Issues with Ohio's Education System

What you're about to read are simple observations as to why I think that Ohio's Public Education system is taking a turn for the worse.

SCHOOL REPORT CARDS

Really, what are the point to these things other than to give the state a reason to give more funding to one school or another. The worse part of is that they keep changing what it takes to be Excellent. It's almost like they made up the system and then the majority of the schools jumped through the hoops and became Excellent. After that the Ohio Department of Education said "we can't have that happen" so they changed it again. They realized that the standards that made a school excellent didn't mean much so they keep changing the target until they one day (hopefully) get the results they expected out the program.

SCHOOL FUNDING

Property taxes to fund schools have already been declared unconstitutional, so why don't they do something to fix it? The current method helps wealthy school districts get even better while the poor ones just get worse. No one moves into the poor districts because the state report cards tell them it's a bad idea, so they get fewer property taxes. Not only that but when the report cards say a district is bad, the property values decrease because it's undesirable to live there and the district gets less money. See a vicious cycle? When the district gets too bad, the state comes in and tries to save the day by throwing more money and resources at it. I hate to say it, but throwing more money at a bad school district will never make parents become more active in their child's lives.

Personally, I think the property taxes should be removed, a quarter percent sales tax created, and then split the money up to the schools based on the number of students. That would then make it so districts don't have an unfair advantage.

IEPs (Individualized Education Plans)

Another big waste of time, but this time it's placed on the teacher. So when a student doesn't perform as someone thinks they should, the school creates an IEP so that the student can work half as hard to get the same grades as someone who does all the work. For example, John is an honor roll student, studies hards, and aces his tests. Billy doesn't. For one reason or another someone thinks he should get an IEP. Because of his IEP, the teacher now has to fill out extra paperwork to judge his progress and then make up special tests for him to take when John takes his tests. Also, Billy gets an intervention specialist to help "guide" him through the tests. All the while, John studies hours before the tests, has to pick from all 4 possible multiple choice answers (while Billy only has to pick from 2 multiple choice answers) and they both manage to get the same grade. The funny thing about it is that when they finish the test, they both get an A. But wait, they didn't take the same test, or have to do the same amount of work?

I hate to say it but these are not preparing students for the real world. In the real world, your employer doesn't put you on an IEP when you don't do the same amount of work as your colleague. No, they promote the colleague and fire you!!! Some people are able to learn things faster and apply them easier. Some people have to work harder to get the same grades. It's just a fact of life. You can't try to level the playing field in school to make everyone feel like they're the same because in the real world, it doesn't work that way (unless you live in a communist society).

ACADEMIC CONTENT STANDARDS, STATE STANDARDS, and OHIO GRADUATION TESTS

The state says "teach this, teach that" or "by this grade, they should be able to do this". Sure these sound like a good idea, but the fact of the matter is that you have teachers spending the majority of their time teaching just what is necessary to get kids to pass the test so they do well on the state report card and not teaching kids how what they're learning is applicable in real life! What a waste! The best teachers I had were the ones who could take what we were learning and then apply it to a real world situation so we would know why we were learning it and why it would be important in real life. If you don't know why you're learning something, then you have no reason to retain it and absolutely no reason to be passionate about it. The downside is that teachers are teaching what they're teaching so they meet all the state requirements (insert more paperwork here). This leads to teachers who aren't as passionate about what they're doing and therefore aren't performing as well as they could be.

Again, in my personal opinion, it would make more sense to let teacher teach and not make all these requirements and state standards that consume a teacher's time. Oh the gnashing of teeth that is coming out of Columbus right now. Listen, if a teacher doesn't teach what they should teach, then it should be evident in their assessments and they should be FIRED by the district.

Agree with me or disagree, I don't really care. I just wanted to share my thoughts.

MY SOCIAL SECURITY FIX

Here is my common sense approach to fix the Social Security system. It's a simple approach.

1. Allow people to opt out. By opting out, you say that you will not use Social Security in the future.
2. If you opt out, you cannot get any of the money that you've put in so far. You've essentially lost it. (You lost it anyhow by putting it into Social Security in the first, now you're just admitting that you're never going to get it back.)
3. Finally, in order to get bipartisan support, it could be required that the 6.2% that you currently contribute to Social Security would have to be contributed to a 401k, IRA, or Roth IRA of *YOUR* choice, and NOT a government devised savings plan.
   

That's it. Pretty simple huh? Too simple actually. And that's why it will never happen. The goals would be to give people choice instead of being forced into the system and to allow people to become responsible for themselves which would eventually ween them off of the crumbling Social Security system.

Cash for Clunkers - Literal Government Waste

I'm sure that many people are familiar with the Cash for Clunkers program. Trade in your 2001 or older car that gets 18mpg or worse and you can get up to $4500 from the government (ahem... I mean taxpayers) towards the purchase of a new car.

Well, guess what happens to the car you trade in....it gets crushed. Guess who is probably buying these cars....people who probably couldn't afford them in the first place, otherwise they would have bought a new car a while ago. Those that could afford to purchase a new car have just pushed their purchase up by a couple of months or years and therefore stolen possible sales from the future. These are cars that could be resold, cheaply of course, to those who cannot afford a new car.

You've probably heard that this will help us raise our fuel efficiency and lower our dependency on foreign oil. Or maybe you've heard that this is going to put people to work making cars. Well consider this, what does it take to crush a car and then make a new car, filled with it's plastic interior. It takes oil. Where do we get oil from??? On top of that, car makers have a back log of new car supplies, which means it's going to take a while to burn through all that inventory before people are actually going back to work to make new ones and restock their supplies.

