Dollie Llama putting the smack down on China?????

[sexual_chocolate]

i wenta to a the private schoola.

[STP]

Where is the outrage from the left? This is a clear violation of their core beliefs.

he is a world leader, he is a major figure in world events that directly impact the usa, the religion he represents is poorly understand by americans and thus seeing him speak on it is educational from a social-studies perspective, his is not an evangelical faith nor is his visit to make converts or really even talk about buddhism at all.

 

i'd have the pope into my class as a guest speaker if i could and i hate fucking catholics.

 

You're missing the point. Mister Llama is the appointed leader of a religion that used to run a country that was no more moral or democratic than the one that annexed it. The issue--for someone consistent with their beliefs--should be separation of church and state.

 

Just because someone is preaching peace and love doesn't mean the state should line our kids up for a parade.

 

Holy shit! The Dalai Lama's talk is definitely a plug for Buddhism directed to impressionable people especially children. Just like using endorsements by Adam Yauch of the Beastie Boys. Hey, it's cool! And it's cutting edge! It incorporates the latest findings in psychology and human behavior.

 

And damn, with Vajrayana, there's that sexual dimension to explore too.

 

And who couldn't use a little magic in their lives?

 

Gotta say though, your point is well-taken. This shouldn't be an all but sponsored event by the school district (or WEA or whomever) using the kids as a captive audience.

 

As i understand it, Buddhism is a syncretic religion but at its core it is deeply superstitious and irrational. Sure you can pick and choose, make it New Age but it, as any orthodox religion, is rooted in fundamentalism too.

[Fairweather]

The problem is that overall public schools are not doing a good job, even though they could be if they were fixed. This will never happen due to political realities, greed, and our wonderful teacher unions.

I am curious how teachers fighting for more pay makes the school system worse or un-good? I work for an increase every year, and I do not see a connection between that and the organization I work for needing to be "fixed".

i would also ask, given that i'm in a union you dislike, despite its stated top priority being the welfare of students, how exactly do you think my organization is an absolute roadblock to your solutions?

 

Your union prevents good teaches from being properly compensated and ensures that bad teachers are paid too much--or kept on. There's a system that exists called merit pay--and it seems to work for the rest of the world.

Edited April 17, 2008 by Fairweather

[ivan]

i agree that the concept of merit pay is anathema to many in the union world, but that is not the case w/ me, in part b/c i've taught in states that had merit pay systems and i'm in fact quite good at getting kids to pass standardized tests, which is what they base the merit pay on. that said, i don't know if you or anyone really has a good functional idea of what you really want to base your merit pay on and not end up w/ more of a monster than you started with. for example, if you make the standards based on just passing the class, don't i respond by just passing everyone? if its getting kids to memorize facts, don't i do just that to the detriment of writing essays or working on cause/effect thinking skills? how is this a fair system when i pull a group of students one year who have totally shit parents and shit attitudes that are impervious to my best teaching methods? how is this fair when i teach in a shit district or shit state?

 

how are you going to make your merit system fair, meaningful and manageable? and just how lucrative are you going to make it? i am not opposed to the theory of merit pay - far from it. for fucks sake, i was a fantastic student. i'm good at doing academic stuff, so if that's the standard i'm paid on, i'll embrace it wholeheartedly b/c i stand to profit from it. but how is it going to work?

[ivan]

other questions re: merit pay

 

how is it a fair system if the students and parents aren't held accountable too? if you're going to base my pay on the kids passing a test, then they damn well better have a serious incentive to pass too, like tying it to their graduation. but, as i've found in the states i've taught w/ that have such barriers, there becomes a huge incentive for the state to lower the bar for passing, so they aren't barring thousands of kids from graduating - the last year i taugh in virginia was absurd. i was proud that i got 100% of my 120 kids to pass a standardized test in world history (especially since the school was 100% free/reduced lunch, therefore very poor)...until i found out the state had decided that any score higher than a 35% would be considered passing! for fucks sake, if you just put "c" down for every answer you should get at least a 25%!

