Help support TMP


"How we are forced to get an education" Topic


36 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Science Plus Board

Back to the Miscellaneous Discussion Plus Board

Back to the Ranting Plus Board



370 hits since 17 Sep 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Great War Ace Supporting Member of TMP17 Sep 2017 4:18 p.m. PST

Today's lesson in church was on "Perpetual Education". (The Mormon dogmatic approach even makes the constant pursuit of education a commandment, which makes education a joyless proposition). Being a classroom teacher himself (he teaches seventh graders Latin), our instructor emphasized exclusively the need to read. He pushed books as the road to education.

But had there been more time, I would have inserted a qualifier. Not everyone in this life gets any sort of reading skill, much less enjoyment out of reading. So those minds do not channel education pursuits through that tool. I wanted to point out that "becoming gods", and "building worlds" does not require all knowledge. What it requires is manipulating the world-building tools: we will not be required to understand what makes those tools work. Compare "all knowledge" to computers and the Net. Very unintelligent people use both with facility. Cars and driving, ditto that! Shooting firearms: how many people could make a gun, or even a bullet? How many know the chemistry that goes into creating gunpowder? We use technology constantly without having the first clue how it works, let alone inventing it ourselves.

Book learning is not required in the least. It is helpful but not necessary to becoming educated enough to use any of these tools. And if someone wants what is in a book, s/he can get it by having someone put it onto CD or in the cloud. People read less these days and have increased their "book learning" or enjoyment by having someone else do the reading for them.

So what does our instructor represent? The traditional dogmatic classroom way of "larnin' an edjicashun".

I would have likely displeased him to suggest a better way:

Let children go where the Spirit leads. Let them follow their Muse. True education, learning, is acquired almost without effort by taking up what interests us. A labor of love creates its own energy. So true education, the acquiring of skills to prodigious levels, happens naturally in the person who is free to pursue authentic interests. That sort of education does not feel like work, it is strenuous play! It brings joy every step along the way.

Lopsided people is what we all are. The classroom attempts to instill a "balanced education". But other than those very few things that we need or want to include in our lives, we forget almost everything else. Of what use is compulsion to obtain a "balanced education?" Does it point anyone toward what they like or want? It controls and stifles. Through forced venues that crush genuine focus, the desire to "learn" is beaten out of children.

If we went another way and let children study with unfettered abandon those subjects that interest them most we would see amazing things happen. I do not hesitate to assert that the world would see prodigious advances. Because far more young minds would pursue that which would make them geniuses, and that would result in new knowledge through discovery.

How many young minds are broken to the wheel and sent into drudgery to work their whole lives at mind destroying work that they hate? Don't argue that somebody has to do those things. Plenty of people will still have to do the jobs nobody likes. But in getting to that point, education in areas of genuine interest will create lifelong hobbies. They may not become your day job. But while working for a living, your mind is constantly on the hobbies, the areas of true talent or fascination. Education taught you how to pursue instead of crushing all that "daydreaming" to death.

Could it ever happen? Could the world change, and let young minds soar; even encourage and facilitate each individual to chase down what they feel, in their very cells, is their calling, their natural activity, their first love? We could if we would. But how do you break the system and rebuild it the right way?

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian17 Sep 2017 4:58 p.m. PST

For those who want to see the lesson itself: link

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP17 Sep 2017 8:11 p.m. PST

I don't know if you should make sweeping generalisations based on your own personal limited experiences. My own experiences are quite different from your own.

I agree with the instructors emphasis on the importance on learning how to read.

I also agree totally with you that one should try to love your life's work.

In my own experience, I found the two points above go hand in hand. If you have no reading skill, it is difficult to even be aware of what opportunities can be available to you.

I really like Thomas Huxley's simple thought about learning. To paraphrase him, "Try to know a lot about one thing, and try to know a bit about everything else". Difficult to achieve as an illiterate.

Personal logo Jlundberg Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 6:09 a.m. PST

I disagree to a point. Mandatory education arose to provide a functioning workforce/citizenry. The US has extended that into our perverse "every kid is college material" ethos.

