-4440-4f28...@l16g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 6, 9:00 am, "teachrmama" <teachrm...@iwon.com> wrote:
>> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> messagenews:a7c89417-6646-4049...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> The NEA article says we should teach them money skills and how to
> save. You say we should not. That seems pretty clear to me.
How does one teach someone "how to save [money]"? That is assuming that the
person is not teaching a value system....I can somewhat understand teaching
"money skills"--that is basic accounting skills--this is something that can
be measured, that is something that is quantifiable in writing objectives
and goals.
How does one write quantifiable objectives and goals when it comes to
"teaching student how to save [money]"?
I ask this, because this is the point where I am at in my current coursework
in my curriculum class in college....we are working on the finer points on
writing objectives and goals.
Rowley
I'm a teacher that quit.
> Apparently, since the Principal was
> conferencing with you, you were having a problem with something that
> was making your teaching ineffective (since, apparently, you weren't
> teaching to the standards).
Actually I was talking with him about some things that I've talked with
each principal that we've had for the past 4-5 years (we've had a
number of them).
>
>>>That
>>>being said, it must confuse you WHY we have standards of what the kids
>>>need to learn.
>>
>>Not really, I understand all too well what the state board of education
>>is attempting to do.
>>
>>
>>> After all, if we're not there to prepare them, why do
>>>we need standards at all...for that matter, we don't need to make them
>>>come to school at all....just give them a paid babysitter.
>>
>>So... let me get this straight - my take is that it is the parent's
>>responsiblility to teach their kids something and you disagree with that?
>>
>
>
> Here are my words...
> "Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
> at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
> life. The NEA Today article agrees."
You seem to put a lot of stock in the fact that you agree with that
particular publication.
> This shows you to be intentionally deceptive, since I told you I
> agreed, you cut out my agreeing words and claimed something you KNEW
> was false about me.
Naw, just using the same faulty logic that you used.
Martin
>
> Kenneth Clifton
> christiansuperhero.com
teachrmama
No, I'm not.
I (and the NEA article) say
> that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
> You said that it is not our goal to help the succeed in life...
Our goal is NOT to help them succeed in life.
just to
> give them the skills TO SUCCEED IN LIFE,
Our goal is to give them certain specific, curriculum mandated skills--and
they will be able to choose to use those skills to succeed in life. Totally
different.
as if I disagree. Where did
> I say that we shouldn't do that? The question, then, comes down to
> two things...and I'll stick around to hear your response.
>
> 1. Do you think money skills will help them in life (as the NEA and I
> am saying)?
I am certain that money skills and many, many other skills would help our
students succeed in life. However, that does not mean that I think that
schools should take up the burden of teachingthis particular skill. At the
moment, other than where math and money skills meet, teaching students to
save, spend wisely, keep a budget, etc, is not a part of our curriculum. So
it is not something that we teach.
>
> 2. If not, do you actually disagree with me or just want to argue?
Yes, I disagree with you.
teachrmama
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:888d858c-3ed9-44ea...@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Why do you say that?
teachrmama
"SumBuny" <Sum...@NOBODYHEREcox.net> wrote in message
news:z1pqj.44312$m6.4...@newsfe18.lga...
Exactly. My 2 daughters are the same way--one spends and one saves.
Although they seem to be switching places now that the younger one has grown
interested in fashionable clothes. <chuckle> I do know that at their school
budgeting, keeping financial records, etc are part of the math curriculum.
What they do with that info is up to them.
sf
wrote:
>IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
>the kids parents.
ditto!
--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Where is the article..in parents magazine or NEA Today (written ONLY
for teachers)? Who was the audience?
>
> <You spend your allowance on candy?
> <Web sites that help you and your kids learn about money
>
> Not "your students", but "your kids".
>
> You wrote
> <I (and the NEA article) say that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
> in the context of which you made the following proposal
>
> >I think it would
> >be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
> >of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
> >This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
>
> which is clearly about classroom education, and not about parents
> teaching their kids about money, and that is what people have been
> responding to.
>
And an idea that you think is bad?
> The NEA article says nothing in support of schools teaching kids about
> saving money.
That is what the links they provide are about...duh...and they say it
explicit in the article.
>
> I would claim that ***you*** misled *us*, except that from experience,
> I know that you probably didn't understand what you read, and thought
> that because it was in NEA Today, it was about teaching.
>
> lojbab
Yeah, so many parents read NEA Today....right?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:ae0fd288-4440-4f28...@l16g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
It's ironic that you protest the use of standards and, then, use them
as a cover for yourself. I believe that standards are important.
However, I am not chained by them to have less than a free mind (as
apparently you are). I can say something would be a good idea, even
if others do not agree. Here, I do this. Teaching kids in school to
save money would be a good idea that would benefit them in life. I'm
sorry that you do not agree.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "SumBuny" <Sumb...@NOBODYHEREcox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:z1pqj.44312$m6.4...@newsfe18.lga...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "teachrmama" <teachrm...@iwon.com> wrote in message
> >news:fobcs...@news1.newsguy.com...
>
> >> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Careful. You are very close to agreeing with me (approving teaching
them how to save money and money management skills). This is supposed
to be up to the parents, right?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
Ahh, gave up teaching but think yourself qualified to tell others how
to do it. Got it. I'm guessing you believe the "those who can't,
teach" theory, since you are trying to do it on this group.
Look right above. You claimed I disagreed with you, despite my
explicit words to the contrary.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 02:53:03 GMT, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >IMO, this (saving money) is something that should be taught at home by
> >the kids parents.
>
> ditto!
And...apparently...NOT by a school, right?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
teachrmama
I protested the use of standards? Really?
I believe that standards are important.
> However, I am not chained by them to have less than a free mind (as
> apparently you are).
<chuckle> You do like to twist things around, don't you? Let's
see--uh--"I'm supposed to teach reading, there are certain standards to be
met at this grade level for reading, but what the heck, I'll teach about
piggy banks instead. After all, learning to save money is an important life
skill. But, Mr. Principal, these children NEED to learn how to save. I'll
teach reading next week." That'll go over really big. I can hardly wait to
hear how your first prioncipal reacts to your 'free mind.' Especially at
standardized testing time.
We have a curriculum we are required to teach, Kenneth. I am perfectly free
to teach it however it gets the message home, but I do need to make sure
that the curriculum is covered. That is the job I am paid to do.
