US education Started to Fall after Dept. of Education was Created

[Thursday]

As recently as 20 years ago, the United States was ranked No.1 in high school and college education. In 2009, the United States was ranked 18th out of 36 industrialized nations.

U.S. Global Education Rankings Slipping, Boomers Once Held Strong Lead



During this period, the amount we spend per child on education has skyrocketed.

Teacher's unions and administrators are making more money than ever.

Teacher's unions are fighting against vouchers which will allow parents and children to choose better schools. Why is this?

 

[Rick Otto]

As recently as 20 years ago, the United States was ranked No.1 in high school and college education. In 2009, the United States was ranked 18th out of 36 industrialized nations.

U.S. Global Education Rankings Slipping, Boomers Once Held Strong Lead



During this period, the amount we spend per child on education has skyrocketed.

Teacher's unions and administrators are making more money than ever.

Teacher's unions are fighting against vouchers which will allow parents and children to choose better schools. Why is this?

The rank and file is probably thinking the profit motive may do to education what it tried to do their jobs.
So I am defending the idea of unions, not the corrupted by money organizations they too have become... Just like I would defend the idea of government, but not the satanic, perverse, corporate debt slavery with a fig leaf of democracy that we have today.

 

[Thursday]

The rank and file is probably thinking the profit motive may do to education what it tried to do their jobs.
So I am defending the idea of unions, not the corrupted by money organizations they too have become... Just like I would defend the idea of government, but not the satanic, perverse, corporate debt slavery with a fig leaf of democracy that we have today.

I don't think the teacher's unions were ever a noble enterprise.

FYI:

Marxism and Humanism are the predominant philosophies of America's education establishment, yet every day we send the public schools our most precious gift, our children, to be "educated."

Our schools are filled with sex education, political correctness, environmental extremism, global unity, diversity training (pro-gay indoctrination), and "higher-order thinking skills" boldly claiming that, in order to become a higher order thinker, one must first believe absolutely that there are no absolutes!

Our schools are filled with violence, murder, extortion, rape, unwanted pregnancy, drug use, disrespect, and foul language. Test scores have been declining for decades as the numbers of children who cannot read continue to increase.

While the pontificators wonder why this is so, many parents and citizens have figured it out. Although earth worship, paganism and the occult flourish in public schools, the Greatest Story Ever Told, based on the greatest book ever written, the Holy Bible, which tells of the greatest teacher who ever lived, Jesus Christ, is not used or even allowed. The Bible was America's first textbook, but today it is referred to as a collection of fables.

America's educational system began to decline with the introduction of socialism, given impetus by the increasing involvement of the federal government. Lenin said: "Communism is socialism in a hurry." Socialism, therefore, is Communism by gradualism rather than by revolution. The socialist "Fabian Society," forerunner of most socialist groups in America, had as its motto "Make Haste Slowly."

"Democratic socialism" became the battle cry for socializing the United States. The goal was to "permeate and penetrate," then control from within. The socialists' first target was education, and they attacked with deceitful language. There were no badges or socialist labels; followers described themselves as "liberal," "progressive," and even "moderate." Words were the weapon of choice in this new war. By changing the meanings of words, socialists concealed their true purpose.

This massive social engineering was carried out under the banners of "reform" and "social justice." These innovations are in the public interest, Americans were told. They promote true democracy, humanitarianism, and, of course are "for the children." The buzzwords of socialism were and still are "social" and "democracy" (i.e. social science, social studies and socialization of the child).

In the early 1900s, unrest in Europe brought thousands of socialists to America. Many held degrees in psychology, sociology and psychiatry (the behavioral sciences) and a number of them became university professors.

Norman Thomas, a socialist and member of the American Civil Liberties Union, boldly told the world: "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened."

John Dewey, known as "the father of modern education," was an avowed socialist and the co-author of the "Humanist Manifesto." The U.S. House Committee on Un-American Activities discovered that he belonged to 15 Marxist front organizations. Dewey taught the professors who trained America's teachers. Obsessed with "the group," he said, "You can't make socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society, which is coming, where everyone is interdependent."