The essential education should continue, but pre-college elements should be stripped out and made elective. Every citizen needs to be able to read, write, build a budget, understand enough politics to vote semi-intelligently, etc. I worked with otherwise reasonably intelligent airmen that believed that as long as you had checks, you had money in your account and other fundamental massive misunderstandings of how the modern world works.

Education is the the only learning people ever do. It should give you the tools to soar and explore on your own. For a lot of our 16 year old male population they would explore porn and video games, not really school subject

Personal logo Great War Ace Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 6:52 a.m. PST

I knew that the assertion that kids would just sit back and do nothing would come up. It always does. "Kids won't learn math unless compelled to." That sort of reasoning. "Why would anyone bother unless forced to?"

Really, now, how did math get invented to begin with? Somebody had an intrinsic interest in math, or else it would never have come up. So kids who possess a math "gene" will gravitate to math. Those who hate it will learn to use a calculator. They already do.

The same holds true for every other area of learning. Present all areas of learning to children and see what holds their interest. From their interests they will segue to other areas.

The Net is a cesspool, but computers are not; they contain what is put into them. Keep kids away from the Net, for a start. (Hah! like that is ever going to happen.)

I don't know what "education is the only learning people ever do" means. I sucked at public school. But I continue to learn. All it takes is interest in a thing and I am off and running. Of course, necessity is the mother of invention. Need sparks interest.

"A functioning workforce/citizenry" isn't the same as it used to be. Automation, tools of high tech (like this one I am using right now) are increasingly available; and jobs are decreasing as the tools increase. People are bound to have loads of freed up time in the near future, the way things are going. So learning has to begin very early as something that grabs interest and attention. "Essential education" has to be necessary in order to be "essential".

Teaching old skills so that they won't die out is pointless. That has never worked, except to the very, very few who have a "retro" interest in old stuff; like reenactors. So public education will have to change rapidly with the times in order for it to make sense to the children/students.

Hafen von Schlockenberg Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 10:03 a.m. PST

Are you familiar with Sugata Mitra's Hole-in-the-Wall Experiment? If not, I recommend taking a look at this:

https://youtu.be/y3jYVe1RGaU

Personal logo jdginaz Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 10:54 a.m. PST

In my experience it's rare to see an adult argue against reading.

Children often don't see the need for a skill like reading or math and if wouldn't learn them if left to their own devices. They need to learn those as much as possible when they are young and the brain is better configured to learn and retain knowledge. The older you get the harder it is to learn retain new things.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP In the TMP Dawghouse18 Sep 2017 12:32 p.m. PST

This really needs to be over on the Blue Fez.

Hafen von Schlockenberg Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 3:18 p.m. PST

Why? It's not politics or religion,really. GWA happened to have had the idea sparked in a religious setting, but the question itself is not a religious one,by any means.

Jidginaz,take a look at the video I linked--children using a computer to teach themselves English. I assume they had to learn to read it,too.

On a personal note, though I don't remember it,my mother told me I came to her at age four,and said "I think it's time I learned to read". It would have been easy for her,as she was an elementary school teacher. Unfortunately, this was in the conformist 50's, and everyone told her it would be bad for me to learn ahead of the other kids.

Attitudes have changed since then,fortunately.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP In the TMP Dawghouse18 Sep 2017 5:16 p.m. PST

Why? It's not politics or religion,really

If I response the way I want to it would be.

Attitudes have changed since then,fortunately.

Yes they have and not for the better.

Greyalexis18 Sep 2017 5:25 p.m. PST

of course we are forced to get an education. we need math and history for gaming.

Personal logo Great War Ace Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 6:38 p.m. PST

I don't know if you should make sweeping generalisations based on your own personal limited experiences.

I'm not the one making generalizations. That is what general education does. It lumps an over-sized class of divergent minds into a single room for a year and then advances all of them to the next class "up". Same cookie cutter "generalization" for everybody: "one size fits all." Except that it doesn't and never did.

Reading is a tool. It isn't the be all or end all of learning. It has drawbacks: someone who reads has a crappy memory compared to an illiterate, who must develop a really good memory, lacking any sort of method to "store" details. Reading is a skill similar to reading music. Someone who plays by ear doesn't need to learn to read music; s/he simply plays back what they hear and remember. They memorize the music through the act of making the music.