[ivan]

do you make the sytem then one that's just based on a kids ability to think and reason critically? shit - the dirty secret about that, i've realized after a decade of teaching, is that no one can really "teach you how to think." it's pretty much an inate ability that a teacher can encourage, much as a farmer waters a seed. but if a kids a goddamn stone, you can water and fertilize all you want and it's still jsut a fucking lump at the end of the day, no?

[Fairweather]

Adopt the model that seems to work in community colleges. No WEA membership or teaching certificate required. While I'm not a teacher, I am a parent--and a student. I'm sure you'll find flaws in what I came up with, but I didn't want your challenge to be met with only silence, so I anxiously await your flame. Here goes...

 

1.) You'll have to be prepared to kiss some administration ass. Just like folks do in the private sector. Not pretty, I know.

2.) You'll have to gain the respect of your colleagues. They know who's teaching and who's sucking public teat. Their opinions should be part of your weighted eval/merit increase.

3.) Respect of your students. Even hard-ass teachers garner the respect of the students they instruct. Again; some very lightly weighted input on your evaluation would be appropriate.

4.) Standardized tests have to play at least a part. Might not be totally fair. Too bad. (If my district's sales performance is down through no fault of my own; economic downturn, idiotic corporate pricing mandates, competitive disadvantage, etc ...it's still my fault. That's just the way it is.)

5.) Balanced against standardized tests should be some sort of scheme whereby a teacher who demonstrates the capacity to help a student find his/her niche is doubly rewarded. This would probably be somewhat subjective, but it could be done. Maybe each teacher could be quietly and randomly assigned 'project children' through which his performance could be measured.

6.) Abandon the goal of college for all. Bring back vocational/trade school track. Our current system is pushing kids who aren't college material (yet) right out the door.

7.) Restore discipline. Give teachers reasonable immunity from legal and administrative retribution when they take measures to maintain order in their classrooms--including corporal punishment.

8.) Incentives for the recruitment of more male teachers. I don't know what the stats are, but I suspect many boys with "issues" at school already have more than enough female role models in their lives.

9.) Pay educators who teach inside their credentials more $$ (ie: math teachers have a BS/MS Math, history teachers have a BA/MA history, etc...).

10.) Cut admin pay and staff levels. Immediately. Put the money and the bodies into the classrooms.

11.) You will never get the parent(s) of non-performing students to provide meaningful help at home. They are either not academically capable of doing so, working two jobs to pay rent, or just don't care. There is likely a genetic component involved as well. ...Or just maybe, Johnny's hormone-addled brain will finally fire up when he's twenty four and he will go on to do great things. Seriously.

12.) Pay scale for post-union era teachers? Just off the top of my head: $28,000 for probation/no exp/(or shitty ones). $100,000 for outstanding.

 

 

[sexual_chocolate]

Holy shit! The Dalai Lama's talk is definitely a plug for Buddhism directed to impressionable people especially children.

 

where do you get this? a bit of a strange position to take, considering the dl's views on one changing their religion (as in "don't do it").

 

 

 

 

Gotta say though, your point is well-taken. This shouldn't be an all but sponsored event by the school district (or WEA or whomever) using the kids as a captive audience.

 

i've personally seen some early polling results: over 75% of the kids who went are now converting to buddhism!

 

 

As i understand it, Buddhism is a syncretic religion but at its core it is deeply superstitious and irrational. Sure you can pick and choose, make it New Age but it, as any orthodox religion, is rooted in fundamentalism too.

 

these charges might, for the thinking person, require some sort of factual underpinning; care to provide?

 

i think when buddhism traveled to tibet and was incorporated into the existing animistic bon religion, many aspects of it changed.

 

perhaps if you had said "tibetan buddhism has "superstitious" aspects", you might have been a bit more accurate than simply making ungrounded generalizations. just a thought.

[STP]

Holy shit! The Dalai Lama's talk is definitely a plug for Buddhism directed to impressionable people especially children.

 

where do you get this? a bit of a strange position to take, considering the dl's views on one changing their religion (as in "don't do it").

