view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
Babysitters already exist so that makes fuck-all sense, numbnuts.
Are they, though, really?
Do they?
School supplies and materials?
Costs of transportation?
Extracurricular activities?
Uniforms or dress codes?
Costs to eat?
Tutoring costs because your kid is in public school?
Technology access requirements for the modern world like tablets or computers with specific often paid software?
Field trips and special projects?
I dunno, it’s all starting to add up to a little more than free.
Unless you want the kids to grow up to be completely undeniably stupid, education has to happen at some point. Babysitters aren’t trained for or paid enough for that. Teachers aren’t paid enough for that.
Also all the costs you’re adding up are still nothing in comparison to having to pay a babysitter a livable hourly wage for 40+ hours a week, and then still have to feed and clothe the kids etc because the babysitter isn’t covering that for you out of their own pay.
So yes, on the point alone that you don’t have to personally employ someone on a full-time basis and pay them out of your own pocket just to make sure your kid doesn’t burn the house down while you’re gone, it is cheaper.
Don’t want to incur such costs? Don’t have kids that you have to do something with during the day.
Nobody’s denying that teachers keeping an eye on your kid slightly at school will prevent them from burning your house down, only that believing that’s the sole purpose of the teacher is asinine and so stupid it makes my brain hurt.
The people saying that obviously felt that way themselves in school and didn’t take it seriously. And it shows now.
He didn’t say “sole purpose”, he said “main job” in the context of what the typical lowest common denominator parent these days expects first from a school just so they can go to work. “Main job” implies there are other jobs teachers do that those same parents don’t consider as important as just keeping their kids busy so they can work. Perhaps you should read the post more carefully to avoid arguing against something that wasn’t argued in the first place.
The very existence of homework disproves this stupid theory.
It’s ok to be too stupid to understand the point he’s actually making. No one expects you to get past your shortsighted interpretation of the argument.
Now explain how you’re so stupid, likely from American public school education, that you can’t tell the difference between childcare, a simple babysitter watching your toddler for four hours, and everything teachers do separate from those things.
Imbecile.
He didn’t argue that. From here it seems like your own education was lacking reading comprehension.
Them:
Me: Teachers aren’t babysitters, numbnuts.
You: “you CaNt ReAd GoOd”
It’s amazing that you read that exact sentence and aren’t able to read between the lines that clearly he recognizes that teachers have normal teaching responsibilities, but that to the average parent who cannot be bothered to show up for parent teacher meetings to actually show concern for what the kids are learning, teachers are just glorified babysitters that are paid for with their taxes. I stand by my comment that while you can read, you don’t comprehend very well.
edit: it's also amazing that you seem completely unaware that the average underpaid, underappreciated teacher in the US has this exact impression of how the average parent views them... as glorified babysitters, and not respected as teachers or paid well for educating and generally dealing with everyone else's kids all day.
Yes, I know the article is about Korea, I imagine the same dynamic applies, given the nature of the article.
/c/im14andthisisnew
I was distracted, by their extreme use, of extra punctuation, that they have, on each line.
I'm sorry, but your post seems incomplete or I'm reading too far past what you're actually saying. Are you meaning to say this is what teachers are supposed to be doing (ie, pretending to be jailers instead of educators) or are you saying this needs to change somehow? Something else, maybe?
Like the way you write makes me think a lot of unflattering things about your stances, and I'm not sure why... like, for example, it seems like you're saying it's a good thing child labor protections are being taken away in Republican states... is that actually your position though? Or is that sarcasm that's not coming through very well?
Sorry for the million questions but I see this is already getting quite heated, and I'm trying to figure out if the heat is warranted or if it's a general misunderstanding.
He doesn’t need to come up with a comprehensive solution. I imagine he could have confidence in his perspective but not so much about how to resolve it. He characterized the situation in a way that seems callous but aligned with reality. You don’t have to cover all the basis when commenting.
If you agree with the characterization you can debate potential solutions. Seems more productive than doubting the stance the person who is bringing a potentially useful perspective. Generally it’s necessary to have a good grasp on reality when trying to solve an issue. Id rather see it as the first step towards a solution.
