Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Being Naive: it must make it easier for some sleep at night

Paul Lambert over at Save The Hilliard Schools wants to believe. He does. And the Hilliard City School District wants his tax money, along with the tax money of every other property owner in that district. So, a little naivety on Paul's part and the levy is in the bag.

Does Paul really believe that once Hilliard passes its levy, things will change? Does he really believe that?

Paul, You are about to learn a big boy lesson. I hope that you take it to heart the next time a levy is on your ballot.

note: You can almost hear the Hilliard district officials snickering behind Paul's back. He's the perfect useful idiot.

18 comments:

Paul said...

Jim: Please quit being such an ass. Just when I start gaining some respect for your positions, you say crap like this.

If you want to engage in debate, fine. I'm willing to listen and learn, but before doing so, I need to believe you will pay me the same respect.

Right now, I don't.

PL

Jim Fedako said...

Paul,

This is not a debate. Mine is an observation of your actions and your stated beliefs.

Is it crap because it's wrong? Or is it crap because you don't want to face reality?

I speak from experience as the naive, useful idiot of my district. I formed citizens committees and served on board committees before running, and formed additional committees while serving.

Every committee was coopted in the end and used exclusively for district purposes -- the taxpayer and parent be damned.

Stand back and read what you are saying. "I support your levy but you must agree to be held accountable."

The district never has to get to your second clause ... and they never will.

But if hubris sends you tilting your windmill, good luck. You will do what no one has ever done before -- convince the alcoholic to quit drinking right after setting him up with drinks for the evening.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if Paul can point to a single district in the state that curtailed spending immediately after passing a levy? A single case would do.

Anonymous said...

Paul,
I think I warned you soon after your first link to and post on Jimmy's blog. Jim doesn't want quality public schools. He doesn't want public schools that are run well. He doesn't want public schools that negotiate tough contracts with teachers. Even though it seems that that is what he is fighting for and writing for he doesn't want quality public schools.

The fact is, Jim doesn't want public schools. He doesn't care about anyone's children but his own. He shows his love for his children by giving them a great home school education. He wants his money to stay in his pocket and be damned with any public effort of education.

Jim may be a loving father but he is an awful citizen of a country that values public education.

Jim Fedako said...

"Jim may be a loving father but he is an awful citizen of a country that values public education."

I accept your first clause but am lost on your second. Are you refering to Prussia under Bismarck?

"The fact is, Jim doesn't want public schools."

You are correct. I think public schools are evil. If that was missed on this blog, I've got some serious font changes to make.

That said, I also know many folks who do send their children to public schools. And I have inside knowledge (serving on the board for years). I also know many folks who are forced to pay for the school system.

If this is the system I have to support, I want to make certain that my money does not simply fund salary increases that are double the private sector. And I do not want to support political and perverse nonsense.

"He doesn't care about anyone's children but his own."

If that was true, I would remain silent and let other's children wallow in the muck of public schools. Instead, I tell it like it is.

"He doesn't want public schools that negotiate tough contracts with teachers."

Tough contracts? Where? Folks are being laid off right and left, and you think a 6.5% guaranteed salary increase is tough? Hmmm.

Really, this as to be your most inane comment. Truly tough contracts lead to lower taxes. Why in the world would I write a blog to raise my taxes? Some people!

"He wants his money to stay in his pocket ..."

Well, who doesn't? You simply want my money for your benefit. I note that you are not freely supporting my home education. Do you not care about my children?

By the way: I like the use of "Jimmy" from someone too scared to use his(?) name.

C.C. said...

Jim:

Does the district still receive a state contribution for each of your children, even though they are home schooled.

Does the district compensate you for transportation like they do children who choose private schools?

I sense they don't reward you or compensate you,with your money, at all for saving them money, same as the federal and state governments give tax incentives to 2 working parents for childcare....but no credit whatsoever to the single income home with a stay at home parent!

You are absolutely correct...Since we do pay taxes on property, sales and income at all levels of government, we have the right to question and audit how our tax dollars are used.

Whether we are for or against public schools...as long as we fund them...it is our right to demand accountability!

I actually wish Paul well in holding them accountable. Yet after seeing the actions of OLSB and their Polit Bureau, I would caution Paul in his trust of Hilliard as well!

Anonymous said...

I just have one question.
You state that you believe public education is evil. Do you really believe that no public school teacher has pure intentions when she/he enters the profession i.e., he just really likes children and just wants to teach?

Jim Fedako said...

5:42 --

Public education is evil. I didn't say all teachers are evil -- though they gladly serve n evil entity.

But, does intent matter? There are private schools that need teachers also. Why not teach there? Then you are truly providing a desired and worthy service

Jim Fedako said...

C.C.:

I get no state aid. And I seek none.

My children do not count toward state funding. That is based on children at school during the October headcount.

We actually save the district some $50,000 in expenditures (give or take).

Paul needs a reason to support the district since he can't convince himself that a no vote sends a true message. So he constructs this mental game of "I will support and they will be accountable." Helps him sleep at night.

Having been on the other side of the board table, I can tell you that the district and its supporters laugh at such naivety.

My issue is that he is convincing others that Hilliard will reign in expenses after the levy is passed.

It's one thing to believe it yourself, it's another to act as a useful idiot.