I love reading as much as the next reader. But there is a sizeable segment of the population that does not, and many of them simply don't get it. If reading is the be all and end all of education (which it is, being a "one size fits all" approach) then those thousands and thousands of non readers are marginalized by "general education". That should never have happened. And it should be changed.

Personal logo Great War Ace Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 7:04 p.m. PST

Thanks, Hafen. :)

Personal logo Mardaddy Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 7:18 p.m. PST

I have to say I disagree (or at least am not quite convinced yet.)

It is only in these modern times (since 1979) that education (at least what I have seen in the USA, sorry to be biased on that) has eroded and slowly devolved.

The philosophy of "how to educate" since then has been experimented with, revised, upturned, changed and modified, with each experiment having diminishing results (feel free to show a sustained example otherwise.)

I will be DHed for my own opinion of why things changed the way they did when they did, because it is politics.

BUT – I am not necessarily convinced another "new idea" in the philosophy of teaching is the answer when US students were rated middling or near the top back before things changed.

AND the reasons cited for the USA's lack of being on top was that we LACKED a consistent, structured curriculum. I am good with that as it is decentralizing the power and such is the way the US (getting into politics now, so backing off…)

Anyway, the non-structured curriculum that is cited as a reason why the USA was not number one flies in the face of this new idea you are posting where the child leans what they will, when they want.

Given non-structured freedom, most will vegetate and sleep or devise new ways to torment one another. You cite how did we get mathematics? Not from what would be elementary through high school-aged kids. So that is a non-argument.

So while I am not saying it'll never work, I am unconvinced and would need to see sustained evidence.

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian18 Sep 2017 7:57 p.m. PST

Reading is essential, as they say.

Reading 'books', on the other hand, may well be as relevant soon as being able to read scrolls is.

For many subjects, the fastest and most convenient way to learn is to take an online course, read a website, access PDF manuals, or watch a YouTube 'how to' video.

The problem with "Let them follow their Muse." is that too many will choose cake instead of bread – to learn the 'fun' things and skimp on the fundamentals.

Hafen von Schlockenberg Supporting Member of TMP18 Sep 2017 8:56 p.m. PST

I take it no one's going to look at the video. If you do,you'll see children choosing to learn "fun" things like geometry, math, physics, and DNA replication. That last one by Tamil-speaking South Indian children,on an English-only computer set up in a village street.

irishserb19 Sep 2017 4:34 a.m. PST

Great War Ace, In the mid 1960s, a teacher presented to me that the obligation of the teacher was to find the methods that successfully conveyed the information to each student, such that they learned and grew on an individual basis. And, that the most effective methods varied from one child to the next. That teacher also used dynamic and non-traditional methods in his presentation of the curriculum. His students consistently had higher test scores than those of his peers and predecessors. He was highly commended by several organizations of forward thinking educators that monitored his classes, and then he was fired, because he threatened a number of long standing families associated with the local education system. Eventually he gave up teaching, and became an accountant.

While reading may not be the best method of learning for every student, it certainly is an effective method for many. And, it has at least some success with the tremendous majority of students. Additionally, it can be a very cost effective method of teaching and learning. I would hesitate to exclude it as an available method.

Regarding von Schlockenberg's video, the scope of the video is not great enough for him to present the full scope of his effort, and I realize that. But, given what I've seen, I think his initial premise is at least partially invalid, and that his presentation is subjective. I could present my views in at some length, with significant support, but this forum isn't the best mechanism for such discussion, and I simply don't have the time. Let me offer that I agree there is merit to what he presents, but that it is hardly all encompassing. Your tone in this thread suggest to me, that maybe you put too much trust in the absolution of his presentation, though I recognize that I could easily be reading that into the thread, as one's tone and manner is not always easily or successfully conveyed through this medium. All I am saying is keep an open mind. New can be good, old isn't always bad, and my experience is that there is almost always more than one valid solution, and often no best solution.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 4:54 a.m. PST

Reading is a tool. It isn't the be all or end all of learning.

Wrong, it is the beginning of all education. "End all and be all" is a straw man and not what your preacher said.