I can say something would be a good idea, even
> if others do not agree. Here, I do this. Teaching kids in school to
> save money would be a good idea that would benefit them in life. I'm
> sorry that you do not agree.
You can have whatever opinion you want on the subject. The fact that
something would be a good thing for the kids to know does not automatically
make it something that schools should teach. Learning how to brush thier
teeth and bathe properly is also a good thing for them to know--but I
certainly do not think that those subjects should be added to our school
curriculums.
teachrmama
Pay attention, Kenneth. I said that these things are taught insofar as they
dovetail with their math curriculum. MATH--not the value system part.
Bob LeChevalier
>> >> topic in the last two issues, but it was a quick look.
>> >http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0802/theguide.html
>>
>> >See half way down the page for the links about teaching kids about
>> >money responsibility.
>>
>> Context, context, context!
>>
>> The article is in fact suggesting NOTHING about what should be taught
>> in schools. As is obvious from the first several paragraphs, this is
>> advice to adults, usually with partners, on how to manage finances.
>> Teachers are adults, and often are parents. It is also located in a
>> regular monthly section called "The Guide ..." which offers practical
>> advice to union members on how to live effectively and professionally.
>>
>> The links in the inset you refer to all are pretty much designed for
>> kids to learn on their own, or under parental guidance. I saw nothing
>> in any of them about curriculum. The header on the section is
>
>Where is the article..in parents magazine or NEA Today (written ONLY
>for teachers)? Who was the audience?
It is on the NEA Today website, and is available to anyone who cranks
up their search engine to look (for example, me, who has never been a
teacher). NEA's primary audience is NEA members, who are mostly but
not all teachers.
The magazine in question discusses the full scope of its members
lives, and not just job issues. It thus applies to family members of
those in the union, most of whom are not themselves teachers.
>> You wrote
>> <I (and the NEA article) say that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
>> in the context of which you made the following proposal
>>
>> >I think it would
>> >be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
>> >of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
>> >This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
>>
>> which is clearly about classroom education, and not about parents
>> teaching their kids about money, and that is what people have been
>> responding to.
>
>And an idea that you think is bad?
I offer no opinion on it, in part because your description is so
cursory that I can imagine a wide variety of implementations, some of
which would cause problems that would exceed any possible benefit.
I can think of more problems with it than benefits, and I question
from my own experience whether any benefit is likely to result.
When I was a kid, I took part in a savings program that arguably might
have fit under what you describe. It was excellent for the time, but
I think was obsolete as I got older, because the concept of a weekly
allowance became common, and the implementation of allowances by
parents was so varied that truly weird things arose.
In my case, my parents gave me a quarter a week for the school savings
plan, which operated most of my elementary years. At the end of
second grade, I had amassed something like $25 in savings. My glasses
broke, and my parents decided that I hadn't been careful, so they made
me pay for it out of my savings. This spent every penny and then
some. I thus learned the lesson that savings is something your
parents will use to punish you. I made no further attempt to save
while living at home - I knew that I would never be allowed to choose
to use when and how to use it.
Shortly after that year, my parents implemented a $1.25 allowance, but
it was payment for doing all of our chores. My two sisters had to
keep their room clean, and alternate helping wash the dishes. The
standards for my sisters was lower, and they could trade off days, so
that they usually got their allowance, and spent it. I was 3 years
older and had a variety of chores, including my room, taking the trash
out daily, cleaning the garage (a major challenge with no well-defined
subtasks). If I failed to do my chore even once, no allowance. I got
my allowance exactly once in the next 3 years, partly because I
stopped asking.
Then my sisters got a quasi-babysitting job, $25 a week to get the two
young kids next door off to school and be there when then got home
until a parent arrived, because the parents couldn't make their work
schedule quite match the schools. More days than not it was my mom
who did the job, but my sisters got the money, as well as their
allowance, while I got nothing, because invariably I would miss a day
of doing something without being told. (I still had to do it, but I
forfeited what was by then a joke of an allowance, when my sisters
were getting 20 times the amount and doing less.)
The interesting thing is that when I became an adult, I was the one
who saved money, financially stable with no mortgage or other debts.
My sisters don't do badly either, and they didn't have the school
savings plan.
>> The NEA article says nothing in support of schools teaching kids about
>> saving money.
>
>That is what the links they provide are about...duh...and they say it
>explicit in the article.
I saw nothing in any links that suggested any sort of curricular
approach.
>> I would claim that ***you*** misled *us*, except that from experience,
>> I know that you probably didn't understand what you read, and thought
>> that because it was in NEA Today, it was about teaching.
>
>Yeah, so many parents read NEA Today....right?
If they are teachers, they might. Union members do more than teach.
They have lives. The union remembers this, even if parents and
administrators and students don't. Having this section in the
publication conveys that recognition, even if the material in the
section isn't the sort of think you could find several dozen other
places on the net.
If one looks at the topics of the section of "The Guide" for the last
4 issues, one will see that they are about helping professionals live
their lives more fully, and with fewer problems. None is about
schools or school curriculum.
http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0801/theguide.html
on staying fit - clearly for adults staying fit
http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0711/theguide.html
on using technology tools
http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0710/theguide.html
on traveling with lower stress
http://www.nea.org/neatoday/0709/theguide.html
on keeping healthy
If you look at the full spectrum of NEA publications, it becomes even
more clear that they take a broad approach to publications.
http://www.nea.org/publications/index.html
They have one periodical "This Active Life" which is intended for
retirees. Another "Tomorrow's Teachers" is directed at wannabes like
you. The "NEA Handbook" appears to be the publication that states NEA
policy, as opposed to being a collection of unofficial but solicited
writings for their audience.
So it seems that you don't understand the audience for the
publication, and you haven't a clue why the NEA would publish
something OTHER THAN for the classroom.
Why is that?
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
>It's ironic that you protest the use of standards and, then, use them
>as a cover for yourself. I believe that standards are important.
>However, I am not chained by them to have less than a free mind (as
>apparently you are).
That's probably because you aren't yet a teacher, with your career
hanging on the line based on whether you follow those standards.
lojbab
Rowley
Kenneth, I'm starting to think that you have aspirations to be a
stand-up comic...
Martin
toto
<writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Where is the article..in parents magazine or NEA Today (written ONLY
>for teachers)? Who was the audience?
The audience was obviously adult members of the NEA, Ken. If you read
it, you can see that they are not asking for curriculum to teach this
to the children. They do think that parents ought to teach it to the
children, but there is no implication that the schools should take the
parent's place in this teaching.
