Thursday, October 12, 2006

Local Companies Partner with Schools

I pitched a similiar program in my school counseling graduate course. I have an extensive proposal all typed up and ready to go.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

This program is total bullshit. What a really bad idea.

I absolutely agree with the critics cogent argument:

"The answer is not to put our kids up for sale," he said. "The answer is for school leaders to band together and demand revocation of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and send the money back to schools, police, fire departments, and others who are begging for funds."

Anonymous said...

I thought you would totally be against this; after all, don't schools already have way way too much money?

This is only making the problem worse.

Anonymous said...

Whose money is it?

Diatribe said...

Do you do drugs?

Anonymous said...

Oh, so when you talk about how schools have more monaey and worse results, you're not actually saying that schools don't need more money- since you're in favor of them getting more money, just not from you. I'll remember that next time you make that argument.

Diatribe said...

First off - schools are not really worse. They are just the same. And when the goverment keeps spending more and more money and there is no improvement - you need to ask yourself if more money from the govt is worth it. Is it really making any difference? What if we were spending what we used to be 10 years ago? Would scores be the same? Would graduation rates be the same?
So, everyime I hear someone mention that schools are desperarly underfunded - I have to wonder if they honestly know the facts and figures. But if outside PRIVATE companies want to spend their own money on something - why should I be against that? That is a persons choice. I am always in favor of individual choices as long as it does not harm someone else. If a business and school believes they can team up and do some good for the kids I am all for it. Why wouldnt I be?

Anonymous said...

Of course there's no reason oyu should be against it. But why should you be so enthusiastic about it as to write up a proposal about it on your own time, when we've seen that giving schools more money doesn't improve their performance? Shouldn't you just not care since it won't make a difference?

Diatribe said...

What I liked about it was students get to be part of a job that they might want to pursue as a career. They get the hands on experience before they decide what major for college. And this is not just a paper filing internship but you have a mentor that shows you the ropes at the job you are intersted in. Then businesses in the community show they care about the students. Schools get some extra money. It is seriosuly a win win win for everyone.

Anonymous said...

Darwin's point is valid if our criticism of school funding is simply that funding wont fix the problem. If out position is correct, then additional raw funding from any source will fail to help schools.

1. If i remeber correctly schools had to compete with each other for coroporate sponsorship. If this is the case then this is clearly not a matter of simply just giving money to schools. I might also note that is also not an example of simply 'providing infrastructure' either.

2. Secondly, others throwing money at a problem doesnt actually bother me. Its someone else throwing my money at a problem that bothers me. Particular when that money was acquired coercively.

Anonymous said...

I think 2. doesn't really get around my objection (because I feel like your previous arguments have been that more money isn't helping, rather than that you don't want your money being taken to help... although you've certainly made that argument as well at different times). But 1. is a fair response that I thinks defeats my objection. I WOULD that I think government money could be offered to schools in a competitive way, bringing the same benefits, except that that was one of the ideas behind No Child Left Behind, which sucks. So good response.