America to Adopt Swedish Education Model

American Schools:
"We can't afford to open safely. There's not enough money for the appropriate precautions."

President:
"Fine! Now you have even less money! I want the taxpayers of that district DEAD! I'm trying to get a war on the poor so they can't vote in November. Gahhh."

'Merica:
"Let the children suffer! Down with children! Stupid dependents."

Smart people:
"Okay. How about more birth control so there aren't as many children? And how about if we let some of the LGBTQ + community who can afford kids adopt some? End child marriage. Tougher on rapists. Child support starts in the womb. More access to abortion clinics. Limits on the cost of giving birth and prenatal care. Free daycare."

'Merica leader:
"WHAT??? NO!!! Crank them out so we can kill them!"

America isn't Germany, Denmark, Norway, or Sweden.

https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/funding-education-31_en

In general, education is administered and financed by Germany's 16 federal states, with the national government assuming responsibility for the standardization of requirements for the Abitur, for teacher training, and for vocational education, as well as for financial support of students in higher education.

Equal education. Not better schools based on where students live.

In 2014, Germany's 16 states abolished tuition fees for undergraduate students at all public German universities. This means that currently both domestic and international undergraduates at public universities in Germany can study for free, with just a small fee to cover administration and other costs per semester.

The central government finances the bulk of education in Norway. About 40 percent of compulsory education, 60 percent of upper secondary education, and a full 100 percent of higher education is paid by the central government. Local municipalities cover the remaining expenses.


The Danish school system offers high quality education from the age of 6 to 19. Education is a key priority in Denmark. The Danish public schooling and education system is financed by taxes and therefore free of charge.

Funds are generally provided as part of a block grant. No local or regional authorities are involved in the funding of upper secondary schools and nor is own revenue use for the funding of the schools.
https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/early-childhood-and-school-education-funding-22_en




The Swedish Education Act states that all children and young people are to have equal access to education, regardless of gender, where they live or social or economic factors, making it the, ‘education of the future’ for many people across the world.


https://twitter.com/openletterbot/status/1281024927458422784

Questions About Mandatory School Prayer

I recently came across a post on Facebook where someone suggested that school prayer needs to be required again.

I HAVE QUESTIONS.

Will all religions be included? What about atheists? And would that mean the school day is longer, it replaces the pledge, or that a school subject gets less time?

I'm not going pro or con without that information. A few extra minutes a day for "silent meditation or prayer" would be fine. I'm not sure Americans are ready for the five times a day prayer required by some religions. I don't think that could work in capitalism. Then again, some places allow smoke breaks, and prayer might be the same amount of time.

I would suggest a non- denominational room for prayer so students could ask to go use it. But some teachers already only allow two bathroom breaks per school year per student. So I don't imagine prayer room use would get better treatment. And what about during the most special standardized test days, when no one is allowed to leave the room at all? Is prayer canceled then? Less time for the precious test? Longer school days required during standardized test days?

Plus, there's a lot of issues where adults attack other adults while worshipping. There's already violence in schools. Adding religious tensions? Oh sure, it sounds like some religions could be able to teach love, acceptance, and understanding of everyone... but the history department is over there with a boatload of wars that never seem to really end which kind of prove otherwise. How can that be dealt with? Who could be in charge of making sure the message of any religious group isn't one of hate, one that alienates some people for who they are?

But really, the biggest question I have-- okay, what if Congress brings it back, but it isn't your religion? What if they toss them all in a hat and pull one out. "JAINISM!" ...and now that's the type of prayer said over the intercom daily?

What if the 4200 religions of the world take turns? Twice a day school prayer, a different one each time. 180 school days. 12 years. (180 school days*2 times a day= 360  360*12 years=4320)

Yeah, every student would hear a prayer from every religion. Would Americans be okay with their children being exposed to two different religions every school day? (We're talking about people who brought back diseases because they didn't vaccinate.)




I think this is the side of the debate that gets ignored. But I think it's the most interesting part of it.

Extend the school days by 20 minutes. 10 extra minutes in the morning and 10 in the afternoon to hear a prayer and short summary of a religion. That's an interesting concept. Not sure how it'd get voted in though. But sure, that's an interesting idea.