Author Rosalie Gordon, writing about Dewey's progressive (socialist) education in her book What's Happened To Our Schools, said: "The progressive system has reached all the way down to the lowest grades to prepare the children of America for their role as the collectivists of the future. The group - not the individual child - is the quintessence of progressivism. The child must always be made to feel part of the group. He must indulge in group thinking and group activity."

After visiting the Soviet Union, Dewey wrote six articles on the "wonders" of Soviet education. The School-To-Work program, now in our public schools in all 50 states, is modeled after the Soviet poly-technical system.

In 1936, the National Education Association stated the position from which it has never wavered: "We stand for socializing the individual." The NEA, in its Policy For American Education, opined: "The major problem of education in our times arises out of the fact that we live in a period of fundamental social change. In the new democracy [what happened to our republic?], education must share in the responsibility of giving purpose and direction to social change. The major function of the school is the social orientation of the individual . . . Education must operate according to a well-formulated social policy."

NEA specialist Paul Haubner, tells us, "The schools cannot allow parents to influence the kind of values-education their children receive in school; . that is what is wrong with those who say there is a universal system of values. Our goals are incompatible with theirs. We must change their values."

Chester M. Pierce, M.D., Professor of Education and Psychiatry at Harvard, had this to say: "Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It's up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well - by creating the international child of the future."

Some politicians agree. Former Nebraska state senator Peter Hoagland said: "Fundamentalist parents have no right to indoctrinate their children in their beliefs. We are preparing their children for the year 2000 and life in a global one-world society and those children will not fit in."

In the Humanist Magazine, Jan./Feb 1983, John Dunphy wrote: "The battle for mankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom . The classroom must and will become the arena of conflict between the old and the new . the rotting corpse of Christianity and the new faith of humanism."

Bureaucrats, politicians and educators regularly appear on television blaming either parents or lack of funds for the failure of our schools. Their prescription is always the same: more money and more government control. For well over 50 years, American voters have fallen for these fallacies. Victor Gollancz, a famous socialist publisher, explained why he believed that socialism would take over America: "Christians are not exactly bright, so it will be easy for socialism to lead them down the garden path through their ideals of brotherly love and 'social justice.'"

It's time for Christians to stand up for their families and their faith and put God in charge of this nation and its schools. Restoring America is that simple.

Why Our Schools Teach Socialism -- September 2001 Education Reporter

 

[grasping the after wind]

The rank and file is probably thinking the profit motive may do to education what it tried to do their jobs.
So I am defending the idea of unions, not the corrupted by money organizations they too have become... Just like I would defend the idea of government, but not the satanic, perverse, corporate debt slavery with a fig leaf of democracy that we have today.

Unions make sense for unskilled labor but are absolutely idiotic for trained professionals. We would not accept being told we have to go to a doctor that was constantly performing worse than his/her peers while someone else was assigned to have their health care needs fulfilled by a doctor with an exemplary record. Yet, unless we take our children out of the state run system, that is exactly how we educate our children in the US. Good Unions, those that are run by leaders more interested in the people they represent than they are in some political agenda, are most interested in the benefit of the collective workforce but if the idea is to strive for excellence a good union is not helpful and a bad union is absolutely a road block. Having Teacher's contracts that reward those that excel no better than those that fail and protect those that fail from any negative consequences for that failure is counterproductive to having excellent schools. Try running any professional sports league in that manner. And those leagues have unions. The difference is those unions understand that their leagues need to put out a product that is top notch or the total amount of benefit available to their members will be reduced. In the US, the worse the product in education the more money politicians will throw at it. So the way to increase funding is to decrease results.

 

[Rick Otto]

I don't think the teacher's unions were ever a noble enterprise.

FYI:

Marxism and Humanism are the predominant philosophies of America's education establishment, yet every day we send the public schools our most precious gift, our children, to be "educated."

Our schools are filled with sex education, political correctness, environmental extremism, global unity, diversity training (pro-gay indoctrination), and "higher-order thinking skills" boldly claiming that, in order to become a higher order thinker, one must first believe absolutely that there are no absolutes!