And it should be changed.

Please explain these changes.

Reading is essential, as they say.

Yep.

Reading 'books', on the other hand, may well be as relevant soon as being able to read scrolls is.

The media changes, but the importance of reading doesn't. It was important at a time even before scrolls.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 5:02 a.m. PST

AND the reasons cited for the USA's lack of being on top was that we LACKED a consistent, structured curriculum. I am good with that as it is decentralizing the power and such is the way the US (getting into politics now, so backing off…)

No to get into politics too deeply, but as an outsider who has American friends who are teachers, the US seems to value education so little that a much smaller part of the GNP is given over to education than seen in other countries. US teachers are paid at lower rates than the first world countries that you have to compete against. It all starts from there.

link

The US ranks 14th in education and 24th in literacy.

link

Personal logo Mardaddy Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 6:55 a.m. PST

I do not know what to call the rationing of income by GNP as a matrix. There are FAR different taxation rates, compensations, costs of living, union rules and relationships between those organizations and the state…

It is nowhere near apples to apples. The comparison is next to useless, especially since the GNP difference between Norway and the US is so vast, it compounds the real numbers (dollars.)

Yes, in 2014, the US ranked 14th and 24th. Picking one year without looking at the history of what it used to be is, again, almost useless.

Teachers are VERY well compensated where I am at here in California. Do not be fooled into looking at "starting salary" because that is a purposely low income they like to cite as virtue-signaling, and clamoring for raises.

Look at their median income:

LA median $55,909 USD
Teachers $62,931 USD

Sacramento median $62,800 USD
Teachers $63,551 USD

San Diego median $63,400 USD
Teachers $62,566 USD

These do NOT take into account the full medical/dental for them and their families, pensions for life and union protections; teachers are VERY well compensated here (at least in California) and I roll my eyes every time I hear of bond measures for schools (every three years, on average.)

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 7:49 a.m. PST

I do not know what to call the rationing of income by GNP as a matrix. There are FAR different taxation rates, compensations, costs of living, union rules and relationships between those organizations and the state…

It is nowhere near apples to apples. The comparison is next to useless, especially since the GNP difference between Norway and the US is so vast, it compounds the real numbers (dollars.)

I think % of GNP is used by everyone because it is the best way to compare apples to apples. Teachers seem to be paid close to the median wages in California. Is California representative of the rest of the country? Regardless, your teachers are paid worse than other first world countries.

Yes, in 2014, the US ranked 14th and 24th. Picking one year without looking at the history of what it used to be is, again, almost useless.

Almost useless? How so? According to the Dept of Education, the poor rates of US literacy have remained constant for the last 10 years. I'll let you look that up. The data from 1992 to 2003:

link

My point is that at a rank of 24th in literacy, this is no time to question the teaching of reading skills.

Hafen von Schlockenberg Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 8:52 a.m. PST

Well, I'm not seeking absolution.

Perhaps I did seem a bit grouchy,for which I apologize; I was just a little exasperated by some of the generalizations about children's desire to learn (or lack of it) expressed here,which seem to come from a sort of "fallen world" idea of human nature, and some of which,at least, appear to me to have been refuted by the experiment.

And it is an experiment,an ongoing one,something that should be kept in mind. I am aware of criticisms of it, and it may turn out to be wrong. But the early results strike me as very hopeful. Some of the "but what about. . ." questions will be answered in the course of it. I eagerly await the outcome.

Here's an update, from two years after the original talk:

https://youtu.be/nLtUl2CP8ak

. . .there is almost always more than one valid solution,and often no best solution.

Readily agreed.

Personal logo Mardaddy Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 9:31 a.m. PST

Bowman, going back 10 years still makes my point – did you not see I used 1979 as my, "year it started going downhill?"
Go back much farther.

I may have misread that Finland/US graph… I thought it was a comparison of % of Finland GNP teachers pay vs % of USA GNP teachers pay. My bad.