Anonymous said...

My neighbor had a son and a daughter. Their son went to St. Charles and their daughter to CSG. Their neighbors criticized them for availing themselves of the government school bus that shuttles kids in private schools back and forth. Imagine. They and others are paying enormous taxes to the government schools that they don't even use and also pay for the buses and the neighbors resent their using the buses. Yet we who sent our kids to private schools or home schooled or perhaps had no children are criticized for being against the schools and for paying and paying for them.

Anonymous said...

I see the point about teaching in a private school, though given the public to private school ratio, I don't think there would be enough teaching jobs to go around for those who wish to pursue this path, so those teachers would not have the opportunity to do the good they wish to do. I doubt most see it as gladly serving an evil entity. I believe that most teachers, in public or private settings, teach simply because they love kids and want to teach them.

Jim Fedako said...

7:09 --

I still want to be a professional cyclist but there are not enough openings for someone 44 years old. But that is what I wish to do.

My point is that your statement isn't sufficient reason for choosing public schools over private -- if you believe them to be evil.

If you don't, then you knowingly serve the school agenda.

It's ironic that no Olentangy teacher has ever publicly nor privately (to me) questioned what goes on. And these folks are tenured and cannot be fired.

Think about that for a bit. Especially when you say that teachers altruistically want to help children. I ask: Help do what?

Jim Fedako said...

6:47 --

It's envy, pure and simple. Call it a public good, but it's based on envy in the end.

Anonymous said...

I see your point but you don't have to spend several years earning and paying for a degree to professionally cycle.
A teacher has to earn a degree to teach in the vast majority of private or public schools, so that is the difference. I am not sure I want someone without a degree teaching my high school student physics for example.

So, what is a person to do if she/he wants to use the degree he/she earned but no private school jobs are available?

Should she/he then simply "settle" for whatever work is available regardless of the ability to succeed or feel any sort of satisfaction in the job or profession?

And by help children, I simply meant help children learn science or math or history, just as a pediatrician wishes to help children remain healthy or a youth pastor wishes to help children grow in their faith.
I still believe that most teachers are in the profession because they care about kids.

Jim Fedako said...

8:03 --

I find it strange that you seem to insist that a teacher deserves a teaching position based on the pursuit of a degree. Nothing in life is guarenteed.

Keep in mind that your degree is an investment that may go bust. Why should a someone with a teachering certificate expect a job? There are many educated folks on Wall Street that currently have no employment whatsoever. The stories of cabbies with physic degrees are true.

Something to consider: Have you ever wondered why almost all teachers are Democrats who believe in redistribution and all the other -isms leading us to ruin? Hmmm.

Anonymous said...

My brother-in-law grew up in a family which is conservative/Rep.. He was a poor student so he went to a rather mediocre college and became a teacher and there met a girl (also getting her teaching degree) from a liberal/Dem. family. He married her and converted. Her mother was a teacher, her father worked for the State, her sister works for the State (prison guard), and now their children both work for the State and their spouses work for the State. They're all heavily into liberal politics. Just an observation.

Anonymous said...

I didn't say a teacher deserves a teaching job. Most people, regardless of degree, wish to pursue the field in which they earn the degree, that's all. So, if a teacher wishes to use his/her degree in education and a job isn't available in a private school, she/he may pursue one in the public sector. I doubt many idealistic 22 year olds consider much else than working in their field with an age group of children they like to work with. If a job is available in the private sector they take it , or if one is available in the public sector they take it . Teachers move between these entities frequently, and not just private to public, as some might believe.
Anyway, I realize that not everyone can or will work in the fields in which they are trained. Most will work to support their families in any way necessary, but most would prefer to work in their areas of expertise.

Anonymous said...

8:03

"I am not sure I want someone without a degree teaching my high school student physics for example."

Well, I really wouldn't want someone with just an education degree teaching my kid physics.

Edison was home schooled. Franklin was self-taught. Many of the world's greatest scientists and inventors had no formal education at all.

Then there are the thousands of successful professionals who have attained fame and fortune without having a college degree--many of whom made their money in IT/computer science or engineering.
Bill Gates--college dropout
Larry Ellison--college dropout
Michael Dell--college dropout
Carl Icahn--college dropout
Kirk Kerkorian--college dropout
Wayne Huizenga--college dropout
David Geffen...
Steve Jobs...
Ralph Lauren...
Richard Branson...

And this is where the whole teaching profession shows its dishonesty. Someone who had worked for NASA for 30 years would not be able to teach physics in a public school unless/until s/he obtained a Professional Educator License, which entails the following:

* Meet all of the requirements and hold a Provisional Educator License.
* Successfully complete a one-year Entry Year Program with a PRAXIS III assessment.
* Complete at least 12 semester hours of reading coursework for applicants for Early Childhood, Middle Childhood and Intervention Specialist licenses.

Additional areas may be added to a current license by successfully completing an appropriate preparation program and passing the applicable portions of the PRAXIS II exams.

So, how many (former) practicianers teach in public schools? The number is so low that it's statistically zero. How many math teachers in public schools were actual mathemeticians at one time? How many economics teachers were actual economists? How many biology, chemistry or physics teachers were practitioners in their fields? None.

Watch where you throw those stones.