Our schools are filled with violence, murder, extortion, rape, unwanted pregnancy, drug use, disrespect, and foul language. Test scores have been declining for decades as the numbers of children who cannot read continue to increase.

While the pontificators wonder why this is so, many parents and citizens have figured it out. Although earth worship, paganism and the occult flourish in public schools, the Greatest Story Ever Told, based on the greatest book ever written, the Holy Bible, which tells of the greatest teacher who ever lived, Jesus Christ, is not used or even allowed. The Bible was America's first textbook, but today it is referred to as a collection of fables.

America's educational system began to decline with the introduction of socialism, given impetus by the increasing involvement of the federal government. Lenin said: "Communism is socialism in a hurry." Socialism, therefore, is Communism by gradualism rather than by revolution. The socialist "Fabian Society," forerunner of most socialist groups in America, had as its motto "Make Haste Slowly."

"Democratic socialism" became the battle cry for socializing the United States. The goal was to "permeate and penetrate," then control from within. The socialists' first target was education, and they attacked with deceitful language. There were no badges or socialist labels; followers described themselves as "liberal," "progressive," and even "moderate." Words were the weapon of choice in this new war. By changing the meanings of words, socialists concealed their true purpose.

This massive social engineering was carried out under the banners of "reform" and "social justice." These innovations are in the public interest, Americans were told. They promote true democracy, humanitarianism, and, of course are "for the children." The buzzwords of socialism were and still are "social" and "democracy" (i.e. social science, social studies and socialization of the child).

In the early 1900s, unrest in Europe brought thousands of socialists to America. Many held degrees in psychology, sociology and psychiatry (the behavioral sciences) and a number of them became university professors.

Norman Thomas, a socialist and member of the American Civil Liberties Union, boldly told the world: "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened."

John Dewey, known as "the father of modern education," was an avowed socialist and the co-author of the "Humanist Manifesto." The U.S. House Committee on Un-American Activities discovered that he belonged to 15 Marxist front organizations. Dewey taught the professors who trained America's teachers. Obsessed with "the group," he said, "You can't make socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society, which is coming, where everyone is interdependent."

Author Rosalie Gordon, writing about Dewey's progressive (socialist) education in her book What's Happened To Our Schools, said: "The progressive system has reached all the way down to the lowest grades to prepare the children of America for their role as the collectivists of the future. The group - not the individual child - is the quintessence of progressivism. The child must always be made to feel part of the group. He must indulge in group thinking and group activity."

After visiting the Soviet Union, Dewey wrote six articles on the "wonders" of Soviet education. The School-To-Work program, now in our public schools in all 50 states, is modeled after the Soviet poly-technical system.

In 1936, the National Education Association stated the position from which it has never wavered: "We stand for socializing the individual." The NEA, in its Policy For American Education, opined: "The major problem of education in our times arises out of the fact that we live in a period of fundamental social change. In the new democracy [what happened to our republic?], education must share in the responsibility of giving purpose and direction to social change. The major function of the school is the social orientation of the individual . . . Education must operate according to a well-formulated social policy."

NEA specialist Paul Haubner, tells us, "The schools cannot allow parents to influence the kind of values-education their children receive in school; . that is what is wrong with those who say there is a universal system of values. Our goals are incompatible with theirs. We must change their values."

Chester M. Pierce, M.D., Professor of Education and Psychiatry at Harvard, had this to say: "Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It's up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well - by creating the international child of the future."

Some politicians agree. Former Nebraska state senator Peter Hoagland said: "Fundamentalist parents have no right to indoctrinate their children in their beliefs. We are preparing their children for the year 2000 and life in a global one-world society and those children will not fit in."

In the Humanist Magazine, Jan./Feb 1983, John Dunphy wrote: "The battle for mankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom . The classroom must and will become the arena of conflict between the old and the new . the rotting corpse of Christianity and the new faith of humanism."