BUT again, it is still not apples to apples. link
Finnish teachers are required to have a Masters Degree, and their pay is scaled accordingly. Finnish teachers work 550hrs vs 1051hrs due to the lack of bureaucracy that US teachers are saddled with (I fully support this: Finnish teachers also don't have all the silly bureaucratic paperwork that so many American teachers have because basically it is trusted that they will do a good job once they are accepted into and graduate from teacher training school.  Seriously, there is basically no administration in Finland and even the principals at many schools still teach at least one or two classes (more on this another time, but imagine what this means financially as well). Since Finland has a national pension scheme that career pensions are added to, and the US has a full pension via the union, the "cost" of a teacher between the two is still skewed.

I agree, it is absolutely time to question the teaching of reading skills. Like myself, you seem to have a pre-determined answer, concentrating on higher pay for teachers based on (???), mine has a decentralized track record in the US up to 1979 (and that decentralization seems to be working for Finland as well.)

Personal logo Great War Ace Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 10:16 a.m. PST

Please explain these changes.

Simply, school should engage the students with questions (as in Hafen's linked video experiment) and let them discover answers. Instead of "old school" or "general education" approach, we should be promoting individual paths. I am not suggesting that modern tech should take over teachers, and just let kids spend untutored time on computers (and the Net, ye gods!).

In the US we have another problem: too much is taken for granted and viewed with entitlement mentality. The danger is very real that huge numbers of kids will do exactly as feared in this thread: degenerate into "cake" eating slobs who look up sex on the Net in between their video games.

Time "in" school should be supervised. Time in front of a computer should be tailored to learning. If reading is a problem, then facilitating that skill should be a groundwork leading to the other areas and skill sets.

I never said that reading and writing (well, composing; fewer and fewer people actually write physically; and even the keyboard is a dodo, with voice recognition doing all the heavy lifting) was to be tossed: I said that many thousands of students, and adults, do not read well or at all; we cannot ignore the problem.

If education goes the way I believe it should, readers and nonreaders alike will benefit from modern tech and still learn. Reading will not be the make or break skill. We have other ways to convey knowledge other than reading it. Our age has invented tools that do an end run on reading for most things.

The higher learning that depends on reading comprehension will remain inviolate. Anyone wanting to engage in higher learning will per force learn to read well. That isn't going to change anytime soon, if ever. At least until some direct infusion of knowledge to the brain via sleep or biological alteration of the way the deficient brain learns comes into play. Right now, in order to do more than begin (like the Indian village students with their "hole in the wall" computer time), reading comprehension is required. We need to continue to promote reading skills above all others in young students. Later, after the reading "push" has failed with the portion of the population that "doesn't get it", we can help them in other ways to achieve in other areas not requiring reading skills. If one of them still wants to be a molecular biologist, and cannot read, we can sympathize and keep encouraging her to pound the books – much like her head against the wall – and at the same time direct her toward jobs that she can do, while she pursues her dream …

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP19 Sep 2017 10:49 a.m. PST

I never said that reading and writing (…..snip….) was to be tossed:….

No one said you did.

The higher learning that depends on reading comprehension will remain inviolate.

Or conversing on a Forum. See above.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP In the TMP Dawghouse19 Sep 2017 1:28 p.m. PST

we need math and history

Sorry to say but those subjects are not a major focus of today's education.

Take this question:

6/2*(1+2) = ??

I can post videos of individuals coming up with a different answer than what it should be.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP In the TMP Dawghouse19 Sep 2017 1:31 p.m. PST

but the importance of reading doesn't

Thing is today students can barely read and with the way they are going the ability to talk will be lost as well.

All I see each and everyday is individuals on their "Dumb Phones".

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP20 Sep 2017 5:46 a.m. PST

Yes. Let's keep spending trillions in the West educating the young to long for the days of the last Ice Age, and to make us all feel guilty that it ended. :)

Dan

picture

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP20 Sep 2017 6:17 a.m. PST

Mardaddy, I think we are actually in agreement……mostly.

Bowman, going back 10 years still makes my point – did you not see I used 1979 as my, "year it started going downhill?"
Go back much farther.

I'm sorry, I thought your point was, "Picking one year without looking at the history of what it used to be is, again, almost useless." It's not useless and the link confirms that.

I'm not that concerned about 1979 being some watershed year. I'm simply stating that a country that sits in 24th spot on the literacy level can ill afford to reconsider the importance of reading and writing.

