The Department of Boneheadedness.

[Wraithworshipper]

That's my very arguement against strictly online learning. I am talking about the STUDENT. There are responsibilities of ADULTS and there are those for CHILDREN. The STUDENT (child) shouldn't be held responsible for the ADULT. Does that make more sense? But always the educational system must take into account the monetary situation of the student's (child's) family. If the family cannot afford the hardware and the internet needed, then the system cannot be strictly online. Students (read children) deserving of a free public school system won't have it because of the peripheral costs, such as troubleshooting/repair of hardware/software issues. It is primarily the responsibility of the school system provided by the government to meet the educational needs of the student (read child).

[Annoyed]

That's my very arguement against strictly online learning. I am talking about the STUDENT. There are responsibilities of ADULTS and there are those for CHILDREN. The STUDENT (child) shouldn't be held responsible for the ADULT. Does that make more sense? But always the educational system must take into account the monetary situation of the student's (child's) family. If the family cannot afford the hardware and the internet needed, then the system cannot be strictly online. Students (read children) deserving of a free public school system won't have it because of the peripheral costs, such as troubleshooting/repair of hardware/software issues. It is primarily the responsibility of the school system provided by the government to meet the educational needs of the student (read child).

Ok, fine, that works for me. Don't offer online at all. Require attendance at brick & mortar schools. And the schools can't require students have computers/etc at home. If needed, the school should provide them at the school, library or something. Problem solved.

[Wraithworshipper]

This is part of the problem of a public school system provided by the government. Unless the needs of those children being left out are somehow met in an equitable manner, the system winds up meeting the needs of the lowest common denominator in a manner with a less than desirable result for the majority of those in said system. That's why it must evolve to be more flexible than it is currently. In an emergency situation, such as a pandemic, it must needs be ready to take advantage of a plan which employs multiple technologies, ranging a spectrum of old to new, to meet the needs of the greatest number rather than the slightly more advantaged some. I'll just hush now.

[Annoyed]

This is part of the problem of a public school system provided by the government. Unless the needs of those children being left out are somehow met in an equitable manner, the system winds up meeting the needs of the lowest common denominator in a manner with a less than desirable result for the majority of those in said system. That's why it must evolve to be more flexible than it is currently. In an emergency situation, such as a pandemic, it must needs be ready to take advantage of a plan which employs multiple technologies, ranging a spectrum of old to new, to meet the needs of the greatest number rather than the slightly more advantaged some. I'll just hush now.

Ok, fine.. you want to use learn at home via computers & the Internet in a situation like this. I have no problem with that, either.

But I maintain that it is the service provider's responsibility to make the services available; it works, and can be accessed by working equipment on the remote end. They're done at that point.

It is NOT the service provider's responsibility to troubleshoot, repair the client's hardware. Or to even be sure user at the remote end knows which end of the computer to put where the sun doesn't shine.

Why on earth should the service provider be responsible for sending someone out to fix the user's computer or internet connection? People, especially children are incredibly stupid when it comes to computers. They click on everything they can find on social networking sites and such. Why should the school have to pay to have viruses/malware removed from a kids computer?

Oh, yes, it's not "fair" to people who don't want to or can't understand computers.

Life itself is not "fair". In fact, it is inherently grossly unfair from birth in many different ways. Some people are born with extraordinarily high intelligence, tremendous physical abilities & talents, extraordinarily good looks while others are born as dumb as a post, sometimes with horrible physical handicaps and ugly as trolls. They are also born into vastly different circumstances and zip codes. Some kids are born with silver spoons in their mouths and some are born to crack addled single parents who aren't remotely capable of raising kids. Some people are born with genetic diseases which will end their lives very early.

People don't want to admit this because it destroys the illusion of self-determination, but by far, the most important factors which determine the path of a persons life are the result of blind luck, they have nothing to say about it whatsoever. And luck very often has disastrous results.

Life itself is horribly unfair, in many different ways, and there is no way we can make things "fair" for everyone. So unless you can come up with ways to make life fair for everyone in all ways, we just have to play the hand we're dealt as best as we can.

[Wraithworshipper]

Wow! With such a dark look at life, why have public schools at all? By the way, I do NOT believe in social justice in the least. I do, however, believe in the creating the most equal, quality, education with which to start. It's up to students and their families to use it.

And I guess you missed everything I said about the system needing to be more flexible in providing education NOT JUST USING COMPUTERS.

I'm sure you'll be happy to know I'm outta here. I'm not into bitter conversations as they aren't productive.

By the way, as a former teacher, I am VERY WELL AWARE of the range of student circumstances.

[aretood2]

I think you are all under the impression that distance learning can equal regular classroom learning in the pre-college level. It can't. Online classes high schoolers have are held in the school building under the supervision of a trained proctor who helps track and orient students and communicate with parents. Not to mention that those classes are run by a subsection of the school district or contracted out to another agency which has access to specialized training, specialized software and modified curriculum.

