Oh, Matt Damon

[ebor]

Blackthorne was thinking out of the box. Children that can think outside of the box (not necessarily anti-conformity, but creative bending of rules-lite) will win in the end. Follow and perish.

 

[Blackthornone]

I didn't think I had to mention the part where first I asked him to hand over his cigarettes because most people who know me here know that I'm not a complete idiot and most others would assume that any professional teacher would obviously do this first.



Yeah, good idea, because assaulting a student is fine so long as it's retaliatory



I didn't steal his hat. He was more than welcome to collect it from the principal's office.



Right, so in your head confiscating property is a no-no, but when it comes to ritual humiliation of a 12-year old, go for it! All bets are off!



Gee, I wouldn't want to be even further down this kid's respect ladder. I'd much prefer I had the same degree of respect from him that had him blow cigarette smoke in my face in the first place.



Yeah, I figured from the outset your whole argument would come down to how some teacher back in the day shafted you in the most harmless way possible

..or maybe it wasn't back in the day. 1987... Mate are you still in school?

1: If you took his cigarettes then there was no need to take his hat, because it had nothing to do with his offense. Sounds like you did it just to flex your power over him to "show him who's in charge" and if so, just is a jerk move. I don't smoke cigarettes, so if someone blew smoke in my face, I would be upset, but I wouldn't take his hat, because the two are unrelated. It was nonsensical to take his hat because they were unrelated.

2: As far as assaulting a student, firstly, he assaulted you with poison gas, so I think it is morally justifiable to retaliate, however I acknowledged that you probably couldn't get away with it, at least not today. In the 50's, you probably could.

Confiscating property is ok so long as the property confiscated is RELEVANT to the offense. If he blows smoke, take the cigarettes, if he uses a straw to blow spit wads, confiscate the straw, if he uses a slingshot to disrupt the classroom, take the slingshot, but don't take his CLOTHING away because he smokes. That's just stupid.


As far as his respect ladder, it has to do with you FIXING the problem, which is not losing more respect and hopefully gaining it back. ANY teacher can resort to the rules to deliver PUNISHMENT. Punishment is EASY. It takes a lot of charisma to LEAD people without using force, and not everyone can. Not every school teacher has leadership qualities, but they demand the same respect that a real leader gets even though they don't HAVE the charm to be a leader. Of all the teachers I ever observed, the ones with the most charisma ALWAYS had the least amount of discipline problems, because the kids all liked them so well.
Then there were the teachers who had the least charisma, who were weak in charm and thus the kids didn't like them, and thus they acted out the most with those teachers.

No, my whole argument does not come down to what you said.
The irrelevance of a hat to cigarette smoke is self evident. (Unless the hat happens to have a cigarette logo on it, in which case it is very relevant. Did the hat say Marlboro on it or something? If so, then you were right to confiscate that the hat, because in that case, the hat directly advocated the substance that he abused)
There are two basic types of teachers in my experience. One type is the one that wants to help each individual to learn all they need to know to be the best that they can be as an individual, and to become anything that that person wants to become, recognizing their uniqueness, and wants to nurture each student's individuality, or individual style. They teach because they want each person to be the best person that they can be to become as dynamic as they can be as uniquely as they are.

Then there is the other type, that was so strongly conditioned by the system when they were growing up, that they believe that the way that school is taught in the way that it demands that everyone conform to be like everyone else is what "normal" is and is the only right way to be, and they want to perpetuate that SYSTEM, because they believe in acting as perpetrators of that system, and supporting it whole, with all of its benefits as WELL as all of it's flaws, because they were so brainwashed by school growing up that they believe that it should all be swallowed whole, without any desire to improve it on their part.
They have no desire to buck the system. Reinforcing the system as it is with all of its flaws makes them feel secure and gives them a sense of stability. They want to impart this belief on (brainwash the next generation to believe the same thing) their students in the desire to keep the culture running "smoothly, to keep it stable, ie the same.