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
toto
<writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>That is what the links they provide are about...duh...and they say it
>explicit in the article.
No the links provide possibilities for parents to look into. Many
teachers might pass on these links to the parents of the children in
their classes. I doubt very much if teachers would use the links in
their classroom unless they clearly teach something that pertains to
the state standards.
toto
<writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Teaching kids in school to save money would be a good idea that
>would benefit them in life. I'm sorry that you do not agree.
Ken, the problem is that while you can teach money management, the
value of saving money is a personal value. There is no way to
actually teach that in school. Parents can attempt it at home by
modelling saving themselves and by allowing children to save up for
bigger toys from their allowance or chore money or money from a paying
job. Also parents have the child for many years, so they can start
with this in preschool and be consistent with it into older ages. As
a teacher, I have a child in my class for one year usually (and in
fact as a hs math teacher, I had the child only an hour a day for the
year). I could teach the skill though not in geometry classes since
it has nothing to do with geometry. I might be able to fit the
skills into an algebra or pre-algebra class, but with all the actual
algebraic math concepts we need to teach, it doesn't fit well there
either.
toto
<writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Enlightening. So, you are a fired teacher, a teacher that refused to
>> > work with his school, or what?
>>
>> I'm a teacher that quit.
>
>Ahh, gave up teaching but think yourself qualified to tell others how
>to do it. Got it. I'm guessing you believe the "those who can't,
>teach" theory, since you are trying to do it on this group.
Martin came into teaching from another field. He taught electives
that are not part of the English/Math/Science. He has mentioned many
times that he loved teaching, but that the administration was not
supportive of what he wanted and needed to do, so he quit.
I did the same. I had owned my own small business, done computer
programming and then went back and got certified to teach. I quit
after the administration in my inner city school threw out the brand
new geometry books we had gotten a grant for.
teachrmama
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:93656899-aa62-4d9f...@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
You really do like to throw out unkind comments, don't you? How on earth
could you possibly know why Rowley gave up teaching? Don't you think the
experience he gained during the years he was teaching could be of benefit to
others?
Wide Eyed in Wonder
So...apparently...the Wall Street Journal isn't for business leaders,
Christianity Today isn't for Christians, and Writer's Digest isn't for
writers, since all of those publications are available for everyone to
see. The fact that it is called "NEA Today," apparently, doesn't mean
it is for the NEA, which is, in fact, a teacher organization (unlike
AFT, staff are not open to membership). Also, the fact that address
changes for subscriptions are sent to NEA Financial and Membership
Services doesn't make it a NEA member publication,
either...apparently.
>
> >> You wrote
> >> <I (and the NEA article) say that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
> >> in the context of which you made the following proposal
>
> >> >I think it would
> >> >be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
> >> >of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
> >> >This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
>
> >> which is clearly about classroom education, and not about parents
> >> teaching their kids about money, and that is what people have been
> >> responding to.
>
> >And an idea that you think is bad?
>
> I offer no opinion on it
Then your comments are irrelevant to the thread.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:20:21 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
>
> >Where is the article..in parents magazine or NEA Today (written ONLY
> >for teachers)? Who was the audience?
>
> The audience was obviously adult members of the NEA, Ken. If you read
> it, you can see that they are not asking for curriculum to teach this
> to the children. They do think that parents ought to teach it to the
> children, but there is no implication that the schools should take the
> parent's place in this teaching.
>
I guess the fact that it talks about teachers saving money on school
supplies as part of it is just an unrelated fact to a different
audience, right? Also, who is the audience of this magazine written
for NEA members?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:20:21 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
>
> >That is what the links they provide are about...duh...and they say it
> >explicit in the article.
>
> No the links provide possibilities for parents to look into. Many
> teachers might pass on these links to the parents of the children in
> their classes. I doubt very much if teachers would use the links in
> their classroom unless they clearly teach something that pertains to
> the state standards.
>
Ahh, so NEA Today is full of non-teaching articles for NEA members?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> > I can say something would be a good idea, even
> > if others do not agree. Here, I do this. Teaching kids in school to
> > save money would be a good idea that would benefit them in life. I'm
> > sorry that you do not agree.
>
> You can have whatever opinion you want on the subject. The fact that
> something would be a good thing for the kids to know does not automatically
> make it something that schools should teach. Learning how to brush thier
> teeth and bathe properly is also a good thing for them to know--but I
> certainly do not think that those subjects should be added to our school
> curriculums.
If I can have whatever opinion that I want, and I expressed it as
opinion not absolute, what is your problem?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
So, that keeps a teacher from THINKING about good idea choices?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:23:50 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
>
> >Teaching kids in school to save money would be a good idea that
> >would benefit them in life. I'm sorry that you do not agree.
>
> Ken, the problem is that while you can teach money management, the
> value of saving money is a personal value. There is no way to
> actually teach that in school. Parents can attempt it at home by
> modelling saving themselves and by allowing children to save up for
> bigger toys from their allowance or chore money or money from a paying
> job. Also parents have the child for many years, so they can start
> with this in preschool and be consistent with it into older ages. As
> a teacher, I have a child in my class for one year usually (and in
> fact as a hs math teacher, I had the child only an hour a day for the
> year). I could teach the skill though not in geometry classes since
> it has nothing to do with geometry. I might be able to fit the
> skills into an algebra or pre-algebra class, but with all the actual
> algebraic math concepts we need to teach, it doesn't fit well there
> either.
I said teaching them HOW to save money. Yes, they may not use it, but
they will likely not use HALF of what you are teaching them in life,
either.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:c5ec57b4-87e0-4d58...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Where did I say anything about a value system? Please, quote it to
me. I said we should teach them about HOW to save money, since it
would benefit them in life. They can reject it if they want. How is
that different than teaching them HOW to cook in Home Ec? Perhaps,
they will refuse to do that, too.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
What is false about what I said? You couldn't do it, yet you want to
tell others HOW to do it.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:29:44 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
>
> >> > Enlightening. So, you are a fired teacher, a teacher that refused to
> >> > work with his school, or what?
>
> >> I'm a teacher that quit.
>
> >Ahh, gave up teaching but think yourself qualified to tell others how
> >to do it. Got it. I'm guessing you believe the "those who can't,
> >teach" theory, since you are trying to do it on this group.
>
> Martin came into teaching from another field. He taught electives
> that are not part of the English/Math/Science. He has mentioned many
> times that he loved teaching, but that the administration was not
> supportive of what he wanted and needed to do, so he quit.
