Not sure if you're trolling or not, but if you'd read the links I posted it's clearly spelled out--with research-backed evidence--how and why Finland's system is one of the best in the world. You show me good empirical research that less government involvement produces the amazing gains not just in academic performance but overall societal well-being (i.e. happiness) that Finland has shown in the past decade and maybe we'll have something to discuss. Otherwise, I'll take well-conducted research over politically-biased speculation any day of the week.
>> ^renatojj:



You guys might want to consider that the right path is not Finland, but going the other direction, with less government involvement in education. This is about putting education and its institutions in a more competitive environment, governments will always bog them down, making it more about teachers or whatever else, turning them into the massive faceless institutions that are like prisons like @dag points out. Instead, we should put on schools the pressure to compete in quality and price for those who'd normally be paying for education, the students or their parents.
Mintbbb points out that bullying does exist in Finland, even though they have a lot less of it. A finnish friend of mine once told me he never saw a fist fight in his entire life, ever, not even as a kid. However, just because they had the decency of adopting anti-bullying measures, doesn't mean letting government educate and make choices for our kids is any better, don't let that fool you. Bullying has been going on for so long it's become an institution in itself, public schools in America and elsewhere have little incentive of stopping or even acknowledging it as a problem.

>> ^renatojj:

You guys might want to consider that the right path is not Finland, but going the other direction, with less government involvement in education. This is about putting education and its institutions in a more competitive environment, governments will always bog them down, making it more about teachers or whatever else, turning them into the massive faceless institutions that are like prisons like @dag points out. Instead, we should put on schools the pressure to compete in quality and price for those who'd normally be paying for education, the students or their parents.
Mintbbb points out that bullying does exist in Finland, even though they have a lot less of it. A finnish friend of mine once told me he never saw a fist fight in his entire life, ever, not even as a kid. However, just because they had the decency of adopting anti-bullying measures, doesn't mean letting government educate and make choices for our kids is any better, don't let that fool you. Bullying has been going on for so long it's become an institution in itself, public schools in America and elsewhere have little incentive of stopping or even acknowledging it as a problem.


For-pay schools exist. Gasp! If you want to send your kids to one, you can do it. Bullying still exists in them.

You guys might want to consider that the right path is not Finland, but going the other direction, with less government involvement in education. This is about putting education and its institutions in a more competitive environment, governments will always bog them down, making it more about teachers or whatever else, turning them into the massive faceless institutions that are like prisons like @dag points out. Instead, we should put on schools the pressure to compete in quality and price for those who'd normally be paying for education, the students or their parents.

Mintbbb points out that bullying does exist in Finland, even though they have a lot less of it. A finnish friend of mine once told me he never saw a fist fight in his entire life, ever, not even as a kid. However, just because they had the decency of adopting anti-bullying measures, doesn't mean letting government educate and make choices for our kids is any better, don't let that fool you. Bullying has been going on for so long it's become an institution in itself, public schools in America and elsewhere have little incentive of stopping or even acknowledging it as a problem.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Nice links. I like this particular section very much:

As for accountability of teachers and administrators, Sahlberg shrugs. "There's no word for accountability in Finnish," he later told an audience at the Teachers College of Columbia University. "Accountability is something that is left when responsibility has been subtracted."

For Sahlberg what matters is that in Finland all teachers and administrators are given prestige, decent pay, and a lot of responsibility. A master's degree is required to enter the profession, and teacher training programs are among the most selective professional schools in the country. If a teacher is bad, it is the principal's responsibility to notice and deal with it.

@smooman

Yeah, I think the way you worded your first post led me to believe you were advocating just doing things the way they've always been done until now and that you didn't consider it that big of a problem. I think though that bullying is much more complex than just the parental/family issues you mentioned. Certainly I'm sure you going to find something there, but I think @dag has pointed out that institutional learning as it is currently carried out in most Western countries carries part of the blame as well. My question is, do things have to be this way? Do we have to be complacent with the current level of bullying? Is it beyond our control (i.e. we can't change what is happening in the homes after kids get out of school). I don't believe so, and I think Finland's school system is pointing the way for how we'll get there.

You and @dag might want to take a look at Finland's educational system, in particular their anti-bullying measures, which have been shown to a statistically significant degree to reduce self and peer-reported bullying. For an overview, check out this website: http://www.kivakoulu.fi/there-is-no-bullying-in-kiva-school I googled some of the articles cited and found them online if you want more specific information about their program and how they defined and measured bullying.