Those kind of teachers are the most lacking in charisma and leadership ability, because they are essentially followers trying to force others to follow the rules of the system just as sheepishly as they have. These people can't CONTROL their classrooms or the kids, because they don't have the charisma to lead by encouraging, and a lot of people don't like to be told what to do.
People like THEM like the establishment to tell them what to do, because they did, which is why they became teachers. So the sheepish follower type pro establishment kids will comply, but independently minded kids will not, and will hate such teachers. When these teachers teach, it is as if they present the kids with something they are just "supposed to do".


The other type of teacher presents what they teach as an opportunity for each student to learn something useful for their lives and that that is an exciting and enriching thing.

Getting people to be obedient requires two things: A they must be absolutely convinced that you know what you are talking about. This also means knowing what will be relevant for THEIR lives. This is an area where the better leader is more effective, because they are more concerned with each student being who they are and becoming an individual, rather than the non leader trying to get students to CONFORM.
Trying to tell people or even implying that you are trying to get people to conform to an assembly line notion of learning that presumes that all people should be the same is something that a lot of people realize to be flawed, at least on the subconscious level, and it is going to make some people mad, and be upset with the teacher for using this method. Thus, the kids don't like you, and will blow smoke in your face if they are upset enough.

The second thing that is needed for obedience is that people have to be absolutely convinced that you care about what is in their own individual best interests. Once you have those two things, kids will always obey you. Of course, it is easier said than done.
If you knew someone who you were absolutely convinced knew everything and who absolutely cared about you, you would listen to everything they said, virtually without question. Why wouldn't you? Example: kid wants to be x when he grows up, you know all about how to be x, and he knows it and he is convinced you want to help him become x. I guarantee you he'll listen up.

Most disobedient kids believe that what the teacher teaches is not relevant to their lives. A lot of the time, they are right. That is because of the curriculum. It isn't relevant to them. Why is school needed? In theory, it is to help people become successful in life.

The pop star Pink hated school, and did poorly in it, getting bad grades, and now, she has become more successful in 5 years than 10 teachers will be in their entire lifetimes. She was right. They were wrong. Not everyone has her talent, but the point is that she wanted to be a pop star and felt strongly enough that she could do it to be frustrated with the school system, and have a tough time of it.

If the school system was more accommodating, or better able to actually meet different student's needs, or at the very least tolerate when they don't totally obey the rigid curriculum, things would go smoother.


I have to ask, what did you do that made that kid get so mad at you that he would blow smoke in your face. It seems to me that you HAD to do SOMETHING to make him mad. Oh, right, I forgot, you are the TEACHER, so that entitles you to upset your students and you shouldn't have to care about that, because you are the "authority" and if they should step out of line in expressing their disdain with you or your teaching methods, you can just fall back on the disciplinary rules that were made mainly for those teachers who can't lead well in the first place, and can't seem to run a classroom without making the students mad at them. That makes it all ok, right??

Don't tell me I don't know what it's like to be a teacher in a classroom, because I've spent a lot of time observing it and listening to what was going on in the classrooms. No, I wasn't doing much schoolwork, so no, I wasn't too distracted by that. I just laid low and drew pictures in class as best as I could get away with, and I always paid attention to the teacher's lectures, so that I would not need to crack a book.

I rarely did homework, because I did well on tests, and if the test percentage was high enough, I got an easy C average, since I aced the tests, and when I didn't do well, because I didn't do enough homework, I didn't give a damn, because I paid enough attention to LEARN what they taught me so I would remember it, without having to do all the stupid repetitive questions on homework, ect. i was easily smarter than 98% of the school anyway, so it wasn't like I would be handicapped in life due to lack of intellect. When I think back to all the grief some of the teachers caused me, wanting me to do stuff I didn't need to do for the quality of my life, or the nonsense they spewed that somehow I NEEDED to do these assignments was just ridiculous. Most of these teachers were a lot less intelligent than I was and yet they were going to tell me what I needed for MY life, as if they KNEW me.