Bureaucrats, politicians and educators regularly appear on television blaming either parents or lack of funds for the failure of our schools. Their prescription is always the same: more money and more government control. For well over 50 years, American voters have fallen for these fallacies. Victor Gollancz, a famous socialist publisher, explained why he believed that socialism would take over America: "Christians are not exactly bright, so it will be easy for socialism to lead them down the garden path through their ideals of brotherly love and 'social justice.'"

It's time for Christians to stand up for their families and their faith and put God in charge of this nation and its schools. Restoring America is that simple.

Why Our Schools Teach Socialism -- September 2001 Education Reporter

You may be right.
But that's one union, not all unions.
I further argue it is basically none of the government's business according to the constitution.
There should be no government schools, ideally.

 

[Thursday]

You may be right.
But that's one union, not all unions.
I further argue it is basically none of the government's business according to the constitution.
There should be no government schools, ideally.

I have no problem with the concept of unions. I agree that government schools are not the best way to educate children.

 

[grasping the after wind]

You may be right.
But that's one union, not all unions.
I further argue it is basically none of the government's business according to the constitution.
There should be no government schools, ideally.

I don't know about that. The Constitution does not preclude the local and State governments from being involved in the education industry but it certainly does nowhere give the Federal Government any power to be involved in education. Unfortunately the supreme court has decided to ignore Article 10 of the constitution and instead assume the government can do whatever the Constitution does not specifically prohibit it from doing and even at some times assume that it mandates the federal government to do things it does not specifically say the government must do.

 

[dgiharris]

I think your source is false and/or you are making a mistake in your argument. As near as I can tell, the article you link to is NOT speaking in terms of "best education" but rather in terms of "percent of people who have degrees". SO sure, from that standpoint, US is definitely high up on the list of students with degrees since School in America is compulsatory.

However, in terms of "quality" of education, IIRC (since the 80s) the US has always placed middle of the pack at best when we compare our test scores in math and science to those across the globe.

Why U.S. can’t get back to head of the class (because it was never there)

Then I have a serious problem with the next part of your title's premise, that is, you infer that our problems with education have to do with the creation of the Department of Education?

So what is the alternative, to just abolish the Dept. of Education and things get better?

I know GOP loves the ideas of vouchers. To me, the argument for school vouchers is very similar to the argument for Solar and Wind Energy as alternative fuels.

On a small scale and in the right environments, Solar and Wind are fantastic alternatives that pretty much meet your needs. The problem however is that when you actually try to replace current means of generating energy with Solar and Wind, the two can't handle the demand and requirements of 24/7 energy that scales according to need.

Same thing with vouchers. ON a small scale and in the right environments vouchers are AWESOME!!!! The problem occurs if/when you try to scale up and cover everyone with vouchers. THere are around 60 million kids in school. The cost of covering all of them with vouchers would be insane. Then there are the economics of a for-profit-model not being compatible with a public mandate.

Here is an example. Schools with higher test scores and more successful kids will be able to command a better price right? Thus, schools will be incentivized to screen kids and reject kids that score "below average". So how does this square with current mandates that all kids have access to an education?

Basically, if you actually crunch the numbers then much like the pipe dream of Solar and Wind, vouchers just can't handle the "total" demand and would end up being more expensive. Sure, in small doses and the right environment vouchers are awesome, but it can't be used for everyone. The system and infrastructure can't handle it and the Invisible Hand is not a good model for a social service like public education.

 

[Rick Otto]

I think your source is false and/or you are making a mistake in your argument. As near as I can tell, the article you link to is NOT speaking in terms of "best education" but rather in terms of "percent of people who has degrees". SO sure, from that standpoint, US is definitely high up on the list of students with degrees since School in America is compulsatory.

However, in terms of "quality" of education, IIRC (since the 80s) the US has always placed middle of the pack at best when we compare our test scores in math and science to those across the globe.

Why U.S. can’t get back to head of the class (because it was never there)

Then I have a serious problem with the next part of your title's premise, that is, you infer that our problems with education have to do with the creation of the Department of Education?

So what is the alternative, to just abolish the Dept. of Education and things get better?

I know GOP loves the ideas of vouchers. To me, the argument for school vouchers is very similar to the argument for Solar and Wind Energy as alternative fuels.