>
> I did the same. I had owned my own small business, done computer
> programming and then went back and got certified to teach. I quit
> after the administration in my inner city school threw out the brand
> new geometry books we had gotten a grant for.
So, apparently, you gave up, too. You could've qualified, easily, to
teach another field. I guess you weren't in it for the kids, though.
There's a huge math shortage, and the rules are easily met for add-on
qualificaitons.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:93656899-aa62-4d9f...@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Apparently not, since it didn't work for him.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:93656899-aa62-4d9f...@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Posting at 7:22 on a school day? What time does your school begin?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Bob LeChevalier
You like playing nonsense semantics games, don't you?
Is every article in the Wall Street Journal is about making a profit.
>The fact that it is called "NEA Today," apparently, doesn't mean
>it is for the NEA, which is, in fact, a teacher organization
Actually, as its name suggests, it is an "education" organization.
Not all of its members are teachers. You for example are merely a
wannabe.
Similarly, not every article posted to k12.chat.teacher is about
teaching, and not every reader is a teacher.
>(unlike AFT, staff are not open to membership).
Clueless, aren't you?
http://www.nea.org/members/index.html
<The National Education Association (NEA) serves a variety of distinct
< groups of education professionals. Click the appropriate heading to
< learn more about the important roles NEA members play in making
< public schools great for every child.
<
<Retired Educators -- for retired NEA members.
<
<Student Program -- for college students preparing to become teachers.
<
<Higher Education -- for college and university faculty and staff.
^^^^^^^^^
<
<Education Support Professionals -- for school staff, including
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
< paraprofessionals, bus drivers, school secretaries, custodians, food
< service workers, health services workers, security workers, and
< technicians.
<
<Substitute Educators -- for the professional educators who provide
< continued quality education to children in the temporary absence of
< regular classroom educators.
<
<Administrators -- for school leaders responsible for the maintenance
< and development of schools, their faculty, and the students.
<
<National Council of Urban Education Associations (NCUEA) -- for
< members of NEA's urban affiliates.
<How to Join the Association
<Start by selecting your membership type.
<
< Active Professional/Certified
<For individuals employed in public education in a certified position
< in a public school district or institution of higher learning or
< whose job is primarily education. More
<
< Active Education Support Professional (ESP)/Classified
<For individuals who are employed in public education in a support
< position in a public school district or institution of higher
< learning or whose job is primarily in education. More
<
< Retired
<For individuals no longer employed in public education and who are
< eligible to receive a pension from an educational employment
< institution. More
<
< Pre-Retired Subscription
<For individuals who are currently working and are an NEA Active
< Professional or ESP, you may join as a pre-retired member in advance
< of retirement. More
<
< Student Membership
<Student Membership is available if you are enrolled in a postsecondary
< program that is preparatory for employment in a position that will
< make you eligible for Active (teacher) membership in the NEA.
Under the second category, we get the following elucidation:
<This membership type includes secretaries, classroom aides,
< paraprofessionals, technicians, custodians, maintenance workers, bus
< drivers, food service and other support personnel who work for a
< public educational institution
You were saying something about "staff"?
> Also, the fact that address
>changes for subscriptions are sent to NEA Financial and Membership
>Services doesn't make it a NEA member publication,
>either...apparently.
Since one does not have to be a member to read it (it is not within
the restricted member's only area of the site), arguably not.
>> >> You wrote
>> >> <I (and the NEA article) say that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
>> >> in the context of which you made the following proposal
>>
>> >> >I think it would
>> >> >be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
>> >> >of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
>> >> >This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
>>
>> >> which is clearly about classroom education, and not about parents
>> >> teaching their kids about money, and that is what people have been
>> >> responding to.
>>
>> >And an idea that you think is bad?
>>
>> I offer no opinion on it
>
>Then your comments are irrelevant to the thread.
Your opinion of what is relevant is irrelevant.
Indeed, YOU are irrelevant.
Not to mention, an idiot and a loser.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
Bob LeChevalier
>> Wide Eyed in Wonder <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >It's ironic that you protest the use of standards and, then, use them
>> >as a cover for yourself. I believe that standards are important.
>> >However, I am not chained by them to have less than a free mind (as
>> >apparently you are).
>>
>> That's probably because you aren't yet a teacher, with your career
>> hanging on the line based on whether you follow those standards.
>
Nothing.
What keeps you from thinking, period?
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
>> Pay attention, Kenneth. I said that these things are taught insofar as they
>> dovetail with their math curriculum. MATH--not the value system part.
>
>Where did I say anything about a value system? Please, quote it to
>me. I said we should teach them about HOW to save money, since it
>would benefit them in life.
Tell us something value-free about HOW to save money, that you would
teach in a classroom.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
>> >> >>Bwa-a-a-a-H hhhhhh---a-a-a-aaaaaa - LOL!
>>
>> >> >>You sound just like the Principal that caused me to quite teaching -
>> >> >>except that he was advocating standardized testing. Exact same argument
>> >> >>he used.
>>
>> >> > Enlightening. So, you are a fired teacher, a teacher that refused to
>> >> > work with his school, or what?
>>
>> >> I'm a teacher that quit.
>>
>> > Ahh, gave up teaching but think yourself qualified to tell others how
>> > to do it. Got it. I'm guessing you believe the "those who can't,
>> > teach" theory, since you are trying to do it on this group.
>>
>> You really do like to throw out unkind comments, don't you? How on earth
>> could you possibly know why Rowley gave up teaching? Don't you think the
>> experience he gained during the years he was teaching could be of benefit to
>> others?
>
>Apparently not, since it didn't work for him.
Thus we can conclude that you are incompetent to home-school your kid,
since you gave up on doing so. Right?
And you haven ''t yet held a regular full time position as a teacher,
so you are therefore not qualified to tell REAL teachers how to teach,
are you?
And your demeanor on this newsgroup is absolutely unprofessional, so
you aren't qualified for a professional teaching position, are you?
lojbab
Cary Kittrell
I've read it, on quite a number of occasions. Conservative, but
still one of our better newspapers in a number of regards.
> Christianity Today isn't for Christians,
I've quoted articles from Christianity Today on Usenet, and more
than once. In this very froup, in fact.
> and Writer's Digest isn't for writers,
Hey, Writer's Digest is where I first encountered Stephen King.
An interview right after "Carrie" took off.
> since all of those publications are available for everyone to
> see.