There was zero respect for people who were artistically inclined. All creative aptitude was treated like it wasn't important at all. Dreamkiller. That is what the public school system is for creative people. Treating it as if creativity is unimportant. The school system treats people virtually like they are on an assembly line.
Actually, what I heard is that the public school system was patterned after a system that was used to turn Prussian serfs into military slaves. I bet you never heard that before. The rows of desks, the way it's structured, the whole thing. The Waldorf schools, for example, are not like that.

There was one time when a teacher stole something from me and lied to me saying that I would get it back at the end of the year, but that evil witch never gave it back to me.
I hate the public school system, and I have a rather extreme dislike for school teachers in general. Some I hate, and some I actually liked. Of course, I liked the type of teacher I described first, and I hated the type I described second if they were the type to make me do things. Yes, they should try to make me, because I know what is best for me better than they do, because I know myself better than they do. But of course to them, it wasn't about really helping me, it was about trying to make me step in line because they thought everyone should be the same and resented the notion that anyone should not disagree with the system enough to question it's relevance to them and not comply. They are basically trying to make everyone the same. Obedience. They demand obedience to the system to be the way THEY think all people should be, rather than teach each student to be a more capable individual human being who an think for themselves.

Why no ethics classes in school, yet they will teach history? Because they don't want students questioning how it was right to steal North America from the native peoples and break nearly every treaty they made with them. They also don't want to bring up the unethical aspects of various businesses. History is taught to brainwash people into believing that the one who won the war and made their country what it is is right, even when it is wrong.

Also teachers will lie. There was a teacher who taught health that said that anyone who uses nutrition to cure disease is a quack, and that nutrition can't help cure anything. Apparently, this guy conveniently forgot about British sailors getting scurvy and then bringing limes with them to cure it and prevent it in the future. Scurvy is a disease, and limes, which is nutrition, cured it. What other conditions can nutrition help with what nutrients in what amounts under what conditions for what people? Try living on just Twinkies and see how well you live.

This teacher was a liar and a charlatan. Hack. How many people will dismiss the possible benefits of nutrition as a healing aid because of this guy's lies? Thousands of people going through his classroom over the years, and some people getting diseases and dying when they could have used nutrition to help themselves all because of this guy's lies. Teachers are in a position to do an incredible amount of damage to people. It makes my blood boil.

 

[thenammagazine]

Blackthorne was thinking out of the box. Children that can think outside of the box (not necessarily anti-conformity, but creative bending of rules-lite) will win in the end. Follow and perish.

There's a proper time and place for that. Trying to weasel your way out of consequences for your actions is not the time, nor the place, unless you're OJ Simpson.

 

[The Ween]

What the hell? I'm not even going to read all of Blackthornone's post.

Nam can......have fun!

 

[Blackthornone]

l agree. l take full responsibility for her taking my hat.unlike some members her l can admit when l am wrong and screw up. l am not perfect. like l said above when you were a hat almost 24/7 you don't even know its on. it's still up to her to keep confiscated objects safe. and it's not like she told me everyday to take it off. 98% of the time l remembered to take it off. if l borrowed her book and someone stole it from my house l guarantee she would of made me pay for it. so l thought it should go both ways. any way glad I'm not in school anymore.

It WAS her responsibility to keep your items safe. It was in her care. The alleged premise of her taking it was that she would keep it safe and then give it back to you at an appropriate time. What she actually did was basically take it from you and then toss it in the air and tell the class it's up for grabs to anyone who catches it, with her looking the other way.

 

[thenammagazine]

What the hell? I'm not even going to read all of Blackthornone's post.

Nam can......have fun!

I just skimmed through it. There was a bunch of entitlement generation douchery. Looking forward to the future and reading about how the parole board turned them down again and how it's society's fault, but at least the rights allow them to have an iPad to type their woes and the rest of us can read and laugh.