Perhaps every religion that wishes to be included has to raise money to fund their 10 minutes. To pay for the staff that has to stay, the cost of keeping the building open a little longer, and a fee to cover any violence, graffiti, or lawsuits as a result of this experiment. There would need to be a guarantee that the trial lasts long enough for all of the relgions who sign up to be heard. (Between 11 and 12 years.) This also means no one can argue, "I ain't paying school taxes for them to teach some other faith to the damn kids!" No, in fact, you wouldn't be. Each faith has to pay the same amount. They'll have to raise that money from their followers.

(Religion is about money, right? You can't worship if you're poor, right? Pretty sure that's a thing. Your religion has to self-fund in order to be recognized. And it doesn't get taxed on that money. Yeah, pretty sure we've already set up that system of recognition.)



Percent of world religions.
Is this the argument? Whichever one has the most should get to be the one taught? Seems like it means that's the one that most people would already know, and therefore it's all the others that should be taught, as that's where the lack of knowledge is.

Equality, even and especially in education. What if we give it a whirl?

Gym, English, and Government Revelation Instead of Revolution to Spur on the New Year

Happy New Year

Because of a dream last night, I woke up with a revelation.

Though we felt miles apart, perhaps the knowledge levels of my fellow middle school students and I wasn't actually that far apart.

In gym class, we'd play various sports, like baseball (or softball or t-ball or kickball...). The rules were never explained in class. "Just do what everyone else does." There were 3 to 5 students who magically possessed the knowledge of the rules. They wouldn't tell you what the rules were, only if you broke them.

I broke those rules ALL THE TIME. The biggest reason that I sucked at sports, at gym class, was because I kept breaking rules. (This sucking reasoning is closely followed by my poor coordination, but that's not the point.) "You're out. You can't drop the bat that way." (I still, to this day, don't know the proper way to place a bat down after hitting the ball.) "You're out because Joe was stealing second and you were on second and didn't make it to third in time." (I didn't even know what stealing a base was, but stealing is a word that means a very bad action, so I wouldn't have wanted to do it. Plus, did it ever occur to Joe that this was going to backfire? There's no way I would have known I had to run. And even if I did know, there's no way I was going to make it. Why did he think I would? Did he think that through, or was he just trying to get his own teammate "out" because it somehow made him look better? Why is that? I really don't know.)

But then there was English class. I seemed to know a lot of "rules" that hadn't been taught. I read a lot of books, and learned grammar as a result. Joe didn't read a lot of books, he was busy with Little League and such.

Is it possible that we were equal in our knowledge levels, but that he was being taught rules of a sport while I was learning the rules of language? Yet we each felt superior to the other because we knew so much about something that the other did not.

What might life have been like if we took the time to help each other? If we had both acknowledged that we excelled in different areas, and then tried to help each other? Except that's NOT how the world works. So when we had to do group work, I carried my "team." I did the lion's share so that I wouldn't fail, and they benefited with a higher grade. When we played baseball, Joe did the lion's share so our team would win and (I suppose) I benefited by being on a winning team. (This didn't alter my gym grade, so I don't understand the benefit to me one way or the other, but I'll assume there was supposed to be one.) We each walked away from those experiences with almost no knowledge gained. Joe wasn't really better at English class, I wasn't really better at Gym class.

Is this also how our government is set up?
Could the wealthy person at the BIG CHAIR be teaching people how to do better financially, while those people also taught him or others how to do whatever they happen to be good at? But, instead, is that person "stealing second" without a thought about the person on third, trying to win some game while not caring if his own teammates are "out" because of it? And even if the team doesn't win, does he feel like he did a good job because he tried to win a team game by himself? Is he doing all the group work to get an A, not caring if no one else in the group learns anything, thinking they should just be glad to have an A for a change?

What if we really did help each other? Not just what we perceive as help ("You were on a winning team, weren't you?" "You got an A, didn't you?"), but actually sharing our knowledge to elevate each other. It's a New Year. Maybe new thinking is in order.