Exactly right.
--cary
teachrmama
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4b36c7ad-490d-42d1...@c23g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
Oh, so you've been reading it and *know* that not all the articles are about
teaching. Good.
teachrmama
I don't have a problem with you having an opinion. Opinions are
like...well..you know.....everyone has one.....
teachrmama
No--why would you think that? Just for the fun of it, Kenneith, which part
of the current curriculum do you plan to ignore in favor of teaching
children about saving money?
teachrmama
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e091fd2e-6739-4854...@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
How would you teach them how to save money, Kenneth?
toto
<writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I said teaching them HOW to save money. Yes, they may not use it, but
>they will likely not use HALF of what you are teaching them in life,
>either.
>
I had algebra and geometry students who though they would never need
any of that later on. I was amused when former students returned to
talk to the classes. They often said that they wished they had paid
more attention in math classes.
Students who were trying to get into auto repair or other trades need
algebra in their classes. I had one student who was in Beauty school,
not a place where you think they need geometry, but the first thing
her teacher said to her on her very first day was *hold the hair at a
90 degree angle to the head.*
>Kenneth Clifton
>christiansuperhero.com
toto
<writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>So, apparently, you gave up, too. You could've qualified, easily, to
>teach another field. I guess you weren't in it for the kids, though.
>There's a huge math shortage, and the rules are easily met for add-on
>qualificaitons.
I loved teaching math. Why should I add certifications if there is a
teacher shortage in math, btw? I did not have any trouble with
teaching math to my students, but I was not willing to put up with a
less than professional environment and working conditions. Why should
teachers become martyrs to a job? Just because I love the kids is not
a reason to put up with the things that were endemic to the inner city
schools.
I taught for 8 years in an inner city school where teachers were short
of supplies. I spent my own money on things that in all my other jobs
were supplied by the business owner. We even had to bring our own
toilet paper for the bathrooms by the end of the year because the
school ran out.
There is a point at which the stress is not worth it even though you
love the kids and the job. I have a family of my own to care for. I
also did not give up entirely on teaching, but went to teach in a
different situation (non-public school and preK instead of high
school) One of the things I wanted to help remedy was the fact that
many of my inner city kids were coming to the high school without
things they should have gotten in preschool and elementary school.
I had kids who had never measured with a ruler or played around with
blocks to get a sense of size, perimeter, area and volume. By
teaching the preK kids more about number concepts, measurement
and size, angles and other math, I hoped to remedy some of the problem
for at least my students.
At this point, there is no way to go back and do what I would like to
do because I am involved in the therapies of my autistic grandson and
I am also involved with teaching my very bright granddaughter who is
5.5. Note that I am currently at the place in my life where I feel I
should be able to travel and relax since my dh is retired. Yet I am
still involved with kids. I volunteer regularly at my dgd's school.
teachrmama
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3091e312-962c-42ad...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
I asked you this in another post, but will ask again: How would you go
about teaching them how to save money?
teachrmama
>
> What is false about what I said? You couldn't do it, yet you want to
> tell others HOW to do it.
I'm not quite sure why you think Rowley couldn't teach. Where do you get
that idea?
teachrmama
What didn't work for him? You have no idea why he does not teach any more,
and are simply being judgmental.
teachrmama
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9a0c6344-ccd9-4354...@l32g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
I have to be there at 8. School starts at 8:20. Why?
Larry Hewitt
"toto" <scar...@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:eo0qq35p8pcjmm2em...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 07:15:50 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
> <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>So, apparently, you gave up, too. You could've qualified, easily, to
>>teach another field. I guess you weren't in it for the kids, though.
>>There's a huge math shortage, and the rules are easily met for add-on
>>qualificaitons.
>
> I loved teaching math. Why should I add certifications if there is a
> teacher shortage in math, btw? I did not have any trouble with
> teaching math to my students, but I was not willing to put up with a
> less than professional environment and working conditions. Why should
> teachers become martyrs to a job? Just because I love the kids is not
> a reason to put up with the things that were endemic to the inner city
> schools.
>
> I taught for 8 years in an inner city school where teachers were short
> of supplies. I spent my own money on things that in all my other jobs
> were supplied by the business owner. We even had to bring our own
> toilet paper for the bathrooms by the end of the year because the
> school ran out.
>
This problem is not confined to inner city schools.
I taught math in a small town. We had the same problems --- using our own
monies to pay for supplies and reproduction, lack of resources.
SPecial to us was selling cookies at lunch to get diaper wipes for the
severley handicapped kids, psending our own money for expesive shrictmas
presents for the poorest of kids, contributing funds for field trips,
uniforms, and band instruments for kids who couldnlt pay for it themselves,
and so on.
And that still sn't enough. You see, I live in a very low tax state, a state
populates by aophobes who refuse to pay not matter the consequences. The
result?? Decrpit school buildings, building s so bad that an documentary
"Corridir of shame" was made detailing the problems 5 years ago.
Did that help?
Unfortunately, no.
You see, on Wednesday the roof of a local High Scool collapsed , shutting
down two wiings of the schoiol
Amazingly, the rest ofhte school is remaining open!!
The local school board has been trying for years, especially after "Corridor
of shame" put the HS onits 10 worst list, to get a bond issue or a tax
increase through to repair the school. But voters refused to pay.
http://www.wspa.com/midatlantic/spa/search.apx.-content-articles-SPA-2008-02-06-0032.html
Larry
Feminazi Cuntkins
wrote:
>
>"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:9a0c6344-ccd9-4354...@l32g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>
>
>I have to be there at 8. School starts at 8:20. Why?
Oh come now, Kenny is obviously far too cleverboots for you. You're
not agreeing with him, so you're obviously not a real teacher, and
he's smoked you out.
FNC, cue the Mighty Mouse theme
teachrmama
"Feminazi Cuntkins" <jaeza...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ehfrq39ga6cgjai2m...@4ax.com...
<chuckle> The myriad students I have taught over the last couple decades of
teaching are going to be terribly shocked by that.
