This is off-topic, but I keep seeing Anglo being used (maybe I just keep running into your comments). Is it suppose to be insulting like in the context of your comment? Is it descriptive? How do you know if someone is an Anglo online? Do you feel like it has any negative connotations being used? Feel free to answer any of the questions or none at all lol, curiosity got the better of me.
Cataphract
Really great dialogue and discourse going on in this post. Thank you everyone for your opinions and viewpoints. Definitely have a lot to think over on my current stance. Exactly what I was missing lately from the social media I've been consuming (actual discussions with merits both sides hold).
I'm not really understanding this comment. Teaching during the pandemic was chaotic, yes. I don't think a skilled or unskilled principal made the difference for a lot of people (besides some mental support and I'm assuming you're referring to the position of principal). There were attendance rules for the districts around my area, grades were calculated regularly like before (not sure what you mean by "fair"), and the curriculum was maintained the same so I'm not sure where the ton of extra work was coming from.
This is all anecdotal from my perspective so if you had a school district that failed to properly follow protocol I apologize and sympathize with the situation you were in. I think most of the problem was how we transitioned with such a drastic change. Resources weren't properly reinvested, proper training support for educators wasn't given, and the students weren't prepared in a meaningful way for the shift.
In this day and age of online training though, for future employment, it could've been something that better situated students to handle obstacles they may encounter in the future (what school is suppose to prepare us for). Just looking at the stats for online education show more than 1/4 of all students are engaged in a form of distant learning. This is going to be something that only increases over time so we should be better prepared as a society to be flexible with transitions like WFH, etc. (source source)
You:
the US didn’t give a shit about it at all
Response:
the United States spent more than $9 billion on a dizzying array of programs to deter Afghanistan from supplying the world with heroin
You:
lmao, so?
That doesn’t prove it’s why they were there.
Now the goal post has been moved to WhY?!? were we there? Throw up some more pretty images to explain the situation please.
Thanks for clearing that up, I value your input.
person replies back with factual evidence contradicting your personal beliefs in a foreign war, "lmao, so?"
Where is here? The World News community? The only one I see whining is the pickle. Is this a small step away from saying people should go back from where they came from and leave this social space you've claimed as your own? IDK wtf you're thinking coming into someone else's post, refuting verified evidence, then proclaiming hate because its context makes the US look subpar. What's your point, you love the US, why come on here and have to ignorantly shout it?
I was simply replying what I thought the OP meant since no one was responding to the "Why?". I do not condone or agree with the original unpopular opinion, but it's nice to see that downvotes continue to be used for agreeing/disagreeing with statements instead of their intended usage.
How do you feel about government subsidies being used to bolster a free press? From past examples like oil, they don't become a shell company of the governments whims and I feel journalism is just as important to an educated populace in comparison to oil for our commerce.
I think it's something along the same vein as an overweight fitness instructor. I think it's an innate requisite that if someone is presenting as a professional, that has instructions for us to follow, that they at least have the appearance of following their own guidelines.
I typically don't downvote but here you are just factually wrong. "to get rid of student loan debt" would mean to abolish and pass legislation that actually ended all student loan debt in present and future. A feeble attempt at a 'one-time only' debt relief with no further policies or plans to eliminate all future educational costs is just a puppet show. I personally would've benefited from the debt relief, but would've preferred them addressing the rising costs and accessibility of higher education (the root of the problem).
Instead we got a repeal of AA and a move that would've benefited loan companies with a side effect that could possibly make getting future loans for under-privileged individuals that much harder (or more dangerous if loan companies decided to give out increasingly worse contracts if they believe the government will step in and pay the horrendous bills). There are better metrics to compare the parties with, "equal rights" is not one of them as they won't ever exist while class disparity is so rampant.
Equal rights isn't a new developing issue, here's a quote from over 60 years ago,
The assistant director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Hyman Bookbinder, in a frank statement on December 29, 1966, declared that the long-range costs of adequately implementing programs to fight poverty, ignorance and slums will reach one trillion dollars. He was not awed or dismayed by this prospect but instead pointed out that the growth of the gross national product during the same period makes this expenditure comfortably possible. It is, he said, as simple as this: “The poor can stop being poor if the rich are willing to become even richer at a slower rate.” Furthermore, he predicted that unless a “substantial sacrifice is made by the American people,” the nation can expect further deterioration of the cities, increased antagonisms between races and continued disorders in the streets. He asserted that people are not informed enough to give adequate support to anti-poverty programs, and he leveled a share of the blame at the government because it “must do more to get people to understand the size of the problem.” (source, bold by me)
Equal rights "advocates" love to posture and hand-wave historical figures like Dr. King, who rightly pointed out the next step to real equality in his book titled, "Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?".
One of the central themes of the book's messages is that of hope. King reflects upon the Civil Rights Movement. He discusses the question of what African-Americans should do with their new freedoms found in laws such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He concludes that all Americans must unite in order to fight poverty and create an equality of opportunity. King emphasizes that he is neither a Marxist nor a doctrinaire socialist; he instead advocates for a united social movement that would act within both the Republican and Democratic parties. (synopsis from wiki)
It goes "on and on" like this because it's all a show, the steps and problems have been laid bare for decades in the U.S. with no meaningful impact for the causes and class disparity is only getting worse. If the democrats in charge actually passed legislation that addressed inequality, then they wouldn't have anything to dangle in front of the donkey.
edit: If you're gonna give a downvote (probably who I was replying to), don't be a coward and at least bring some conversation to the table with your viewpoints. I'm just gonna have to assume your feelings were hurt and that's the only recourse you have if not.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/news/nasas-chandra-webb-combine-for-arresting-views.html <-- Direct link to the nasa website for HD pics, sought it out wanting a better resolution for a background.
I'll have to take your word on the interviews, I'm open to other perspectives which is why I initiated this dialogue with stating my confusion. I'm still not seeing the connections that I initially confronted. As you stated, the questions are usually answered and administered from top-down (department, district, then principal). I'm not sure on what effectiveness a "skilled" principal could have when the district is not prepared, though I could see a case for an unskilled principal not instituting/following change as instructed.
All of the questions you've brought up are valid whether there is a pandemic or not (which is why I specified your pandemic remark). When considering any fairness, edge cases will always be problems that need to be addressed. I agree the situation of overworking was exacerbated during the pandemic but existed long before that as funding and support systems have been slowly dwindled away.
I'm not sure on what the crux of this debate is but I feel like the light has been shifted from "education responsibility" to "pandemic bad/we need X". I believe education has been getting the short straw for decades and the pandemic was just the straw that broke the camel's back. A decent principal or administration assessing the health scenarios you presented would not fix the broken system. Schools being all paper based, the overworking of staff, students lack of reliable internet, not having a pre-pandemic plan ready (it's been known for a long time that it was a problem to arise soon), all of these are problems that needed to be addressed a long time ago. Most early education schools only have one I.T. person and usually doubles their role in another form (teaching classes as well).
I feel like teaching is chaotic as a whole regardless of the situation society faces. Hearing about how the pandemic was the root cause of the problem just sounds disingenuous and completely glosses over the need for distant education to be an effective tool for future students. Teachers should be available to help explain and instruct how to fill out health forms, just like tax forms and other important documentation that should be covered at some point in a students career. Classes should be hybrid, teachers should be familiar and take supplemental training for the new tech they are using. All of this should be countered with support so nothing is "added on" to the workload. Again, these aren't problems that were cleared up when the pandemic restrictions were lifted. Plenty of teachers are still on the edge of bailing as the system continues to decline.