 

[Blackthornone]

I just skimmed through it. There was a bunch of entitlement generation douchery. Looking forward to the future and reading about how the parole board turned them down again and how it's society's fault, but at least the rights allow them to have an iPad to type their woes and the rest of us can read and laugh.

There was no entitlement mentioned. There was independent thought mentioned, and blazing one's own individual path, which means doing things oneself, which is the opposite of entitlement. Entitlement is about asking people to GIVE things to you. That isn't what I was talking about.
Never been to prison. I said it was the school system's fault, mainly. I don't own an IPAD or ANY sort of microwave wireless device, as all microwave devices cause cancer. Cell phones, Blackberries, all that poindexter head nonsense that is a very slippery slope to us all becoming the Borg.

 

[thenammagazine]

There was no entitlement mentioned. There was independent thought mentioned, and blazing one's own individual path, which means doing things oneself, which is the opposite of entitlement. Entitlement is about asking people to GIVE things to you. That isn't what I was talking about.
Never been to prison. I said it was the school system's fault, mainly. I don't own an IPAD or ANY sort of microwave wireless device, as all microwave devices cause cancer. Cell phones, Blackberries, all that poindexter head nonsense that is a very slippery slope to us all becoming the Borg.

Entitlement:

In a casual sense, the term "entitlement" refers to a notion or belief that one (or oneself) is deserving of some particular reward or benefit—if given without deeper legal or principled cause, the term is often given with pejorative connotation (e.g. a "sense of entitlement").

Though I suppose "Narcissistic" would be wholly more appropriate:

Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person.

You should've payed more attention in school.

 

[CelticPredator]

She sounded a bit mental. I had one I hated too and I KNOW she was off her nut.

There's always one. But atleast the numbers are low. Most of my High School teachers were awesome though. I even became friends with one of them...heh.

 

[Blackthornone]

Entitlement:


Though I suppose "Narcissistic" would be wholly more appropriate:


You should've payed more attention in school.

I was saying that ALL people should be taught as individuals, not just me. I used myself as an example. All people are unique, and it is wrong to homogenize the curriculum in school to the degree that it is. I am not saying that ONE is deserving of some particular benefit. I am saying ALL are deserving of a particular benefit. That is not entitlement.
I said that a great many people suffer at the hands of the public school system and you act as if I was speaking ONLY of myself. ALL people deserve better education. That is what I was saying.

Your statement that I should have paid more attention in school with reference to the definition of narcissism is a non sequitor. If anything, the TEACHERS were narcissistic, because they are the ones who show "unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person." You should pay attention to what you read before you attempt to criticize it.

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

Why does every post this guy writes have to be a book?

 

[Blackthornone]

Why does every post this guy writes have to be a book?

Partly because I think that a message with a lot of words is like a painting with a lot of colors, and so it offers a much richer texture and detail, whereas a message with fewer words is like a painting with fewer colors. More words are more interesting to me just like more shades of color are more interesting in a painting. Another example would be more words equate to more pixels in an image which thus offers much greater detail than an image with fewer pixels. I enjoy many words just as I enjoy more colors and pixels in an image. I like to write a high definition post.

 

[Darth Snoopy]

The problem is that respect is not given-- it's something that has to be earned. Most schools do not allow the wearing of hats for two reasons A) a security measure as it can hide the face from security cameras and B) it's a respectful thing to do (removing your hat when you're inside). B is an older practice to be sure (just check out the next restaurant you're in oreven for that matter the amount of guys who keep their ball hats on while a national anthem is being played, oblivious to the disrespect they are showing), but in reality the no hats rule actually allows for those rebellious youths to be just that, rebels, with their hats on. Oh, look at me-- I'm a rebel because I'm wearing my hat. Allow teenagers to be rebels with the hats and it's not something worse of being rebels with graffiti or vandalism, etc.

But you said that you often forgot that you still had your hat on. That meant that you probably were often reminded to remove it... and your constant lack of respect brought it to the point where your hat was taken. You're lucky you had the chance to at least get your hat back-- the fact/blame that it was lost/stolen lies with you.