Cary Kittrell
> e5-4a1f-9f91...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <697qj.7646$Ch6...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net> <286a06db-a5ff-48d8...@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <hRsqj.3363$xq2....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net> <93656899-aa62-4d9f-9a78-13b325995
> d...@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> <foghu...@news4.newsguy.com> <9a0c6344-ccd9-4354...@l32g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: p215574ebd784b9cd686b2357c50e494d1456a6518af2323e.newsdawg.com
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
> X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
> Xref: news.arizona.edu alt.education:103295 k12.chat.teacher:24120 k12.ed.life-skills:443
Because you'e dealing with a poster with a serious conspiracy
mindset, that's why. From big things like Hollywood machinations
to undermine Christian movies and Bush getting us into Iran,
to small things like Bob LeChevalier and FNC and Buckeye
and myself all being the same person, there's nothing in
actually reality that Ken cannot improve upon. After all,
he DOES write fiction.
And in your case, as is obvious from the "sick kid" posts,
he's now turned the Beady Eye of Suspicion on you.
-- cary
teachrmama
"Cary Kittrell" <ca...@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:fol9ac$6ap$1...@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
It will be interesting to see if his opinions change when and if he actually
begins teaching.
Feminazi Cuntkins
wrote:
>
>"Cary Kittrell" <ca...@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
>news:fol9ac$6ap$1...@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
>> In article <foj5i...@news5.newsguy.com> "teachrmama"
>> <teach...@iwon.com> writes:
>>> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:9a0c6344-ccd9-4354...@l32g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>> >
>>>
>>> I have to be there at 8. School starts at 8:20. Why?
>>
>> Because you'e dealing with a poster with a serious conspiracy
>> mindset, that's why. From big things like Hollywood machinations
>> to undermine Christian movies and Bush getting us into Iran,
>> to small things like Bob LeChevalier and FNC and Buckeye
>> and myself all being the same person, there's nothing in
>> actually reality that Ken cannot improve upon. After all,
>> he DOES write fiction.
I enjoy Kenny's posts ever so much more since this revelation, and his
achievement levels have improved now that I consider them as creative
writing projects.
>> And in your case, as is obvious from the "sick kid" posts,
>> he's now turned the Beady Eye of Suspicion on you.
I bet the Beady Eye of Suspicion is his superpower! I've always
wondered.
>It will be interesting to see if his opinions change when and if he actually
>begins teaching.
No, just his complaints and excuses.
FNC, I am he and you are she and we are all together!
Bob LeChevalier
>> And in your case, as is obvious from the "sick kid" posts,
>> he's now turned the Beady Eye of Suspicion on you.
>
>It will be interesting to see if his opinions change when and if he actually
>begins teaching.
How long do you think he'd last on the job, if he talks to and about
his fellow teachers the way he does on the newsgroup?
(And this is assuming he doesn't try to teach religion in his classes
based on his misunderstandings of the law.)
lojbab
teachrmama
"Bob LeChevalier" <loj...@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:n05tq3lktsqbisbmn...@4ax.com...
> "teachrmama" <teach...@iwon.com> wrote:
>>> And in your case, as is obvious from the "sick kid" posts,
>>> he's now turned the Beady Eye of Suspicion on you.
>>
>>It will be interesting to see if his opinions change when and if he
>>actually
>>begins teaching.
>
> How long do you think he'd last on the job, if he talks to and about
> his fellow teachers the way he does on the newsgroup?
I can't imagine him making it through his probationary year if he thinks he
can teach whatever strikes his fancy as important rather than the curriculum
adopted by the powers that be.
>
> (And this is assuming he doesn't try to teach religion in his classes
> based on his misunderstandings of the law.)
I've taught with people who feel that they can subtly teach religion without
violating the law. They don't seem to last very long.
Wide Eyed in Wonder
We were talking about the magazine's audience, not the theme of the
article. Answer the question, then. Who is the audience of those
magazines and newspapers...everyone?
You can't read it saying the members were those whose job was
primarily education? You were saying something about this magazine
being for the common parent?
> > Also, the fact that address
> >changes for subscriptions are sent to NEA Financial and Membership
> >Services doesn't make it a NEA member publication,
> >either...apparently.
>
> Since one does not have to be a member to read it (it is not within
> the restricted member's only area of the site), arguably not.
>
>
You ignored the point. Respond to where subscription is sent.
>
> >> >> You wrote
> >> >> <I (and the NEA article) say that we should teach them money skills to help them succeed in life.
> >> >> in the context of which you made the following proposal
>
> >> >> >I think it would
> >> >> >be a good idea to start a savings account as a class project for all
> >> >> >of our students, even if it were only a dime put away each month.
> >> >> >This habit could save them a lot of grief, later in life.
>
> >> >> which is clearly about classroom education, and not about parents
> >> >> teaching their kids about money, and that is what people have been
> >> >> responding to.
>
> >> >And an idea that you think is bad?
>
> >> I offer no opinion on it
>
> >Then your comments are irrelevant to the thread.
>
> Your opinion of what is relevant is irrelevant.
By your own omission, you didn't offer an opinion on the thread topic.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
So, in context of this thread, you are saying those publications might
include articles about the consistency of motor oil. After all, a
mechanic might be reading the magazine or newspaper.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:f3c13565-e697-450f...@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Your actions in attacking me for my opinion disproves your words.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:261c2eff-117b-4ca8...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Let's stay on task about this. I said that I was not chained to
standards and could think outside the box about what is best for the
kids. You said a teacher doesn't have that abilty. I asked how just
being a teacher keeps you from thinking. Answer the question.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 07:10:55 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
>
> >I said teaching them HOW to save money. Yes, they may not use it, but
> >they will likely not use HALF of what you are teaching them in life,
> >either.
>
> I had algebra and geometry students who though they would never need
> any of that later on. I was amused when former students returned to
> talk to the classes. They often said that they wished they had paid
> more attention in math classes.
>
> Students who were trying to get into auto repair or other trades need
> algebra in their classes. I had one student who was in Beauty school,
> not a place where you think they need geometry, but the first thing
> her teacher said to her on her very first day was *hold the hair at a
> 90 degree angle to the head.*
And, how often will they be figuring the area of a circle or using
cosigns and tangents? You are really going to tell me that the
average student will use ALL of what you are teaching in their life?
Let's stay on topic, here. I said we should teach them HOW to save
money, even if they choose not to use it. Are you saying we should
cut out all math that may not be used by EVERY student?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:3091e312-962c-42ad...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
I'm not letting you wiggle out of this. You said I was trying to
teach a value system. Quote that to me or admit you lied.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 07:15:50 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
>
> >So, apparently, you gave up, too. You could've qualified, easily, to
> >teach another field. I guess you weren't in it for the kids, though.
> >There's a huge math shortage, and the rules are easily met for add-on
> >qualificaitons.