Of course, Finland's education system has introduced some other radical changes which no doubt are also contributing to the decline in bullying. See this article for more informations: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-keep-ignoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/

My point is this--I agree with you that we can't eliminate bullying (within schools) entirely. But I think we reduce the frequency of its occurrence and deal with it in much better ways than we currently do when it does happen. Like you said, we need to address the causes--psychological, social, institutional, etc.--rather than put out fires after they've already been started.

what you said at the end, that i think is the real issue. youve got a documentary crew filming bullying on a bus and yet the officials (whoever that lady was, principal i presume) are in complete denial instead of looking into it further and taking appropriate disciplinary action.



by and large children are products of whoever raises em, whoever their adult influence is. you could take virtually any "bully" look at his parents and find the root cause (most of the time anyway). i know a lot of the boys who bullied me in jr high and high school i later came to find out almost all of them had no father figure. do you really think anti bullying rules or something is gonna stop that? the problem is deeper than that, much deeper. do you think bullying stops after high school? do you think it doesnt take place at work, at college, at a park, at the movies, at anywhere?

i think overall the point im getting at is it really doesnt matter what we do or dont do, we cannot prevent bullying. it will happen, it always has and it always will, and thats not a "swept under the rug" answer to the issue, its the reality. so how can we resolve it? by changing not only our mindset as adults, but positively influencing the mindsets of our children as well.

as a side note, as far as the 24-7 thing is concerned, i was bullied at school and at home almost a full decade before the internet and looooong before myspace and facebook. i had an older sister who was such a tomboy growing up she was practically another older brother. but i mainly got picked on by my older brother who was just a year apart from me. i got shit from him and his friends at school, i got it from him and his friends when we'd play in and around our neighborhood and i got it from him at home. in a way, thats infinitely more invasive and inescapable than e-bullying. i lived with him, and for a number of years i had to share a room with him. so ya, to me, it isnt different at all. and while my testimony may be a special case, its far from being unique and youd be naive to think so.

if teen crime rates are declining and bullying is pretty much a constant, that certainly doesnt suggest bullying is becoming worse or even that its a "huge problem". all that suggests is what ive been saying; bullying isnt anything new, and it will always be with us.

maybe im not articulating myself in a compassionate way. im certainly not advocating turning a blind eye to bullies or bullying. i squash it pretty quick when it happens in class, and whenever appropriate i try to talk to the bully one on one in hopes that i may discern what the issue really is. is he picking on that kid cuz he's just a shitty kid? or is he lashing out over emotional/mental issues he's unprepared to cope with? or is he compensating for severe self esteem issues? those are the things we should be addressing to "prevent" bullying, not creating this bizarre subculture war where its us vs them.
>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^smooman:
>> ^berticus:
what? no comment yet from someone saying how bullying "toughens you up and prepares you for the real world"? COME ON!

ok i'll start. im all for moderate measures to be taken to monitor and disrupt bullying (man, that almost became full alliteration). that being said, the bullying scandal and the myriad documentaries and specials and exposes on the subject are just redundant. as someone who works in the school system bullying really isnt any different than when i was in school, or when my parents went to school, or their parents, etc. bullying isnt anything new. calling it an epidemic is laughable and just plain absurd.
does my heart go out to individuals who have been bullied? absolutely. i myself was constantly bullied growing up (both at school and at home). now berticus, what you said is true even if you were being facetious. being bullied forced me to quickly develop social skills needed to diffuse confrontations among other things. it sharpened my wit, even as an adult. the point isnt that we need bullies to make men out of our children. the point is bullies arent anything new, and they will always be with us. react accordingly

I downvoted your comment and I just wanted to explain why.
First off, while you may technically be correct in that the amount of bullying has not changed over time, technological advances (i.e. the Internet) allow that bullying to continue 24-7 so that there is no refuge from it, even after you get out of school. In other words, while the rate of bullying may not be changing the severity and impact is--it is more invasive, harder to escape, and therefore is NOT the same as when you were a kid.
But even disregarding that, I think the term "epidemic" is appropriate when you look at the fact that over the past 50 years crime among teens has consistently been decreasing in the U.S. (according to FBI statistics a drop of over 44%) and yet the rate of bullying appears to remain the same. To me, that says there is a huge problem that is not being addressed by either our society or our school system. And taking the attitude that "bullies aren't anything new, and they will always be with us" does not seem to me to be the way to go about solving that problem. Rather, it virtually guarantees that in the next 50 years we will see bullying to continue at the same rate as bullies find ways to circumvent the "moderate measures [...] to monitor and disrupt bullying" that you advocate.
Documentaries like this are critically important because they expose just how deep the problems are--you have school officials claiming the bus is perfectly safe while the documentary filmmakers are capturing multiple acts of violence and bullying on the bus. We need more documentaries like this and much more research into how bullying manifests and how to prevent it because we're clearly doing a piss-poor job of it right now.

