#12 The education system needs more resources, and that doesn't change because of one random teacher being ignorant about the book they're teaching.

Ahahahaha. So true. O_o

33, No amount of "resources" can make a bad teacher a good teacher. A good teacher can teach effectively with limited resources. Sure, quality books and materials can make a teacher's job much easier, but they can't be used effectively by a bad teacher. I've had some terrible teachers who were complete morons but they couldn't be fired for their incompetence because they had tenure. For example, I had a teacher who thought the main character in "Flowers For Algernon" was dyslexic, and so I, an 8th grader with ADHD, had to explain to a college educated adult with teaching license, the difference between a learning disorder and mental retardation (which was the polite term at the time). But it wasn't only that. If you showed her an essay, she'd mark in red ink things that needed to be fixed. Then, if you showed her the exact same unaltered essay with her red ink marks still all over it, she'd say, "Wonderful! I see much improvement." We learned absolutely nothing from her, and she had access to the exact same funding and resources as far superior teachers in the same school from whom we learned a great deal. She just wanted to sit on her fat lazy ass and collect a paycheck rather than learn the material she was supposed to teach and do her job. I and her fellow students tried to get her fired, but nothing could be done because she had tenure. And that's just the worst one. There were other terrible teachers in that school district getting paid just to show up every day, and there was absolutely nothing that could be done about it. Having said that, more funding for schools might help, but it would be put to better use by vetting teachers more thoroughly, ensuring they understand the material they are teaching, and by giving them higher pay and better benefits as an incentive to attract intelligent and well educated people to the field.

Yeah because teachers give any ***** about their material when they make less money than a plumber. Children's futures are entrusted to people who make just above minimum wage. Of course teachers get jaded and stop caring. Pay the people, their jobs are more important than almost any other. Oh but sorry we don't want our children to be smart we just want them to be part of the herd.

You're kidding. The median salary for a teacher here is nearly $60K before bonuses, perks, and benefits. That's for working for about 9 months out if the year. And I really couldn't care if they feel they are underpaid. They chose that profession knowing the average salary and still applied. It's the same deal as people who complain about their low paying jobs. If you don't like it, leave.

Paying more attracts more qualified people so less qualified people can be fired.

96, That's actually the point I made in the final paragraph of my reply, although I didn't spell it out so explicitly. In my original comment I was pointing out the fallacy of the ridiculous notion that teachers themselves are not responsible for the quality of education, which is a notion that is amazingly insisted upon by many. My basic point was that funding alone won't improve education. Rather, funding must be spent wisely to acquire quality educators. OP's teacher is clearly not a quality educator, thus his education, and that of his peers, suffers. Giving OP's teacher more "resources" won't magically make her not a moron anymore.

76-- I, and many teachers I know, give several ***** about our students, our content, our curriculum, and our own education. No teacher has ever gone into teaching because of the pay. We teach because it's a calling, a passion. Teachers get burned out and jaded, yes, it happens. There are bad teachers-- I've known a lot. But I've known many more teachers who are dynamic, inspiring, and who care deeply about their students. No wonder it's so difficult to attract quality people in to the teaching profession-- so many people devalue and degrade it.

Only people devaluing teaching are the people who won't pay em. I despised my first career, but it paid stupid amounts of money and that's the only reason I did it. Fact of the matter is "money talks, bullshit walks." It only takes half a brain to realize how many people with a passion for teaching completely skip out on it because it pays so little.

You do realize number 12 was being sarcastic, right?

Once again #112 you do realize that teachers get paid far more than the average worker. In my district, if you include benefits, the average teacher makes $75,000 a year. Considering that the median salary in my state is $40,000 Id say that teachers make a ridiculous amount of money

It doesn't even say where this person is from. You can't jump to that conclusion.

typical go **** yourself

Fail troll.

Duh! We all know "1984" is a biography about Van Halen. :P

The meaning of Animal Farm was absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Das rite

Those books were written in such a way as to have multiple meanings depending on who reads them. Sure the absolute power corrupts absolutely theory is the most popular, but so long as they can find specific examples to how animal abuse shows up in the novel it will work too. As long as the teacher shows them how to write an essay backing that theme that clearly explains their reasoning the teacher is still doing their job.

67 It's apparent that lots of people regurgitate what they are taught, instead of questioning or analyzing for themselves. Absolute power does corrupt and I'm well aware of the theory it doesn't mean that's the only meaning . I applaud you for being one of the few that sees and knows this.

The book's a classic. I actually wrote an 8 page book report on it. Just think about: the animals stand up to the humans on the farm (think they're the Johnsons). After winning their freedom through revolution, Napoleon the pig is leader. Whereas the animals started out wanting equality for all of their brethren, it soon turns out that the pigs are an oligarchy, instead of a democracy, and mistreat the other animals. One rule is that an animal must never behave like a human, including: sleeping in a bed, walking on two feet (exception of birds), etc. That's when the irony kicks in for the pigs. Go read it, it's a really good book. I'm not gonna spoil the ending.

Great, simple overview, 31. I read the book in 8th grade after learning about World War II in great detail. The point of the book was quite obvious to all of my classmates and I. OP has a horrible teacher.

or op has a teacher who wants the students to look beyond the obvious and analyze the theme of the book for themselves. In my AP Literature we came up with 10+ themes for each book we read in class. Then had to have another for our essays.

The problem with that, 102, is that Animal Farm was written specifically as an allegory to communism and the Russian Revolution, and the fact that the teacher is unaware of this is shocking. Even in AP Lit when you're coming up with themes, there are certain themes that aren't correct, and I don't think it'd be right to interpret a bunch of farm animals overthrowing their (slightly neglectful but non abusive) farmer and starting their own corrupt society as a stance against animal abuse, but hey, that's just me. I'll also just mention that this is more of a book that'd be taught to 8th graders, not High School seniors in a college-level course. I don't think the teacher is trying to give them new perspectives.

no it's an allegory communism specifically the combination Stalinism and fascism