On a small scale and in the right environments, Solar and Wind are fantastic alternatives that pretty much meet your needs. The problem however is that when you actually try to replace current means of generating energy with Solar and Wind, the two can't handle the demand and requirements of 24/7 energy that scales according to need.

Same thing with vouchers. ON a small scale and in the right environments vouchers are AWESOME!!!! The problem occurs if/when you try to scale up and cover everyone with vouchers. THere are around 60 million kids in school. The cost of covering all of them with vouchers would be insane. Then there are the economics of a for-profit-model not being compatible with a public mandate.

Here is an example. Schools with higher test scores and more successful kids will be able to command a better price right? Thus, schools will be incentivized to screen kids and reject kids that score "below average". So how does this square with current mandates that all kids have access to an education?

Basically, if you actually crunch the numbers then much like the pipe dream of Solar and Wind, vouchers just can't handle the "total" demand and would end up being more expensive. Sure, in small doses and the right environment vouchers are awesome, but it can't be used for everyone. The system and infrastructure can't handle it and the Invisible Hand is not a good model for a social service like public education.

I think you articulated that power is best managed locally, even when produced regionally.

 

[Thursday]

Then I have a serious problem with the next part of your title's premise, that is, you infer that our problems with education have to do with the creation of the Department of Education?

So what is the alternative, to just abolish the Dept. of Education and things get better?

[/QUOTE]

Yes, I think the Dept. of Education is a burdensome, expensive slush fund that makes it more difficult to educate our kids. IMO, It's primary role is to dole out cash to education administrators who don't accomplish anything for our children. We would be much better off if that money went straight to the states.

 

[dgiharris]

I think you articulated that power is best managed locally, even when produced regionally.

I think I can mostly agree with that. Micromanaging from the top down is not efficient and only gets worse as an organization gets bigger and bigger.

Had an interesting problem in Starbucks once. Apparently (you can check at your local Starbucks) the temperature at Starbucks is set by "corporate" in Seattle, that is, local Starbucks have ZERO control over the thermostat. Now, on paper 75 degrees may seem like a good setting, but not when it is raining and 65 degrees outside. 75 degrees feels more like 60 degrees with the windchill.

So I asked the manager at Starbucks if he could turn the heater on or at least turn the air off and he apologized and said he couldn't that he had no control over the thermostat and that it was a common complaint that it was too cold in his Starbucks.

I know, equating School to Starbucks is apples and oranges... but micromanaging from ivory towers is just not as efficient as developing objectives then trusting the locals to meet your objectives however they see fit.

 

[Rick Otto]

I think I can mostly agree with that. Micromanaging from the top down is not efficient and only gets worse as an organization gets bigger and bigger.

Had an interesting problem in Starbucks once. Apparently (you can check at your local Starbucks) the temperature at Starbucks is set by "corporate" in Seattle, that is, local Starbucks have ZERO control over the thermostat. Now, on paper 75 degrees may seem like a good setting, but not when it is raining and 65 degrees outside. 75 degrees feels more like 60 degrees with the windchill.

So I asked the manager at Starbucks if he could turn the heater on or at least turn the air off and he apologized and said he couldn't that he had no control over the thermostat and that it was a common complaint that it was too cold in his Starbucks.

I know, equating School to Starbucks is apples and oranges... but micromanaging from ivory towers is just not as efficient as developing objectives then trusting the locals to meet your objectives however they see fit.

I would duct tape some Tupperware over the thermostat and put an ice bag on it, or just aim a hair dryer at it, whichever the local weather dictates, lol.

 

[essentialsaltes]

In 1936, the National Education Association stated the position from which it has never wavered: "We stand for socializing the individual."

(sad trombone)

It's better that they be unsocialized? Honestly, people are overreacting to a sequence of letters that has nothing to do with socialism.

 

[Thursday]

(sad trombone)

It's better that they be unsocialized? Honestly, people are overreacting to a sequence of letters that has nothing to do with socialism.

