plainoldme wrote:Quote:So, David, you think that kids ought to go through life without the ability to read.
I don 't think that thay ought to do that.
Quote: What jobs will they be able to do?
I had this conversation with my mother
well over half a century ago,
when I was 6.
She enlightened me as to the value of education,
when I challenged jurisdiction
(" where in the HELL do thay get the right to make ME go over THERE ? ")
to which I acquiesced, however grudgingly.
Quote: You think the teacher has no right
to bring students above level one literacy,
Yes.
The teacher has the right to vote,
the right to go to church
and the right to keep and bear arms,
but he has no right to
to bring students above level one literacy.
Look at it this way:
if a teacher were prevented by his students
from voting or going to chuch,
then the students wud have violated the rights of their teacher,
but if the students merely IGNORED the teacher,
wud thay thereby violate the teacher 's rights ?
Wud the teacher be rightfully entitled to compensation therefor ?
[quote]
which means this person can sign their name
and do enough math to add and subtract and,
if they were to read a sports story in the paper,
would be able to find one fact.
OK, since we r discussing education,
perhaps u 'll enlighten me as to Y u have chosen
to use the plural of " their name " when this refers to a single person,
to wit: " this person " ?
Y the failure to co-ordinate singular n plural usages ?
( Note that in my use of fonetic spelling,
I am in
overt rebellion and repudiation of the orthografic paradime,
insofar as it is inconsistent with logic n efficiency;
does YOUR decision in this matter reflect a choice
to rebel against the logic of numbers ? )
David
P.S.:
If I sound a little too ruff,
I 'm only having a little fun with logical concepts here;
please accept it in that spirit.
[/b]