The rest of us don't have access to any of that specialized training, software nor curriculum. All the computer and online tech stuff I have developed was developed to be done in tandem with traditional instruction (In person, physical interactions, paper and pencils and group work and instant real life teacher feedback and redirection).

I don't think any of us are anywhere near the level of student outcomes pre-quarantine. The school does provide resources for those that don't have the tech (Hotspots, chromebooks, etc).

I'm not a tech guy, I don't have the ability to troubleshoot a problem. My Brother-in-law took classes to be able to do that, he would be much better equipped to troubleshoot a problem. I tried and it doesn't work well. So I have to often provide alternatives or pass them on to another person who is more of a tech support person in the school.

This wasn't a pre-planned thing that schools were prepared for. This is all new, sudden, and unforeseen (even though it should have been). It's an ad-hoc response to the situation we find ourselves in. We can talk about what should be done, but the fact is...the schools aren't prepared for any of this and what should be done isn't possible.

As for that radio thing, Mexico has been using Teleschools where lessons are transmitted over the TV to students in isolated areas in Southern Mexico and Central America who are supervised by adults. The teacher provides instruction, students work on workbooks and mailed tests. But that's a system that was in the works for ages and it has its limits.

Honestly, some parents haven't realized that the grades aren't exactly that important right now. We are in a pass/fail system by mandate of the state. My Spanish students are the ones I am pushing the hardest because they do really need to learn as much as possible so that they could actually understand what's going on in the next Spanish class. The History classes, I'm just focusing on key tent polls. And yes, Annoyed, that includes Pearl harbor.

[Annoyed]

And yes, Annoyed, that includes Pearl harbor.

Good!

[Womble]

Life itself is horribly unfair, in many different ways, and there is no way we can make things "fair" for everyone. So unless you can come up with ways to make life fair for everyone in all ways, we just have to play the hand we're dealt as best as we can.

That is like saying that unless we can cure everyone of all illnesses at all times, we shouldn't treat the sick at all.

Life may be unfair - but we can choose whether to just accept that unfairness or we can mitigate that unfairness as best we can.

The coronavirus crisis is exposing the weaknesses of capitalism, there is no denying it. One measly virus, one month of quarantine, and most of the population in most countries cannot survive without government assistance. There are virtually no people in the wealthy Western world who can handle being out of a job for a couple of months. Capitalism is like a swift or a shark - it lives so long as it moves, but put it on hold to stop an epidemic and it starves and dies. Don't even get me started on the USA: without single-payer healthcare, no one's savings are enough - one hospitalization and you're done. People who will get coronavirus and survive it, will not survive the bills.

The few countries who are faring best are the ones where welfare state is the strongest and where the population is most trusting and obedient to the government - countries like Germany, Denmark, New Zealand. When the dust settles, it is them who will define the new world.

Socialized economy and strong welfare state is the next swing of the pendulum. Suddenly, the idea of universal basic income makes a lot of sense. Nationalization of industries responsible for necessities such as healthcare, pharmaceuticals and housing, price control of food staples, mandatory nationwide surveillance - it's all coming and there's no stopping it.

[Annoyed]

That is like saying that unless we can cure everyone of all illnesses at all times, we shouldn't treat the sick at all.

Life may be unfair - but we can choose whether to just accept that unfairness or we can mitigate that unfairness as best we can.

The coronavirus crisis is exposing the weaknesses of capitalism, there is no denying it. One measly virus, one month of quarantine, and most of the population in most countries cannot survive without government assistance. There are virtually no people in the wealthy Western world who can handle being out of a job for a couple of months. Capitalism is like a swift or a shark - it lives so long as it moves, but put it on hold to stop an epidemic and it starves and dies. Don't even get me started on the USA: without single-payer healthcare, no one's savings are enough - one hospitalization and you're done. People who will get coronavirus and survive it, will not survive the bills.

The few countries who are faring best are the ones where welfare state is the strongest and where the population is most trusting and obedient to the government - countries like Germany, Denmark, New Zealand. When the dust settles, it is them who will define the new world.

Socialized economy and strong welfare state is the next swing of the pendulum. Suddenly, the idea of universal basic income makes a lot of sense. Nationalization of industries responsible for necessities such as healthcare, pharmaceuticals and housing, price control of food staples, mandatory nationwide surveillance - it's all coming and there's no stopping it.

All very good - IN THEORY. But it doesn't work in real life. So it's not coming.. particularly those bits at the end.

Also, some of those unfairnesses? if that's the word would be able to be resolved, but it would be unacceptable to take certain freedoms away from certain people. But it's perfectly fine to take other freedoms away from other people.

Unfortunately, I think further discussion of the details would be verboten around here, so I'm not going to explain it further.

[Womble]

All very good - IN THEORY. But it doesn't work in real life.