I did not imply anything negative about this. It does not bring joy when someone decides to take such drastic actions.

Now about your comments. Sounds like you are promoting you own hate speech towards me. Seems like you need some Anti Bullying training.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^bobknight33:
Sadly it did not get better.

Because he didn't live long enough you bastard. I would love nothing more than to find you, saw open your sternum, open your chest cavity and SHIT on your heart.

>> ^hpqp:

So it passed... crappity crap.


Yeah, that's a really bummer.

Did you read beyond the headline? "Asian Americans endure far more bullying at US schools than members of other ethnic group". "Gay" isn't an ethnic group.

This study wasn't done before the trendy gay anti-bullying campaign. As for "ethnic group" rubbish, only the left cares about such distinctions, for the purpose of divide and conquer, vote-buying and tribalism. And "Gay" is now officially a victimized group, political movement AND voting block.

The problem is that it is the LGBTs are the group most affected by this clause, "statement[s] of a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction". No religion gets away with overt racism so abuse against Asian Americans doesn't have this escape clause. I very much doubt you can get away with claiming white supremacy as a religious belief or a moral conviction and you should not be able to get away with homophobia as a moral conviction either.

"Homophobia" is one of this delightful thoughtcrime control words terms made up by those suffering from homophilia. There's a world of difference between scum who violently attack others for being gay and stern but non-violent Christians who believe homosexuality is wrong for religious reasons. "Homophobia" is a word meant to lump both together. When I call anyone on the left a 'communist' I am closer to the truth than a liberal calling everyone on the right a 'homophobe'.

I don't think any other minority is as affected but if there is, then they shouldn't have abuse against them legitimised like this.

Leftists are the only ones making these ridiculous generalizations about the purpose of the religious clause. Would you see Christians go to jail for simply stating, "Homosexuality is wrong"? That's what they're doing up in Canada (or damned close to it).


>> ^Quboid:

Did you read beyond the headline? "Asian Americans endure far more bullying at US schools than members of other ethnic group". "Gay" isn't an ethnic group.
The problem is that it is the LGBTs are the group most affected by this clause, "statement[s] of a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction". No religion gets away with overt racism so abuse against Asian Americans doesn't have this escape clause. I very much doubt you can get away with claiming white supremacy as a religious belief or a moral conviction and you should not be able to get away with homophobia as a moral conviction either.
I don't think any other minority is as affected but if there is, then they shouldn't have abuse against them legitimised like this.

Did you read beyond the headline? "Asian Americans endure far more bullying at US schools than members of other ethnic group". "Gay" isn't an ethnic group.

The problem is that it is the LGBTs are the group most affected by this clause, "statement[s] of a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction". No religion gets away with overt racism so abuse against Asian Americans doesn't have this escape clause. I very much doubt you can get away with claiming white supremacy as a religious belief or a moral conviction and you should not be able to get away with homophobia as a moral conviction either.

I don't think any other minority is as affected but if there is, then they shouldn't have abuse against them legitimised like this.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Good catch, @Quboid. If Asian kids are the "most" bullied than that means more so than any other group.
Aside from your ludicrous implication that because one group is getting it worse then another group should shut up, the bases for this implication seems to be built on absolutely nothing.
How about not bullying anyone?
You make the point for me. If this is an anti-bullying measure, then it has no bearing on whether or not the victim is gay, Asian, etc. Presumably it increases punishment of the bullies.
One third of the population are fuckups and will be no matter what you do. It's called The Bell Curve. The incapability of dealing with children bullying is a small scale example of the grand failure that is liberalism, and the dearth of common fucking sense and lack of personal empowerment that liberalism promotes amplify these evils.
The Bowing Kenyawaiian tries to placate dictators and the hopelessly swamped and time-wasting state government and government school bureaucracy tries to make a network of laws and rules that only end up strangling freedoms in the name of safety.
Do gay kids deserve equal protection? Yup. Do they deserve special protection that infringes on others' freedom? Nope.
At this stage of the game, if a gay kid is self-aware he should already be learning how to to fight, because just as 9-1-1 is government-sponsored dial-a-prayer for those who don't own guns, no teacher or camera is always going to be there to protect every bullied child.




>> ^Quboid:
>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.

Where does that article state that "Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids", or anything even remotely like that?
Aside from your ludicrous implication that because one group is getting it worse then another group should shut up, the bases for this implication seems to be built on absolutely nothing.
How about not bullying anyone?

