Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
I'm not sure why this is being brought up. I have no problem with spending money helping kids with learning disabilities if it can be proven that the money is being spent efficiently.
But simply generalizing things like class sizes and saying we need to spend more money to get class sizes down to 25 students because kids in classes with 35 kids aren't getting a proper education is to me a pretty dumb excuse.
Especially when people like MMF then use that logic to say that is why kids drop out of school. Your son already has something a LOT of other kids don't have. Parents that care. And parents can be a VERY important influence on how a child approaches school. Saying that we need to reduce class sizes to keep kids from dropping out is a ignorant statement when 1 on 1 teaching won't help a kid if his parents don't influence him in such a way that schooling is important.
|
Innovative ideas are needed in education, but it shouldn't be seen as a cost savings measure because if you start cutting funding for education you do see increase in class sizes, decreased educational opportunities (particularly for at risk youth) and worse outcomes.
Honestly I am agaisnt cutting money for education because larger class sizes have worse outcomes for those who are at the greatest risk and who as you say have parents that don't give a crap, those are the kids that the education system needs to attempt to help as much as is possible. When you do have larger class sizes I really do believe that it becomes more difficult, if not impossible for the teachers in the class to spend individualized time with those students.
You mention that you had some long distance interactive TV teacher thing, I am going to guess that requires a great deal of self-study which often comes from parental attitudes and beliefs, would such a system be effective for youth who wasn't raised with the same values - doubtful.
I just think that if you are looking at cutting government funded programs cutting those which directly benefit the youth seems like a slap in the face to future generations, especially when one of the big tenets of the Wildrose Party supporters seems to be how we have to save money for the future generations.