As an aside, the Finland/US comparison is done by many as the teacher wages are similar (modified by benefits, insurance and vacations). However, most European countries spend more on education than Finland, including the other Scandinavian countries, England, Germany and France. That's not including Canada and the financial powerhouses in Asia, including Australia and Japan. Also, don't forget that education expenses are more that just teachers salaries and pensions. Factor in textbooks, supplies, School building construction and upkeep, buses, administration costs, etc.

Personal logo Mardaddy Supporting Member of TMP20 Sep 2017 4:21 p.m. PST

Teacher's pay was something that was brought up as an example of, "we're not doing it right because." That is the only reason I addressed it like I did.

There is so much bureaucratic WASTE within our school systems at all levels it boggles the mind. Wastes of time, effort and energy for the teachers and the students, and wastes of taxpayer money that could be better spent concentrating on better pay and improved learning of the basics instead of, "distractions."

Again, details would be political in nature.

Mithmee Supporting Member of TMP In the TMP Dawghouse20 Sep 2017 6:30 p.m. PST

According to the Dept of Education, the poor rates of US literacy have remained constant for the last 10 years.

This is due for several reasons, one of those reasons is like Math & History teaching child to read is not important in today's education.

But teachers in the United States are very well paid and many end up double dipping.

Start teaching right out of college (around age 22-24) work for 25 years in one district and retire. Then go to work in another district and put in another 20 years, while getting their retirement pay.

Plus we have far too many school districts with nearly all of them with a School Board and bloated staffs.

Hafen von Schlockenberg Supporting Member of TMP20 Sep 2017 7:47 p.m. PST

I guess teachers really do have it made,then.

Maybe I can get one to take me for a spin in her Maserati.

Charlie 1220 Sep 2017 8:36 p.m. PST

I guess teachers really do have it made,then.

Yeah, right….

As the only member of my extended family who did not go into the "family business" of teaching, that statement (and many others on this thread) are laughable. Consider this: to even get considered in most districts for a fulltime teaching position, a masters is the minimum. With additional specialized credentialing above that. Plus, ongoing training and school is absolutely required (kinda like "up or out"). And tell me, how many of you after your 8 hours on the job get to take home papers to grade for 3-4 hours EVERY NIGHT. Plus, some districts (most actually) are so strapped for supplies that teachers have to make up the shortfall out of their own pockets (and no, they don't get reimbursed).

Don't tell me how good teachers have it. To those who know you just look foolish….

Interesting thing about these types of "discussions" (and I mean in the general public) is some of the loudest "know it alls" sounding off about what's wrong with education have NEVER stood in front of a classroom. Until you've tried to get 30 kids to LEARN (and I have during my brief student teaching days), you have NO CLUE about the subject…

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP21 Sep 2017 4:56 a.m. PST

Teacher's pay was something that was brought up as an example of, "we're not doing it right because." That is the only reason I addressed it like I did.

Actually I brought up lack of funding based on GNP AND teacher pay in the same entry of Sept 19. Again, Finland was used as a comparative model as they do not pay their teachers particularly well.

There is so much bureaucratic WASTE within our school systems at all levels it boggles the mind.

Something my country shares with yours. Bureaucracy.

Interesting thing about these types of "discussions" (and I mean in the general public) is some of the loudest "know it alls" sounding off about what's wrong with education have NEVER stood in front of a classroom.

Or, "……..never spent a lot of time in a classroom" would work too. wink

Hafen von Schlockenberg Supporting Member of TMP21 Sep 2017 7:15 a.m. PST

Once again, excessive dryness gets me into trouble.

You do know what a Maserati is,right?

picture

link

Maybe used one,then?

link

Hafen von Schlockenberg Supporting Member of TMP21 Sep 2017 1:49 p.m. PST

Would exclamations, quotation marks,capitalization,and emoticons help?

Gosh! I guess teachers really do "Have It Made",then! ; )

How's that? Or maybe if I replaced "Maserati" with "yacht"?

My grandmother, mother, and three cousins taught school.

So yeah. I know.

BTW, For her first year of teaching, my mother had FIFTY first graders.

I'm aware.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.