Just something to consider as the Senate is considering funding this with $2 billion more taxpayer dollars. Not only do we own GM, but we're also funding their rebate programs!!!!

THEY'RE JUST AS BAD AS EVERYONE ELSE

No matter where you are or who you are, there are always people that think they are better and smarter than you are. There is no better example of this than Congress. We have elected a group of people who, despite what their constituents tell them they want, do whatever they want.

They make these decisions that contradict what we want them to do because they supposedly are smarter and in a better position than us to make these decisions. However, it appears that isn't the case. For example, Speaker Pelosi is saying that she was misled about the interrogation tactics that were being used on detainees. Is that so?!?!?! Really!?!?!? Well I hope that she learned her lesson, and I hope everyone else who was misled did too. Otherwise, they could be led into voting for the largest stimulus package of all time without really knowing what was in it or reading the fine print.

Next time you go into vote, don't look at these people as celebrities or as people who are any smarter than you. They blame others for their problems, don't ask enough questions when they should, and sign their name without reading the fine print. They're no better (but could possibly be worse) than the rest of us.

WHO CARES???

I'm wondering why everyone cares so much about these AIG bonuses. If the government hadn't nationalized them in the first place, it wouldn't be an issue. Besides there was more money wasted in the recent stimulus bill than what is being given out based on contracts to these employees. One article had a quote from a Senator that said that it wasn't right for them to get the money and buy fancy cars and yachts. Well if I understand correctly, if they purchase cars and yachts, someone has to build it, which means people are going to work.

So what is the government's plan? Tax the bonuses 100%. If the government can't get it's way by asking, they'll force it to happen, one way or another...all in the name of protecting the taxpayer. They could have protected the taxpayer best by not giving any of the banks or AIG our money in the first place. Then they wouldn't have to come up with "creative" ways of getting it back.

STUPIDITY

I'm sure you've heard the Albert Einstein's saying, "The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

I don't want to call anyone stupid, but let's think about this. 

• First, a $700 billion bailout for the banks that didn't work, and now they're proposing an additional $750 billion in order to do the job. Why?
• First, you have people going into debt over their head and not being able to afford their mortgages and other debt payments and yet we're trying to get the banks to lend more. Why?
  
• First, we see record foreclosures, a negative savings rate, and massive debt being incurred by US citizens which helped to lead us into this crisis, and now the government is spending even more than they bring in and incurring record amount of debt and expecting a different result than what the average citizen experienced. Why?

Can we seriously think that the government or those running it who are making the same choices over and over again and expecting different results (a.k.a. stupidity) are really that much better than you and I? Remember, we elect these people. Think about that the next time you're asked to vote for "more of the same".

HOPE

I think I've finally figured out what Obama meant when he said he was running on a platform of Hope for America. He meant he would implement new government programs and run up an incredible deficit and then:

• HOPE no one notices the incredible budget deficits he's accumulating.
• HOPE someone else will pick up the tab.
• HOPE no one associates the higher taxes they'll be paying down the road with the actions he's taking during his presidency.

I'm sure you can think of your own.

What is Vetting?

It makes me wonder what vetting really is or what it means. During the election, the democrats seemed to think the republicans had no idea how to vet a proper Vice Presidential candidate. All these stories kept coming out about Palin and how she did this, or said that.

But now, I'm starting to think that no one knows how to vet someone for a position. Look at all the cabinet positions and White House staff positions have already been vacated before they've even been filled. We haven't even completed the first 30 days of the presidency.

Consider this. Talk is talk, a speech is a speech, but unless you can back up what you say with real actions, then it means nothing. Where is the "change"? Where is the tossing of "politics as usual"? You let me know when you see it.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-03-ethics_N.htm

$825 billion of OUR money???

So the government has gotten the bright idea that it knows how to spend $825 billion dollars to stimulate the economy. Well let's put this in perspective. In less than one month in office, Barack Obama and Congress will have pushed through a bill that costs more than what we've spent on the entire Iraq War so far. You can see an ever increasing calculation of how much we've spent on the war here. http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

For all of you who complained about how much this war has cost us, it's time to think twice before making that statement again. In less than a year, Congress and both Presidents will have spent almost 3 times more than what the war has cost, and for what??? (700 billion bailout + 825 billion "stimulus" package...and I use the word stimulus weakly)

If you want to stimulate the economy, how about not spending so much of our money and cut back on programs so that we can have more of our money to spend. How many people do you think would be foreclosed on if they had a few extra hundred dollars in each paycheck to put food on the table or make a mortgage payment? No, instead, take my money and spend it on arts programs and give jobs to those who already have them (because you can almost bet that the laid off workers at Microsoft will be picking up a hammer to build a new school...yeah right!!!!)

The true purpose of this bill is to push through all of the programs that Obama and the Democrats have promised and hail it as a stimulus package so they can hurry it through Congress without anyone looking too closely at it. Unless people do something, they're plan will work. This is not a stimulus package, but a spending package. They're simply going to use this create or expand programs, which we won't be able to cut next year because they are already in place, and then tax us more heavily to make up the difference in the future. You think things are bad now, just wait until we have to pay it all back.

And for those of you who scoffed at me when I said we should be a bit cautious of Obama (and the Democrat congress) because of bigger government and higher taxes, we're less than a month into the new year and we've already got deficit spending to support more government programs.