Overtly no. I'm taking the position that nearly any time a religious figure speaks publicly in this manner then it is a subtle plug through example as opposed to the proselytization most people dislike.

 

 

Gotta say though, your point is well-taken. This shouldn't be an all but sponsored event by the school district (or WEA or whomever) using the kids as a captive audience.

 

i've personally seen some early polling results: over 75% of the kids who went are now converting to buddhism!

 

For their part, they have an interfaith component in the Seeds of Compassion event. Some religious leaders including the Pope believe that secular humanism (atheism, materialism) is the greater threat to our values than a competing religion.

As i understand it, Buddhism is a syncretic religion but at its core it is deeply superstitious and irrational. Sure you can pick and choose, make it New Age but it, as any orthodox religion, is rooted in fundamentalism too.

 

these charges might, for the thinking person, require some sort of factual underpinning; care to provide?

My bad, I'm not as precise as some others but on the other hand, maybe it's the nascent aspect of my writing.

i think when buddhism traveled to tibet and was incorporated into the existing animistic bon religion, many aspects of it changed.

And, also it's incorporation of the pantheistic aspect of Hinduism

perhaps if you had said "tibetan buddhism has "superstitious" aspects", you might have been a bit more accurate than simply making ungrounded generalizations. just a thought.

I mean superstitious in its basis of supernaturalism. I don't mean it in the sense of it being false. Also, as CG Jung put it, to paraphrase, even if something doesn't have concrete reality something by virtue of having conceptual existence can be as real as something material. Is it true? Does it exist? Does it have impact on your reality?

 

[sk]

Ah, so we can pay to educate your kids, but you won't kick in to keep other people's kids healthy enough to go to school?

 

Funny, I paid taxes which educated "other people's" kids before I had kids in school, and will be paying for "other people's" kids in just a few years. Ditto for medical care of others. And I'm sure I've kicked in more than my fair share over the years, since I've always paid income and payroll deduction taxes.

 

And I'm coughing up at least $1000 a month for insurance, but hey, keep pretending that YOU pay for MY kids.

 

 

I assure you that I pay significantly more taxes than you do. But that is beside the point. Why would it seem like I am "pretending" that I pay for your kids, but you feel justified in saying that they will support me when I am old? Can you see the problem there?

 

wont it be the children of today who pay your social security, medicare and medicade? we are certinly paying for our parents generation now. the problem being, their generation out numbers ours drasticly. because they had fewer children it will be a significant strain on the economy when all the boomers hit retirement.

[sexual_chocolate]

I mean superstitious in its basis of supernaturalism. I don't mean it in the sense of it being false. Also, as CG Jung put it, to paraphrase, even if something doesn't have concrete reality something by virtue of having conceptual existence can be as real as something material. Is it true? Does it exist? Does it have impact on your reality?

 

what is this "supernaturalism" that you refer to in siddharta's teachings?

[STP]

Its underpinning of faith. For instance, the belief in multiple rebirths, the continuity of the subtle body.

 

I realize that philosophers such as Nagarjuna logically developed the system but on what ultimate basis? Observations of existence which crystallized into a root system of thought?

 

Can you really call it Buddhism if it sheds those bases if we no longer take it as truth? In other words, strip the religious garb from the ethics?

 

 

[tokyobob]

This entire discussion is depressing me, I'm going to get my .40 cal and king james.

[archenemy]

I assure you that I pay significantly more taxes than you do. But that is beside the point.

 

But yet you highlighted this.

 

Your modesty is modest.

I have no modesty around the professional/financial success I have worked hard for my entire adult life. I've fought hard on many fronts and I am proud of what I've attained.

So take your expectations of "modesty" and shove them up your ass.

[archenemy]

Ah, so we can pay to educate your kids, but you won't kick in to keep other people's kids healthy enough to go to school?

 

Funny, I paid taxes which educated "other people's" kids before I had kids in school, and will be paying for "other people's" kids in just a few years. Ditto for medical care of others. And I'm sure I've kicked in more than my fair share over the years, since I've always paid income and payroll deduction taxes.