Are you saying that Germany isn't real?

[Falcon Horus]

Are you saying that Germany isn't real?

It's a fantasy state right next to that country that has a hellhole capital.

[Annoyed]

It's a fantasy state right next to that country that has a hellhole capital.

If you are referring to Washington, DC, I'll agree with you. It is a hellhole. But not, I suspect for the same reasons you would cite.

[Gatefan1976]

All very good - IN THEORY. But it doesn't work in real life. So it's not coming.. particularly those bits at the end.

Also, some of those unfairnesses? if that's the word would be able to be resolved, but it would be unacceptable to take certain freedoms away from certain people. But it's perfectly fine to take other freedoms away from other people.

Unfortunately, I think further discussion of the details would be verboten around here, so I'm not going to explain it further.

This is the VERY DEFINITION of capitalism you tool. If you can afford it, you can get it. You frame it under "who deserves it" or "who has worked hard enough" but it's the same, unfair system.
What you constantly fail to realise is that people can see value in both systems of government, and sometimes one becomes more relevant than the other. Right now, you need federal leadership, and the "adivice" you are getting from POTUS is essentially "kill yourself with bleach or disentfective"
Glad he was not in charge in WW1, or 2, or any other moment of crisis...…….
But of course. he was just joking...……

Wake up.
I'm sorry if this is overly political Baggie and Sky, but the recovery of all nations depends on the response of their leadership, and the US has failed at every turn because the POTUS is an entitled brat who is either too incompetent, or too arrogant to think he can lean anything.

[Annoyed]

This is the VERY DEFINITION of capitalism you tool. If you can afford it, you can get it. You frame it under "who deserves it" or "who has worked hard enough" but it's the same, unfair system.
What you constantly fail to realise is that people can see value in both systems of government, and sometimes one becomes more relevant than the other. Right now, you need federal leadership, and the "adivice" you are getting from POTUS is essentially "kill yourself with bleach or disentfective"
Glad he was not in charge in WW1, or 2, or any other moment of crisis...…….
But of course. he was just joking...……

Wake up.
I'm sorry if this is overly political Baggie and Sky, but the recovery of all nations depends on the response of their leadership, and the US has failed at every turn because the POTUS is an entitled brat who is either too incompetent, or too arrogant to think he can lean anything.

Umm... Yes, nice anti-trump rant. *pats GF on head*.

I wasn't even talking about economic issues. My initial point was that life itself is basically very unfair in many ways. And we don't even try to address many of the ways life is unfair. So if we want to address SOME ways that it is unfair, shouldn't we address all of them?

For example, some people are born with very high intelligence. Others are born dumb as a post. Should we lobotomize those with high IQ's so that they match those that have very low IQ's? That would be fair, wouldn't it? Apply the same thing to the other attributes listed. Destroy the talent of those born with special talents. Disfigure those that are born with attractive physical features. And on and on and on. Use the power of govt. to equalize everyone. (wasn't there an old Twilight Zone episode that explored this?)

Of course, that is nuts. We aren't willing to accept the imposition upon the rights of the people who would have to be "detuned" for lack of a better word. But we are perfectly willing to impose upon the rights of other people in our efforts to make life "fair" for people and groups that we choose to try to help. What a load of hypocritical BS.

You are fond of applying scientific principles. One very basic such principal is that unless a theory applies in all cases, it's not valid. Same logic applies here.

Life itself is not "fair". In fact, it is inherently grossly unfair from birth in many different ways. Some people are born with extraordinarily high intelligence, tremendous physical abilities & talents, extraordinarily good looks while others are born as dumb as a post, sometimes with horrible physical handicaps and ugly as trolls. They are also born into vastly different circumstances and zip codes. Some kids are born with silver spoons in their mouths and some are born to crack addled single parents who aren't remotely capable of raising kids. Some people are born with genetic diseases which will end their lives very early.

People don't want to admit this because it destroys the illusion of self-determination, but by far, the most important factors which determine the path of a persons life are the result of blind luck, they have nothing to say about it whatsoever. And luck very often has disastrous results.

Life itself is horribly unfair, in many different ways, and there is no way we can make things "fair" for everyone. So unless you can come up with ways to make life fair for everyone in all ways, we just have to play the hand we're dealt as best as we can.

All very good - IN THEORY. But it doesn't work in real life. So it's not coming.. particularly those bits at the end.

Also, some of those unfairnesses? if that's the word would be able to be resolved, but it would be unacceptable to take certain freedoms away from certain people. But it's perfectly fine to take other freedoms away from other people.

Unfortunately, I think further discussion of the details would be verboten around here, so I'm not going to explain it further.

[Falcon Horus]

If you are referring to Washington, DC, I'll agree with you. It is a hellhole. But not, I suspect for the same reasons you would cite.

No, I meant Brussels -- remember when Trump said it was a hellhole...