>
> I loved teaching math. Why should I add certifications if there is a
> teacher shortage in math, btw? I did not have any trouble with
> teaching math to my students, but I was not willing to put up with a
> less than professional environment and working conditions. Why should
> teachers become martyrs to a job? Just because I love the kids is not
> a reason to put up with the things that were endemic to the inner city
> schools.
Actually, it is the perfect reason to teach. Or, do you quit EVERY
environment that is difficult?
Exactly. You quit and wouldn't do it, but everyone else is supposed
to listen to your advice on how to do it...pathetic.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "toto" <scarec...@wicked.witch> wrote in message
>
> news:eo0qq35p8pcjmm2em...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 07:15:50 -0800 (PST), Wide Eyed in Wonder
> > <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>So, apparently, you gave up, too. You could've qualified, easily, to
> >>teach another field. I guess you weren't in it for the kids, though.
> >>There's a huge math shortage, and the rules are easily met for add-on
> >>qualificaitons.
>
> > I loved teaching math. Why should I add certifications if there is a
> > teacher shortage in math, btw? I did not have any trouble with
> > teaching math to my students, but I was not willing to put up with a
> > less than professional environment and working conditions. Why should
> > teachers become martyrs to a job? Just because I love the kids is not
> > a reason to put up with the things that were endemic to the inner city
> > schools.
>
> > I taught for 8 years in an inner city school where teachers were short
> > of supplies. I spent my own money on things that in all my other jobs
> > were supplied by the business owner. We even had to bring our own
> > toilet paper for the bathrooms by the end of the year because the
> > school ran out.
>
> This problem is not confined to inner city schools.
So, I guess, if Toto was right, everyone should whine and quit. That
is, apparently, what is best for the kids.
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
Wide Eyed in Wonder
> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <writing...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:170e63c4-e1f1-42b5...@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
If he is not WORKing, it didn't WORK for his job...right?
Kenneth Clifton
christiansuperhero.com
stevericks
board has approved to be taught, not whatever they want to teach.
One of the best ways for you to loose your job is for the principal to
document you are NOT teaching what you have been hired to teach, Can you
imagine what education would look like if we all went in and just taught
what we wanted to teach? And imagine the fun of getting a new classroom of
students that had not been taught a somewhat unified set of skills that you
could build on-instead they got whatever the teachers the years before just
wanted to teach and felt like students should know. I might want to teach
physics, but might find that the only prerequisite those who reached me had
to prepare them was geology and statistics, because that is what their
previous teachers waned to teach.
What you will teach is usually determined by large committees, not
individuals. In our state, standards are set by the State Dept of Ed. They
determine the standards for each grade and subject by routinely bringing
large committees together (standards are looked at every 6 years-we rotate a
subject or so a year). It is quite a process and takes at least a year of
hard work to accomplish.
I have been a part of this several times, for instance on K-12 science
standards. The committee always includes a good number of the best teachers
in the state, administrators, a local superintendent, college professors,
one or two college administrators, several parents (usually appointed by the
state PTA) , some "real" scientists, business representatives, and a few
appointees by the Governor's office. We are always careful to be sure
there are university experts on the committee that can address age
appropriateness . Of course, this huge committee is broken into many
subcommittees. In addition, the state department provides a number of
facilitators and content specialists to assist (their job is not to
influence standards, but help write (word) the standards as the committee
determines them. They also make sure that everyone is looking at what is
being taught in grades above and below.
Part of the process is to have the committee look at national standards.
They also review standards from other states, look at appropriate test
standards and results, NAEP, TIMSS, etc.
There are several times during the process where public opinion is solicited
and the work of the committee put out for public review. EVERY letter that
is received is shared with the committee and addressed. Finally, the
standards are presented to the Board and there is a time for citizens to
address the Board to support or refute the standards. Then, the Board
either accepts the standards or sends the committee back to address issues
(the latter has happened a few times).
Steve
"Bob LeChevalier" <loj...@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:onqgq3d2o7n4rkepb...@4ax.com...
> Wide Eyed in Wonder <writi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On Feb 5, 6:09 am, Rowley <industry3dREM...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
>>> > Agreed. That doesn't mean it's not a good message to teach the kids
>>> > at school, especially if our goal is to teach them to prepare them for
>>> > life. The NEA Today article agrees.
>>>
>>> AFAIK, there is no goal to prepare students for 'life'. Seemed to me the
>>> only two goals we had (where I was working) was 1) for the kids to pass
>>> the state's standardized test and 2) for them to go on to 'college'.
>>
>>I guess that is why you are a teacher, to help kids be prepared for a
>>standardized test.
>
> No That is what he was HIRED to do, and that is what his bosses want
> him to do, and that is what the state law REQUIRES. Why someone wants
> to be a teacher has nothing to do with what their job actually is.
> They are employees and like all employees they are obliged to make a
> damned good effort to follow the boss's wishes, or they won't continue
> to be employees.
>
>>Personally, I entered teaching to prepare students to succeed in life,
>
> But to keep your job, you'll have to learn how to keep the adults
> above you happy, which also may require keeping your peers happy,
> because when you start they will have more clout with your bosses than
> you do.
>
>>That being said, it must confuse you WHY we have standards of what the
>>kids
>>need to learn.
>
> Because the law says that we shall. "Why" is because the public
> demands accountability. Uniform standards are required for fairness,
> and also to deal with family mobility (so that 4th grade in one school
> is more or less at the same level as 4th grade at a different school.
> But the whys and wherefores that the legislature chooses in requiring
> standards has little to do with why the employees have to follow those
> standards.
>
> I have nothing against teaching "success in life", but that is
> enrichment, after you have done your job to teach what the state tells
> you to teach.
>
> lojbab
stevericks
Hoever, it is a lot like democracy. It has problems, there are things it
produces that aren't right, at times it seems unfair ---but it is the best
system we have found thus far.
Steve
"stevericks" <steve...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:LvDrj.77693$_m.6...@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
Rowley
What makes you think that they (students) aren't being taught HOW to
save money? Several people here have said that the concept was being
taught where they are at. I even posted a link to a pamphlet - which if
you had looked at you might have seen where it said;
"SOCIAL STUDIES
In third grade social studies, your child will learn:...
ECONOMICS. Students:
• identify ways of earning, spending, and saving money...."
LEARNING STANDARDS FOR TEXAS CHILDREN
A SUMMARY FOR PARENTS
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/LearningStandards.pdf
Martin
Bob LeChevalier
>> >> The magazine in question discusses the full scope of its members
>> >> lives, and not just job issues. It thus applies to family members of
>> >> those in the union, most of whom are not themselves teachers.