 

And I'm coughing up at least $1000 a month for insurance, but hey, keep pretending that YOU pay for MY kids.

 

 

I assure you that I pay significantly more taxes than you do. But that is beside the point. Why would it seem like I am "pretending" that I pay for your kids, but you feel justified in saying that they will support me when I am old? Can you see the problem there?

 

wont it be the children of today who pay your social security, medicare and medicade? we are certinly paying for our parents generation now. the problem being, their generation out numbers ours drasticly. because they had fewer children it will be a significant strain on the economy when all the boomers hit retirement.

Muffy, have you looked at what SSI pays? My answer to your question (the same I answered to K3) is no, I do not expect to rely on SSI. I save more than 20% of my income every year in preparation for retirement and have done so for a long time. I have no plans to ensure my care to the hands of strangers with a system that may not be there when I am old. I was raised to believe that I must take care of myself. I have done so since I was 16 and I plan on doing everything in my power to be able to continue to do so until I am 116.

[ivan]

Adopt the model that seems to work in community colleges. No WEA membership or teaching certificate required. While I'm not a teacher, I am a parent--and a student. I'm sure you'll find flaws in what I came up with, but I didn't want your challenge to be met with only silence, so I anxiously await your flame. Here goes...

 

1.) You'll have to be prepared to kiss some administration ass. Just like folks do in the private sector. Not pretty, I know.

2.) You'll have to gain the respect of your colleagues. They know who's teaching and who's sucking public teat. Their opinions should be part of your weighted eval/merit increase.

3.) Respect of your students. Even hard-ass teachers garner the respect of the students they instruct. Again; some very lightly weighted input on your evaluation would be appropriate.

4.) Standardized tests have to play at least a part. Might not be totally fair. Too bad. (If my district's sales performance is down through no fault of my own; economic downturn, idiotic corporate pricing mandates, competitive disadvantage, etc ...it's still my fault. That's just the way it is.)

5.) Balanced against standardized tests should be some sort of scheme whereby a teacher who demonstrates the capacity to help a student find his/her niche is doubly rewarded. This would probably be somewhat subjective, but it could be done. Maybe each teacher could be quietly and randomly assigned 'project children' through which his performance could be measured.

6.) Abandon the goal of college for all. Bring back vocational/trade school track. Our current system is pushing kids who aren't college material (yet) right out the door.

7.) Restore discipline. Give teachers reasonable immunity from legal and administrative retribution when they take measures to maintain order in their classrooms--including corporal punishment.

8.) Incentives for the recruitment of more male teachers. I don't know what the stats are, but I suspect many boys with "issues" at school already have more than enough female role models in their lives.

9.) Pay educators who teach inside their credentials more $$ (ie: math teachers have a BS/MS Math, history teachers have a BA/MA history, etc...).

10.) Cut admin pay and staff levels. Immediately. Put the money and the bodies into the classrooms.

11.) You will never get the parent(s) of non-performing students to provide meaningful help at home. They are either not academically capable of doing so, working two jobs to pay rent, or just don't care. There is likely a genetic component involved as well. ...Or just maybe, Johnny's hormone-addled brain will finally fire up when he's twenty four and he will go on to do great things. Seriously.

12.) Pay scale for post-union era teachers? Just off the top of my head: $28,000 for probation/no exp/(or shitty ones). $100,000 for outstanding.

 

think i've been pretty flame-low on this thread.

 

i don't see the union as being your biggest opponent or enemy on many of your listed items.

 

i don't happen to put a lot of stock in a teaching certificate either, mostly b/c the process of getting one is pretty bureaucratic and meaningless, as is the process of re-newing it. most education classes are circle-jerks and utterly worthless.

 

so, to your list:

 

1. i don't run rough-shod over my admin now, here or in any state. my last school in particuliar had a very strict, command/control style leadership taht was highly effective for the inner-city environmnet it operated it. do you think teachers/unions are in charge? the reality varies from school to school. in my current school, the rich parents pretty much own/control everythign.

