Our Nation's Future, part 1 [education] vanity

Here is an example of what some of our most brilliant futurists have envisioned:

Junior could learn chemistry through a 'mad chemist' education game. Cheaper than a high school lab, infinitely more fun, AND safer.

Interactive software is the future in education. If the parents and Junior are in agreement with the option, "it's a go".

Auto-repair could be taught through repairing and modifying virtual cars that engage in some highly violent 'road warrior' education game. Vocational students virtually work on their cars and then at home they do battle with each other or against computer opponents. So yeah, Junior is having a good time learning.

NOTHING. It's all about reshuffling budget priorities. One way is to recognize that teacher's union pension agreements AND government pension plans should not shackle future generations. I'm not suggesting we 'wipe out' their pensions [even if many of them deserve it]. But states should consider pruning them back.

It was a corrupt concept for Mister Fat Cat Politician to promise that taxpayers would honor a financial payoff twenty or so years after he retires. In my opinion the main government workers who actually earned their pensions are firefighters, police, and REAL teachers. Naturally those are the first victims that liberals target, so it would certainly be quite a battle.

I'm actually a friend of real teachers. REAL teachers should have it made with fun, easy, and rewarding careers while working at home and make more money than ever. [More than that later.]

We can have serious money to work with if we recognize tax-funded union pension contracts for what they are -- theft.

Conservatives keep fretting over low income S.S. recipients. But unlike government union members, S.S. recipients were FORCED into that ponzi scheme for retirement/disability. At the same time, many S.S. recipients had their pension plans poached to the point that they no longer have faith in pension plans. Free enterprise pension plans have been skimmed and raided time-and-again [mine included]. But conservative politicians are scared to death of government unions and teachers' unions.

Well guess what? Since the government unions supported the party which created Social Security [instead of the Galveston Option], then it's only fair that they too should live off Social Security. If they have any talent they can keep earning money. Otherwise? Who really cares anymore?

Paradoxically, Junior could also learn world history or American history from software designed in Tel Aviv and approved in Maine. And the Vatican could offer various versions which Maryland and other states approve. And why not invite almost any religion to offer history, math, science [etc] courses from that religion's viewpoint? Liberty University most certainly would offer Protestant versions of history. All they would need is a state license -- and they should be free to 'state shop' for that license.

Why don't we respect the 'Free Exercise of Religion'? Once every household has countless choices of education software, 'separation of church and state' becomes a more laughable mandate than ever, not only unconstitutional but also obsolete to everyone [but wacko control freaks who hate religion].

States, on the other hand, could compete with each other -- who offers the best license arrangement?

Unlike Junior, Alice likes nature and exploration. So her parents choose 'Nature Trail' education software. When she passes a test, she gets to explore a nature trail for a few minutes as a reward, and at home she can savor longer 'walks'. Every time she gets an answer correct a nature scene pops up for two or more seconds. But maybe her family prefers traditional education. Fine, they have that choice too, and I would pity the poor girl.

Junior's parents might even approve of 'porn math' software since he's been looking at porn for years anyway. So now he gets exciting rewards every time he improves in math. That might offend Christians, but at least now they also have more freedom.

So, while violence/adventure oriented education has been severely neglected, software designers can get creative in any number of ways. For example: business simulations. Donald Trump might offer some kind of 'tycoon' style education.

Rush could offer his versions, as well as Glenn Beck, Hannity, Levin, etc. [Mark Levin once said that his son likes 'Warcraft' if my fuzzy memory is correct. Maybe he and his son could team up on something along those lines.]

Or some popular series like 'Walking Dead' or 'Weeds' or 'Lost' or 'Fringe' could offer education software. [Or 'Bones', or 'Dexter', etc.] You-name-it.

At first the software would be more 'videos', 'still shots', text boxes, sound/voice recordings, and multiple choice than anything else. But in just a few years there would be detailed interactive software to fire up students' synapses like never before!

And since we have fifty states, our software designers have more options than nation-state designers who have only one government to turn to. The USA would enjoy an overwhelming advantage.

So Junior is blowing things up in class, at least in his computer simulations. I assume that he would wear headphones that have 'child safe' decibel restrictions. His offensive images would also need screening too. [Big deal if it improves his learning.]

In his classroom the teacher is yammering away to her zombie-class while Junior is having a high old time learning at his own pace and also following 'curiosity trails'. After all, you learn faster when you are curious, right? That's one advantage of interactive software -- the student's curiosity can open 'paths' that the student is actually curious about at that moment.

If a school has enough boys and girls like Junior and Alice, it could relegate entire classrooms to become generic study halls. And it would be terrible if seniority decides which teachers get laid off.

Merit-merit-merit! I don't care what it takes to reform this stupid education system -- DO IT PLEASE!

So now Junior is outside his teacher's curriculum. Her teaching orbits around a politically correct text book. Junior's parents are pro-military, so he gets to learn math by calculating military logistics -- the supplies and ammo his simulated troops need to kill the 'bug people'. He hopes he gets his army supplied by the weekend or his electronic troops will get slaughtered.

The cookie-pressed teacher in Junior's classroom should not be subjected to weird questions. Otherwise Junior might ask her what the cost of teflon-tipped bullets is and how well do they penetrate exoskeletons?

But here's the thing -- Junior doesn't have to ask his classroom's teacher anything if ...