Did you miss this:

John Dewey, known as "the father of modern education," was an avowed socialist and the co-author of the "Humanist Manifesto." The U.S. House Committee on Un-American Activities discovered that he belonged to 15 Marxist front organizations. Dewey taught the professors who trained America's teachers. Obsessed with "the group," he said, "You can't make socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society, which is coming, where everyone is interdependent."

and this:

"Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It's up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well - by creating the international child of the future."

 

[essentialsaltes]

Did you miss this:

John Dewey, known as "the father of modern education," was an avowed socialist and the co-author of the "Humanist Manifesto."

He was a signatory. He didn't write it.

Obsessed with "the group," he said, "You can't make socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society, which is coming, where everyone is interdependent."

Did he? Where? People have looked long and hard and have been unable to attribute that quote to Dewey.

Given that it's easy to find things that Dewey did write, like "If we train our children to take orders, to do things simply because they are told to, and fail to give them confidence to act and think for themselves, we are putting an almost insurmountable obstacle in the way of overcoming the present defects of our system and of establishing the truth of democratic ideals"...

Or "We need, on the whole, more elbow-room for activity of the outer sort, more freedom and spontaneity of action in the schoolroom and on the playground than we usually get, not because that is the act of self-expression or end in itself, but because, with a certain degree of elbow-room we can get opportunity for the students to think for themselves, to work out their own plans, to formulate their own problems, to carry their ideas into execution, and to test their plans and ideas to determine how they work out" ...

I think it likely that your quote is just a malicious lie.

and this:

"Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It's up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well - by creating the international child of the future."

It has been attributed to a 1972 speech by Pierce, and passed on and on, but do you have an original source for the text of the speech? It looks like the quote first appeared in Brave New Schools (originally published 1973), not a work that inspires confidence: "If someone had told me that globalist educators were determined to mold our children into a compliant workforce for a New World Order by year 2000, I wouldn't have believed them.
...
9. HUMAN SACRIFICE: Because of the quieting influence of Christianity, all ritual human sacrifice around the world apparently ended--for a season. But human nature hasn't changed. As God withdraws His protection from His lands - as He said He would when people turn from Him to other gods[26] - the type of demonic control that originally inspired human sacrifice and torture is likely to return. Death education, assignments like the "Fallout Shelter," and the cultural endorsement of abortion and euthanasia are preparing the new generation to accept many new forms of human sacrifice at the unholy altar of today's "common good.""



There, you made me do homework, and now I believe even less of your copy-pasted post. I first picked out the most obvious nonsense, and now I dig deeper and it looks like lies and errors everywhere. Sadly, it will continue to be copy-pasted for all eternity.

 

[essentialsaltes]

NEA specialist Paul Haubner, tells us, "The schools...

I humbly invite you to document any evidence of the existence of Paul Haubner of the NEA other than this one quote.

 

[Ana the Ist]

As recently as 20 years ago, the United States was ranked No.1 in high school and college education. In 2009, the United States was ranked 18th out of 36 industrialized nations.

U.S. Global Education Rankings Slipping, Boomers Once Held Strong Lead



During this period, the amount we spend per child on education has skyrocketed.

Teacher's unions and administrators are making more money than ever.

Teacher's unions are fighting against vouchers which will allow parents and children to choose better schools. Why is this?

Those other nations that now rank higher than the U.S. in education? They actually pay their teachers more...not less...

Teacher pay around the world | Brookings Institution

Teaching, education, like so many other things is subject to the cliche..."you get what you pay for".

 

[wing2000]

I suspect schools started to fail when their communities and parents stopped investing in their children's education.

 

[Nithavela]

It's also a matter of how a society views it's teachers. In societies with an effective education system, teachers are seen as valuable and on par with doctors and other highly skilled professionals, while in the USA, the saying was coined that "those that can't, teach".

 

[bill5]

A large part of the problem is also how teacher's authority in the classroom has been shredded, and you can thank our brilliant legal system for that by upholding all the idiotic sue-happy morons, upset when a teacher dares to so much as look at their little angle cross-eyed. I've heard this many times over from numerous teachers. They're more babysitters than teachers, with little authority to even do that.