I don't condone bullying of any kind.

Nor do I, but you know what? Bullying still exists and must be dealt with, and this bullshit trendy law ain't doing it.

However, as Dan Savage has said repeatedly, the difference with gay kids is that they often go home to bullying, they go to church and are bullied. They are often thrown out onto the streets by their parents because they are gay.

It's sad and it's true, but an anti-bullying law at a government school isn't going to change it.

Asian kids don't face that. They go home to a place where it is safe to be Asian.

Safe to be Asian but maybe not to be a 'failure' with bad grades? And again, what law is supposed to measure suffering?


I think I am going to have to take a break from you, Q. I know you think you are "right", but lately it has gotten to be too much for me.

I am right. Everyone here believes they are right. I am just more right more of the time.

Catch you on the rebound.

Oh, I answered your other post. It'll be waiting for you when you get back.











>> ^bareboards2:

I don't condone bullying of any kind.
However, as Dan Savage has said repeatedly, the difference with gay kids is that they often go home to bullying, they go to church and are bullied. They are often thrown out onto the streets by their parents because they are gay.
Asian kids don't face that. They go home to a place where it is safe to be Asian.
I think I am going to have to take a break from you, Q. I know you think you are "right", but lately it has gotten to be too much for me.
Catch you on the rebound.

>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.
When will this trendy save-gays-from-bullying business fall out of favor with the left for a new cause?
Wouldn't it be so much easier if America just banned free speech like the canucks did?
It would be easier than getting rid of government schools.

Good catch, @Quboid. If Asian kids are the "most" bullied than that means more so than any other group.

Aside from your ludicrous implication that because one group is getting it worse then another group should shut up, the bases for this implication seems to be built on absolutely nothing.

How about not bullying anyone?

You make the point for me. If this is an anti-bullying measure, then it has no bearing on whether or not the victim is gay, Asian, etc. Presumably it increases punishment of the bullies.

One third of the population are fuckups and will be no matter what you do. It's called The Bell Curve. The incapability of dealing with children bullying is a small scale example of the grand failure that is liberalism, and the dearth of common fucking sense and lack of personal empowerment that liberalism promotes amplify these evils.

The Bowing Kenyawaiian tries to placate dictators and the hopelessly swamped and time-wasting state government and government school bureaucracy tries to make a network of laws and rules that only end up strangling freedoms in the name of safety.

Do gay kids deserve equal protection? Yup. Do they deserve special protection that infringes on others' freedom? Nope.

At this stage of the game, if a gay kid is self-aware he should already be learning how to to fight, because just as 9-1-1 is government-sponsored dial-a-prayer for those who don't own guns, no teacher or camera is always going to be there to protect every bullied child.








>> ^Quboid:

>> ^quantumushroom:
But wait! Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids.

Where does that article state that "Asian kids are bullied far more than gay kids", or anything even remotely like that?
Aside from your ludicrous implication that because one group is getting it worse then another group should shut up, the bases for this implication seems to be built on absolutely nothing.
How about not bullying anyone?

Thank you! This is the only way I, and probably many others, will have come to know the content of this bill. That the religious right would try to slip something like this by in what is supposed to be anti-bullying legislation is disgusting yet sadly predictable.

edit: thank you @NetRunner for the quality!

>> ^Sagemind:

Promote - Kudos for taking a stand and sticking up for the kids and people that will never see that Bill before they try to slip it past. Completely makes you shake your head at the people who wrote that Bill in the first place.

>> ^hpqp:

The reason for adding qualifiers is because some teachers share qm's idea that certain types of abuse (especially verbal/psychological) are not bullying but simply "free speech".
>> ^xxovercastxx:
"House Bill 370 prohibits the bullying because of a student's sexual orientation, race or religion."
Wait, wait, wait... We're only prohibiting certain types of bullying? So it's perfectly ok to bully a kid based on his weight, height, clothes or family's wealth?
Why the fuck are we quantifying bullying? Teachers should be required to stop bullying. The end.



They should reword the bill, then, if it's worded the way it was said by the anchor. The way he said it, it would not apply in any of the examples I gave above.

The reason for adding qualifiers is because some teachers share qm's idea that certain types of abuse (especially verbal/psychological) are not bullying but simply "free speech".

>> ^xxovercastxx:

"House Bill 370 prohibits the bullying because of a student's sexual orientation, race or religion."
Wait, wait, wait... We're only prohibiting certain types of bullying? So it's perfectly ok to bully a kid based on his weight, height, clothes or family's wealth?
Why the fuck are we quantifying bullying? Teachers should be required to stop bullying. The end.