I started by saying that respect is not something immediately given, but rather it is earned-- I can tell you that I don't ask any student to remove their hat a second time. I merely have to look at them and they remove it on their own because they respect me and I respect them. It sounds like you were a wild rebel-- congratulations on that accomplishment. It's too bad that respect was forgotten.

Excellent post.

 

[DarthNeil]

1: The pop star Pink hated school, and did poorly in it, getting bad grades, and now, she has become more successful in 5 years than 10 teachers will be in their entire lifetimes. She was right. They were wrong. Not everyone has her talent, but the point is that she wanted to be a pop star and felt strongly enough that she could do it to be frustrated with the school system, and have a tough time of it.

You equate success with money and fame, correct? Well in the 5 years that your example pop star has had those I'll wager the impact I've made on individuals in my classroom, on the football field, and in the theatre has far outweighed her bank account. You say that you know what it means to be a teacher because you've observed?... To quote from Mr. Martin, "you know nothing Jon Snow."

 

[jonny88]

there was a documentary about a school in the states. didn't watch it just read the outline of the documentary a few days ago. l think it was called "stupid in America" . it is about a school in New York. the teachers are so bad and boring kids fall asleep in class. kids say they also see kids walking through the hallway smoking pot.

 

[thenammagazine]

I was saying that ALL people should be taught as individuals, not just me. I used myself as an example. All people are unique, and it is wrong to homogenize the curriculum in school to the degree that it is. I am not saying that ONE is deserving of some particular benefit. I am saying ALL are deserving of a particular benefit. That is not entitlement.
I said that a great many people suffer at the hands of the public school system and you act as if I was speaking ONLY of myself. ALL people deserve better education. That is what I was saying.

Your statement that I should have paid more attention in school with reference to the definition of narcissism is a non sequitor. If anything, the TEACHERS were narcissistic, because they are the ones who show "unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person." You should pay attention to what you read before you attempt to criticize it.

The rules are set forth to be conductive to learning. You expect special treatment because you look for loopholes in the system. I thought the comparison in your other post to Pink, was so laughable. Compare the percentage of dropouts and failures who become millionaires to the dropouts and failures who become deadbeats and work in ____ jobs for the rest of their lives. Unless you have some natural gift which advances you to the front of the pack, you'll wind up working a ____ job, living in a ____hole (or mom's), for the rest of your life and die all but forgotten.

 

[Gruff Old Bear]

I'm surprised and gratified to learn we have so many professional educators among us. I salute you all.

And I loved Matt Damon's use of "MBA-think." MBAs have been our ruin. Everywhere they pop up, they inflict sanctioned idiocy upon us. "Job insecurity makes you work harder" = "the beatings will continue until morale improves."

 

[NosferatuBill36]

The rules are set forth to be conductive to learning. You expect special treatment because you look for loopholes in the system. I thought the comparison in your other post to Pink, was so laughable. Compare the percentage of dropouts and failures who become millionaires to the dropouts and failures who become deadbeats and work in ____ jobs for the rest of their lives. Unless you have some natural gift which advances you to the front of the pack, you'll wind up working a ____ job, living in a ____hole (or mom's), for the rest of your life and die all but forgotten.

I can't believe this even needed to be said...but apparently it did.

I love when idiots bring up examples such as: "Notorious B.I.G. dropped out and became a millionare, so I can too!"

 

[Blackthornone]

You equate success with money and fame, correct? Well in the 5 years that your example pop star has had those I'll wager the impact I've made on individuals in my classroom, on the football field, and in the theatre has far outweighed her bank account. You say that you know what it means to be a teacher because you've observed?... To quote from Mr. Martin, "you know nothing Jon Snow."