 

2. i don't mind being evaluated by my peers, but they'll have to come in for observations, which is extra work for them and will require substitutes. the reality of a teacher's life is we pretty much all work in obscurity - that is, no one really knows what the hell i'm doing or how good i am b/c they're all busy working in their own rooms w/ their own kids during the school day.

 

3. i don't mind some small evaluation from my students/their parents either

 

4. i've already said standardized tests are fine as a part of evaluation.

 

5. i already take on "project kids" each year, and for that to be meaningful, it can't really be evaluated - the kids i try to take special interest in are deeply damaged or deranged, and the succes of any strategy of dealing w/ them heavily governed by chance. if you evaluate someone on this, they'd game the system and pick easy targets, ignoring the kids who truly need them.

 

6. you're mistaken if you think all kids are being pushed towards college. the esd i'm in has a very strong skills center program, and our career center in my school works very hard to put kids in all kinds of apprentice programs and highlight non-college pathways. that said, i believe the stats show an increasingly huge divide between the eventual salaries of folks w/ college degrees and those w/o.

 

7. you want teachers to have the right to strike their kids? i certainly wouldn't mind whaling on some of my charges, but in case you haven't noticed, society at large has turned its back on CP as a discipline tool, for better or worse.

 

8. you want to pay male teachers more than female teachers in order to recruit them more heavily? uhhh, okay. i'm sure that won't piss off a huge # of folks. at any rate, i don't see the need. at least in high school, there are already a large # of males. my humanities department is more than 50% male. assuming we're still somewhat stuck to that 20th century notion as the male in a family being the chief bread-winner though, it makes sense that men would prefer something more high-paying then teaching.

 

9. WA state already requires all teachers to have credentials to teach w/n their subject area.

 

10. cut admin pay? okay. their high pay is necessary to attract competence too of course. even if you pay them the same as teachers you're not reintroducing that much money into the system. i don't see that much "fat" walking around my school. most staff members are doing something useful that directly involves kids. that may not be as true at the district level admin, but then i have no real sense what the hell at all those folks are doing.

 

11. this point is not a suggestion, but does explain why schools are always going to have problems, no matter what you change. schools are mirrors - they reflect society. you can distort the mirror all you want and it doesn't change reality.

 

12. i'll take 100k$ a year and certianly think i'd be good enough to earn it. someone more math-happy then myself can figure this out, but assumign that salaries for teachers makes up the principle cost of education, adn seeing as how 100K is at least twice as much as the current average, are you prepared to increase spending on schools that much?

 

regardless, unless the compensation is made more attractive to attact a much larger pool of qualified teachers, you're not going to improve a damn thing. no one will swim through an ocean of shit for a pair of plastic earrings.

 

my recommendation, at least for high school - make the kids have to earn their place. kids who can't maintain an acceptable gpa or discipline record should be shown the door. public schools are instead essentially jails, housing a huge population of disaffected, disinclined dipshits who divert me from my purpose. feel free to have "work camps" on some sorta ccc-model for those who can't make the schools work for them so you don't have a large teen-gang element on the street. i'm tired of having classes where 50% of the kids are failing and damn near 90% are proud of never studying and never working.

[sexual_chocolate]

Its underpinning of faith. For instance, the belief in multiple rebirths, the continuity of the subtle body.

 

from what passages of siddharta's teachings do you take this? what i've been exposed to is his reluctance to even engage in speculative conversations regarding "soul", "god", "subtle body", etc.

 

I think some citations from a body of liturgy might be in order, so this isn't some disembodied speculative conversation about "buddhism".

 

and nagarjuna came after siddharta.

 

 

 

[STP]

Well, we're talking about Buddhism as it exists today so Nararjuna is just as revelant as Shakyamuni. Some of the ideas predate Gautama, ideas such as karma and rebirth. I'm not sure you can get back to the bare essence to what was originally propagated apart from the community or sangha any more than you can realistically get back to a Christianity that has only what Jesus said apart from the establishment of the Church.

 

Even people with a rudimentary understanding of Buddhism know that the story of Siddharta's journey to enlightenment is a central part of the religion. As Siddharta sat under the Bodhi tree his mind experienced remembrance of countless rebirths (anamnesis).