Oh I see it now, I gave an example of what their writing is leading me to believe about them. Odd that you're reading that far into it that you're telling me I doubt them while I'm asking for clarification.
I don't know anything about this person, what is there to doubt yet? If anything, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt by asking for clarification rather than joining the dogpile.
But since you're here now, what do you think about what they're saying? Do you understand it enough to make conclusions about their beliefs? Because that's my problem right now, I don't think I have enough to do it even though I'm interested in what they're saying
I mean to say that you were concerned or at least wondered if he endorses what he is seeing or not. I felt the need to comment because I usually ran into people thinking i supported a stance just because i was able to characterize it. It’s a typical reaction. I prefer to keep in mind that we don’t know his stance. He might be pessimistic and or frustrated with the issue. Alternatively he could be an idiot who enjoys the bad situation. It would be somewhat idiotic if he has no moral qualms because he would benefit more by not drawing attention into the root cause of the issue.
Oh I get that, no problem.
My issue is the characterize seems to be all over the place at best and minorly nefarious at worse, but I think I totally get where you're coming from.
I do appreciate the second guess though, I do sometimes write things in ways that make people think I actively dislike them when all I'm actually doing is reporting a reaction that I thought was interesting, and I think a little bit of that happened here.
In any case, legit, seems like we're on the same page now
Their statement is certainly right about what a lot of people seem to believe, and it's a sad indictment of the reality. Conservatives just see teachers as liberal babysitters, so they don't provide proper funding for anything. Where, in reality, teachers are one of society's most noble professions. Its because of my teachers that I've grown into the person I am today and have had the successes that I have.
In elementary school, they took an active interest in me and other students when they didn't have to, and it wasn't really part of their job. But they personally wanted to see us succeed and enjoyed teaching. In middle school my teachers provided the guidance and structure that I needed as a depressed, hormonal mess. And in high school, my classes were either business transactions, or the teachers became my friends and mentors. They taught me how to think critically, evaluate objectively, and argue intelligently. And perhaps most importantly -- that there was more to life than just schoolwork.
As an adult approaching 30 now, it's depressing to see that things have only gotten worse for teachers, not better. They still get paid jack shit, they have to figure out how to do more with less and less support/funding + more students per class, and these days they have to deal with fucking Karens who don't want their kids to learn facts that might hurt their feelings. Oh and of course, there's school shootings where teachers are trying to protect their students.
I haven't even read the whole thing yet, but damn! You have a brain! I came here ready to take a dump on someone, but you... Make... Sense?? This does not compute. I gotta go somewhere else to empty my bowls. Good job.
So, legitimate question. Do you think that children learn nothing of any importance whatsoever in any public grade school? It's absolutely ridiculous to think that public schooling is first and foremost babysitting because we don't have child labor laws. What in the world would adults be doing at 18 if there wasn't any schooling kindergarten through 12th grade? How, pray tell, would they be ready for a vocational school or college or any secondary school really without k-12? Would their parents be required to stay home and teach them?
Sure, schooling doesn't seem to teach people much to get them ready for the world anymore, but I hardly think that's because school is primarily babysitting. You obviously have an incredibly low opinion of teachers if you really think that's why they exist. The lack of relevance of grade school seems to be more because of the hype over college and the tendency of companies to require more and more education for a job. Lack vocational classes in high school plays into that, too, but cutting them likely had to do more with teaching to a test and getting rid of things that "didn't matter".
Despite that you may think people would figure out how to write, read, do basic math, understand science theory, learn geography, learn civics, analyze fiction and nonfiction works, learn higher levels of math and science, learn subsequent languages, oh and socialize because that really is a very important part of schooling, without school at all, people wouldn't... There's a ton of basic knowledge you need to survive in this world. Maybe you think people will just absorb it through osmosis, but that's not really how that works.
Teachers are important. Period. Their job is made difficult by those who think they have the right to micromanage the curriculum. Their job is made difficult by being paid or fired for students who pass or fail a test. Teachers, on the whole, are excellent, wonderful people. They don't need this belittling nonsense.