Actually I equate success with money and the amount of positive impact on the world that someone has. Fame is just a by product of having a positive impact. Firstly, yes, Pink has made a tremendous amount more money than public school teachers do, and so she is much more financially successful. The reason why she is more successful is because she has a much larger number of people that she has a positive impact on.
Now, if the number of people that she gave benefit to was only as high as the number of people that School teachers teach, I guarantee you that school teachers would make a LOT more money than Pink, and deservedly so. However, because the number of people that Pink's career benefits is so astronomically greater than that of a school teacher, in fact, she imparts a much greater positive impact on the world than just about any public school teacher does. Success it determined by the amount of benefit to other peoples lives one provides magnified by how many people one provides it TO.

If Pink only provided benefit to 10 times as many people as school teachers do in their lives, then, again, school teachers would make more money and if you were good teachers, would be much more successful in making a positive impact on the world. The reason why Pink is more successful than a lot of teachers are is just sheer, overwhelming numbers, and NOT the quality of the service that she provides.

If you provide a beneficial service to people, you can be much more successful at making a positive impact on the world than someone else who provides a service that that is 10,000 times more important than you if you can provide your service to 10,001 times more people or more. Pink provides benefit to tens of millions or more while school teachers only provide benefits to thousands of people.

By a similar token, a teacher like Anthony Robbins is much more successful at making a positive impact on the world because through his books and other media, he provides that benefit to far more people than a school teacher does, and because the quality of his service is so great, I think that even if he makes a little less money than Pink, the quality of his service to the number of people he provides it for ratio is more favorable, and so even though he might make less money, because his service is much more beneficial than a musician, and because he provides it to so many people, he is more successful at making a positive impact on the world.
The number of people one provides benefit for is the same reason why pro athletes make more money than school teachers. If a school teacher provided their service to even 1/100th of the number of people that a pro athlete does, the teacher would make more money than the pro athlete.

Also, I said I have seen what it takes for a teacher to control a classroom or not because I have seen it, and I have seen what it takes for a teacher to maintain a respectful classroom to the teacher, and avoid a lot of discipline problems. That is not the same thing as saying that I know everything there is to know about BEING a teacher.

 

[Blackthornone]

The rules are set forth to be conductive to learning. You expect special treatment because you look for loopholes in the system. I thought the comparison in your other post to Pink, was so laughable. Compare the percentage of dropouts and failures who become millionaires to the dropouts and failures who become deadbeats and work in ____ jobs for the rest of their lives. Unless you have some natural gift which advances you to the front of the pack, you'll wind up working a ____ job, living in a ____hole (or mom's), for the rest of your life and die all but forgotten.

No, the rules are NOT set forth to be conducive to learning. They are set forth to be conducive to conditioning people to be obedient to the system. The public school system was patterned after a system to turn Prussian serfs into military slaves. It is designed to suppress individuality and force people to be obedient to the powers that be, the establishment, the government, ect. It has practically nothing to do with providing an atmosphere of better learning. My point in referring to Pink was to highlight the failings of the design of the system and how it does a poor job of being conducive to real learning. My point was not that everyone who does not like school will become a rich pop star. The fact that someone who would become a rich pop star as well as other creative people become disillusioned with the structure of the public school system, and the quality of the education that the system provides is the point.

I also emphasized that the curriculum and the structure of the system are mostly at fault, and not most teachers, unless those teachers believe strongly in the design of the system being this flawed. You act as if the U.S. public school system is the benchmark of education in the world, and it is definitely not. You also assume that the public school system is the only design of a school system, and that there aren't any better ones, which is also completely wrong. My objection is to the flawed manner in which the school system is structured and that that is why it produces poor quality education, but then, education isn't the point of the design of the system. The point of the design of the system is to suppress individuality and to condition people to be obedient sheep who will follow the establishment policy.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldorf_education


I don't look for loopholes in the system. I seek a fundamental restructuring of the ENTIRE system. It is fundamentally too flawed to provide quality education. The entire thing will need to be redone. There is simply too much failure in the system.
The Waldorf School design, which is designed to educate, not indoctrinate.