[sexual_chocolate]

Well, we're talking about Buddhism as it exists today so Nararjuna is just as revelant as Shakyamuni.

 

we are? and he is? sounds like you're making up some funny rules here!

 

but even taking that as the starting point, you'll run into a hell of a wide range of "buddhisms", from exoteric layman's buddha and god worship stuff, to stuff i personally think is more in line with siddharta's teachings, ie. personal experiential practice of the path, sans superstitions and beliefs.

 

Some of the ideas predate Gautama, ideas such as karma and rebirth. I'm not sure you can get back to the bare essence to what was originally propagated apart from the community or sangha any more than you can realistically get back to a Christianity that has only what Jesus said apart from the establishment of the Church. Is that enough backpedaling for you?

 

it'd be slim pickings if you tried to have a "christianity" with only jesus's teachings, now wouldn't it? kinda vague, unknown, few direct quotes, etc.

 

whereas gautama taught for what, 45 years. very little about his life seems to be a mystery, so there is more certainty as to what he really said. better preserved teachings.

 

as far as getting "back to the essence": you try, with a scholarly approach, to do just that, and then try to be honest with the results.

 

No seriously, even people with a rudimentary understanding of Buddhism know that the story of Siddharta's journey to enlightenment is a central part of the religion. As Siddharta sat under the Bodhi tree his mind experienced remembrance of countless rebirths (anamnesis).

 

sure people are aware of the story of his "enlightenment". and?

 

from my understanding, he wasn't into making a "religion"; he was into teaching people a practice that had lead to his "enlightenment", or liberation. i don't get the feeling he was into a cult of personality, trying to convert people. in fact, it seems he did just the opposite, telling people not to take his word for it but to try the practice.

 

as far as his past life experiences go, that's his gig. you can either believe in them or not, or perhaps have a more esoteric understanding than a simple "soul reincarnation" gig, but that's up to you. maybe it's a central part of "buddhism" to the layman's exoteric understanding, but i hardly view it as a necessary belief.

 

just remember there are more sophisticated ways of understanding "karma" and "reincarnation" than some blind belief in soul and subtle body migrations.

[archenemy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gP9deiu-FY&feature=related

[STP]

Uh...samsara (cyclic existence) and nirvana? That's not central to Buddhism regardless of what part of the spectrum you're talking about?

 

Your understanding sounds more like New Age adaptations of Buddhism. So you are a practioner? Did you take a vow to save all sentient beings?

 

As far as cult of personality, Shakyamuni expressed his belief that 'this' cannot be taught, only the way pointed. Even so, the figures have taken mythic significance.

 

It's similar to the Jeffersonian Bible, if you take away the mysticism, the miracles, the supernatural and are left with the just the historical personage and the ethics then what do you have?

 

 

[tomtom]

I assure you that I pay significantly more taxes than you do. But that is beside the point.

 

But yet you highlighted this.

 

Your modesty is modest.

I have no modesty around the professional/financial success I have worked hard for my entire adult life. I've fought hard on many fronts and I am proud of what I've attained.

So take your expectations of "modesty" and shove them up your ass.

[archenemy]

Looks like you'll be poking yourself in the eye when you do that.

[Peter_Puget]

just remember there are more sophisticated ways of understanding "karma" and "reincarnation" than some blind belief in soul and subtle body migrations.

 

Now we are talkin' deferents and epi-cycles!

[sexual_chocolate]

Uh...samsara (cyclic existence) and nirvana? That's not central to Buddhism regardless of what part of the spectrum you're talking about?

 

Your understanding sounds more like New Age adaptations of Buddhism. So you are a practioner? Did you take a vow to save all sentient beings?

 

As far as cult of personality, Shakyamuni expressed his belief that 'this' cannot be taught, only the way pointed. Even so, the figures have taken mythic significance.

 

It's similar to the Jeffersonian Bible, if you take away the mysticism, the miracles, the supernatural and are left with the just the historical personage and the ethics then what do you have?

 

 

it seems like you have it figured out.

 

congratulations!