Should we permit teachers to have the option of helping students online? That way, when Junior's mad scientist blows up from a dangerous chemical experiment, he can seek chemistry teachers online. And perhaps parents could modify their childrens' online 'teacher lists' so that the parents decide who he might contact. Online networking might warn them that 'Teacher X' is a perv, or that 'Teacher Y' sabotages the education of students he or she does not like. [More on that in 'fine post', coming up.]

Wouldn't it be great if all students would learn about Pearl Harbor from that amazing movie, 'Pearl Harbor' [when they are old enough]? They could learn about D-Day through the first parts of 'Saving Private Ryan'. But maybe some kids [too sensitive] could get waivers to attend study hall instead.

In short order our nation would be united in understanding the reality of war. We would universally see how important it is that our nation's military always be vigilant, well supplied, and well prepared from now 'til Judgment Day.

Just as important -- all students should watch Milton Friedman's award-winning economic series.

All students of a certain age must hear [and/or watch] certain debates. We could pit polar opposites against each other on a routine basis. [During summer vacation perhaps.]

The two 'supreme' Court Justices who have the largest opposition in court opinions -- each would annually choose a representative to debate -- open ended about constitutional interpretation. No moderator, just a timer. Students could watch a recording of it and pass 'alertness tests' to prove they watched/heard it.

The House Majority Whip and the House Minority Whip could also choose annual representatives [same as above].

The Israeli government could send a rep to debate a rep from Mecca regarding Israel's 'crimes' vs. Islamo-attrocities.

Another advantage of such debates is that it would be impossible for a jaded media to ignore such debates. They would make news in a big way and help level the playing field of national deliberation.

Lastly, the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule define what is best in the USA as a people. We need not establish any one religion, but why not require that those timeless words of wisdom be mounted in every classroom and study hall respectfully and prominently near the main exit?

In a couple weeks I will post about the 'Swiss Clock' of government waste cutting.

These concepts are not my ideas by any stretch. The military has been playing war games even before the tilting fields of yor. Simulators of today are what make our military so well trained. So why not use 'simulation' software for ALL education? Boys love violent video games, and since we males hate traditional school so much, let's shake things up!

Imaginative authors such as Piers Anthony have envisioned this for decades. More well-known is Hogwart's 'Room of Requirement'. I also recently read "Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card [back in 1985!]. He had been contemplating this kind of education revolution for a long, long time, anticipating interactive computer-game education back in the early-mid '80s. Who inspired them? I don't know.

Regarding Mandatory Debates, that idea was pretty-much adopted in Ancient Athens and more recently in England. The Prime Minister is required to speak with the opposition in the House of Commons. Very lively! However, I for one would rather our President be Chief Executive than constantly prepare for debates. Let debaters handle debates.

As for the Ten Commandments and Golden Rule, our Founding Fathers were always frank and open about our religious foundation. Then later Judge Roy Moore was unjustly persecuted for obeying his state's constitution. Regardless of the legal issues, what he did was harmless and a monumental first step toward healing our nation's soul.

Fine Tuning

One last thing about replacing textbooks with software. Perhaps we should respect the wishes of the House in repealing certain education IF 2/3 of the House agrees that it is terrorist propaganda. And we could require that all education lessons be transcribed for convenient online ‘word searches’.

Church based study halls? Perhaps church property could be used as a study hall, and the church gets paid instead of the public school. But for now we have the public school infrastructure, so maybe we might as well use it for the time being?

Emergency System — students with headphones might have an app included that helps with school evacuation. Or they are only allowed a single ear to be covered during the tech transition.

. . . .

Fine Tuning Online Teachers

Each state could decide for itself how to resolve parental networking regarding teachers.

Should it be ‘above board’ and safe from traditional lawsuits? ‘Adults only’ on the message boards? Should they be required to reveal their true names when officially denouncing a teacher? And the teacher could have a recording of every teaching moment to vindicate herself or himself.

If a state is too hard on its internet teachers, those teachers could offer their services in any of the other fifty seven states. [Uups. No, I am not Obama.]

Here's the flip side: if a state sides with the teachers all the time and possibly fines outraged for ‘frivolous’ complaints [or whatever], then entire groups might decide to boycott ALL teachers licensed in that state.

Regarding fines, the states should forewarn anyone who enters its official ‘education message board’ in advance what the maximum fine would be if the message board concludes that the parents’ complaints are frivolous or slanderous. We should not tolerate that warning being buried in an ‘agree-to-these-terms’ page. Such an important warning must be at the top line of the ‘agreement’ page.

Exactly how federal legislators incentivize states to have the best online teachers would require some deliberation. But I hope it is worked out in a way that a teacher in Hawaii might get licensed by Delaware without any problems. When it comes to online education, does a state truly need physical borders?

Also, if a particular state gets too insane with teachers who act as Islamo-terrorist recruiters, I am confident that a Constitutional Amendment would quickly be ratified to ‘fine-tune’ this education revolution. For example, if a state gets overrun by a Reconquista movement, 3/4 of states could easily and swiftly end any educational mischief.

States would need to be free to reshuffle their budgeting for online teachers according to the number of legitimate ‘student hits’, how effective they were at helping the students, etc. Bottom line — each state works it out for itself as much as possible.

. . . .

For computer newbies:

Computer software can calculate a student's progress automatically. But we can also have standard multiple choice tests to see if students are somehow cheating. This needs to remain dynamic and state-managed. For example, a ‘question pool’ for random customized tests will ultimately be superior to a single generic test that was traditionally photocopied, and answers could be crib-noted by cheaters.

There's no need for the federal government to meddle — that could be more dangerous than helpful.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.