>>
>> >So...apparently...the Wall Street Journal isn't for business leaders,
>> >Christianity Today isn't for Christians, and Writer's Digest isn't for
>> >writers, since all of those publications are available for everyone to
>> >see.
>>
>> You like playing nonsense semantics games, don't you?
>>
>> Is every article in the Wall Street Journal is about making a profit.
>
>We were talking about the magazine's audience, not the theme of the
>article.
The audience is anyone willing to buy a copy and/or read online. WSJ
is about making money for its owners, not reaching an audience.
Most people who read WSJ are either investors, executives, or
managers, but these days, that covers a huge chunk of society. It
certainly is NOT only for "business leaders".
>Answer the question, then. Who is the audience of those magazines and newspapers...everyone?
Anyone who buys or reads a copy is the "audience" for that issue.
Obviously not everybody reads everything, so the audience could hardly
be "everyone".
To make it more relevant, I do not work in education, but it would be
a very silly Kennie who would think that I am not part of the audience
for every post he makes to k12.chat.teacher or alt.education.
I surmise that you are confusing the concepts of "audience" and
"primary market", but it hardly matters (other than to remind us that
you speak a language where words mean something different from what
they mean to everyone else).
I disagree with your contention that "We were talking about the
magazine's audience, not the theme of the article." It was *I* who
raised the issue of context, pointing out that the article is NOT
about classroom teaching, but about adults managing their finances,
and incidentally teaching their kids about the same subject. You are
attempting to change the subject to a discussion of "audience" which
is irrelevant to my claim, because you are a loser who can't stand to
admit when you've been caught with your pants down.
The article is perfectly relevant for teachers, staff, or people who
have no connection with education at all, regardless of the fact that
it appears in a union journal primarily read by union members, most of
whom are past, present, or future teachers at some level from
preschool to postgraduate. The "audience" has no bearing on what the
subject of the article is, and specifically on whether it is to be
interpreted as guidance for people in their private lives versus
whether it is telling teachers what they should teach in their
classes.
>> >(unlike AFT, staff are not open to membership).
>>
>> Clueless, aren't you?
>>
>> http://www.nea.org/members/index.html
...
>> Under the second category, we get the following elucidation:
>> <This membership type includes secretaries, classroom aides,
>> < paraprofessionals, technicians, custodians, maintenance workers, bus
>> < drivers, food service and other support personnel who work for a
>> < public educational institution
>>
>> You were saying something about "staff"?
>
>You can't read it saying the members were those whose job was
>primarily education?
I could read it all sorts of ways, but it is quite clear that "staff"
of a public education institution can be members. I don't care to
argue whether a custodian or bus driver in such an institution has a
"job which was primarily education", which is just a silly semantic
game.
The claim that I was responding to was your claim that "unlike AFT,
staff are not open to membership".
That is clearly false. Furthermore, a bus driver or custodian who is
a union member might find the article on finances interesting and
useful, even though they do not teach students.
>You were saying something about this magazine being for the common parent?
No. I was saying that the ARTICLE was for adults whether they were
teachers or not.
YOU are the one arguing that the magazine is only for teachers (false)
and that therefore it could only be about the classroom (false even if
it was only for teachers, which it isn't).
>> > Also, the fact that address
>> >changes for subscriptions are sent to NEA Financial and Membership
>> >Services doesn't make it a NEA member publication,
>> >either...apparently.
>>
>> Since one does not have to be a member to read it (it is not within
>> the restricted member's only area of the site), arguably not.
>
>You ignored the point.
You have no point.
>Respond to where subscription is sent.
Print subscriptions are sent to the mailing addresses that those who
subscribe provide.
Why is that in the least bit relevant to whether the ARTICLE was for
adults whether they were teachers or not?
I answered your question, now you answer mine, or we will all know
that you are a dishonest loser.
>> >Then your comments are irrelevant to the thread.
>>
>> Your opinion of what is relevant is irrelevant.
>
>By your own omission, you didn't offer an opinion on the thread topic.
I offered an opinion on what you posted. The thread topic is
irrelevant, as is obvious by your comments in this posting. After all
>Respond to where subscription is sent.
has nothing to do with the thread topic, OR with what I opined about
your posting.
Apparently you feel it is OK for YOU to change the subject and be
insistent that everyone answer your silly and irrelevant questions,
but our comments are "irrelevant to the thread" when we deviate from
whatever YOU think the topic is. But of course you don't bother with
that game unless you have lost the argument.
Loser.
lojbab
Rowley
You are wanting to teach a value system - problem is, you are not
differentiating between what is a concept and what is a value system.
Teaching kids the mechanics / mathematics of saving money is one thing
(and apparently something that schools are doing), teaching them how
doing affects their life - that (least to me) is a value system.
We (schools/teachers) can teach students about the concept of riding a
bike in a classroom, however (IMO) - it takes a parent to actually buy
the kid a bike and put in the time and effort it will require for the
kid to successfully learn to ride it and give the kid a reason to do so
regularly.
Martin
>
> Kenneth Clifton
> christiansuperhero.com
Bob LeChevalier
>include articles about the consistency of motor oil.
"In the context of this thread" you seem to vacillate between
complaints that any discussion other than about "Teaching Kids to Save
Money" is off topic and therefore "irrelevant", and posting articles
like this one which are not about "Teaching Kids to Save Money".
He is saying no such thing. We all know your game of trying to put
YOUR strawmen in other people's mouths (and keyboards). Confine
yourself to making clear what YOU are saying, and whether it is
"relevant" and leave it to us to make clear what WE are saying without
any 'help' from you.
>After all, a mechanic might be reading the magazine or newspaper.
You have a short memory. From my other post, NEA members do include
mechanics. Who do you think the maintenance workers that fix the
buses do?
<> Under the second category, we get the following elucidation:
<> <This membership type includes secretaries, classroom aides,
<> < paraprofessionals, technicians, custodians, maintenance workers, bus
<> < drivers,
But of course every adult who is responsible for a motor vehicle
should know something about consistency of motor oil, so I can imagine
that most publications could write about that topic at a general level
and interest their readership.
If the publication was entirely full of miscellany not specific to
their interests, they might lose readership. But in the case of NEA
Today, a college professor might find an article on motor oil more
relevant to them than an article on preschool education.
lojbab