From: davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:19:36 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Montagar Software Concepts, Plano TX

In article <1992Nov16.181440.29961@watson.ibm.com>, johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:
> David L. Cathey (davidc@montagar.com) wrote:
> :                                           Remember John, even your kids are
> : learning how to bribe the teacher and cheat.  Nice.  I guess that is the
> : only way you believe that football players can get good grades.
> 
> No, I'm saying that they only way they can play football is to pass unrelated
> classes, AND they don't give a hoot about the unrelated classes, then they will
> find a way to pass, and it probably won't be the way you want.

	But until you actually start your career, how can some kid or even
you determine what classes are "unrelated"?

> : 	Does that mean that the football player doesn't have to show up for
> : practice if he doesn't want as well?
> 
> Of course.  And if he doesn't, they kick him off the team.  Wouldn't it be
> absurd if they punished him instead by forbidding him from going to math class?
> If you really want to learn math, you should be willing to work a little harder
> at playing football.  Call it incentive.

	Again, Football is an elitist sport, participated in only by those
chosen by the coach.  Math is a required curricular course by ALL who are
attending school.  You don't do the required work, maybe you should be kicked
out of school.  That means no math, no english, no football, no drama, no
problem.

> : 	You want the student to get what he wants, without doing anything to
> : earn it.  That is also an ethic.  One you seem to believe in.
> 
> You don't have to "earn" liberty in this country.  It's a given.

	You talk about it like it was some freebie, when many Americans have
given their lives for it.  This could start a whole new thread.

	Liberty is a given, but you don't understand that it is a two-way
street.  You have to right to work, but I also have the right to not hire
you if I think your an asshole.

	Again, you want to emphasis the free ride, whereas others want to
instill some concepts of interdependency.

> : 	Sure, just treat them like dogs...  Gee, John, your treatment of people
> : can sure be inconsistent...
> 
> If nobody else cares about the dead body of a burglar in your house, I see
> nothing wrong with recouping the expense of removing it.  It's not like you
> invited him in.

	Or did you?  How do we know for sure without checking?  But of course
we should take your word for it.  Why don't you come on over some time and
we can discuss it in more detail?

> : 	Right and wrong.  We learn through experience.  We are setting up
> : artificial risks that will not seriously harm those that take the wrong one. 
> : There are chances to go back recover quickly.  They learn by succeeding or
> : failing how to manage and recover from risk.  If they fail a test, the grade
> : can be brought back up through short term effort. 
> 
> I'm not saying it's a bad idea to minimize the effects of choices that children
> make.  I don't think it's the responsibility of the state, but rather the 
> child's parents, or the child himself.

	But the child *IS* taking the responsibility!  If he blows off classes,
there are penalties.  It is *THEIR* choice, their risk, and their
responsibility.  The effects are minimal, and recoverable.  The child even
has the choice to option out of the whole program and learn elsewhere.

> : 	You want to provide short-term comfort without any risk.
> 
> Of course there's a risk, it's just not the one that you're inventing.  Suppose
> I don't approve of you eating red meat, because you are very likely to get heart
> disease a few years down the road?

	Letsee how that relates to the topic.  You don't approve of what I eat,
but you want to control it.  However, you also don't provide me meals, food
stamps, or other sources of nutrition, so what business is it of yours?

	The school is not only prescribing what "meals" are approved, they
are providing them and are directing the "diet" to provide a "well-balanced
meal".  If you don't want to eat at the school (even though this means you
don't get "football" for dessert), you are welcome to dine elsewhere.

	You analogy is not wholly inappropriate, if applied accurately.

> : 	Besides, no-pass/no-play is not negative reinforcement, but positive
> : reinforcement. If you practice hard, you get to stay on the team.  If you
> : can run fast, you can stay on the team.  If you play a position better than
> : anyone else can, you can stay on the team.  If you study in class, you can stay 
> : on the team.  If you show up to practice, you can stay on the team.  If you
> : learn your plays, you can stay on the team.  Why does John only have a problem
> : with one of these?
> 
> Because it's the only "one" that has nothing to do with playing football.

	Really?  Isn't "DISCIPLINE" something sports are supposed to teach?
We are not talking about failing optional classes, but required core
curriculum.  Discipline sometimes means doing the dirty work, and isn't all
fun an games.  Try the military sometime...

> : 	Sorry it's so long, but John really doesn't seem to give a shit about
> : these people (like he claims to),
> 
> I care about them enough to let them make their own choices about their own 
> lives.

	Not really.  If you've ever dealt with children you would know
already that "let them make their own choices" doesn't work.  Sometimes
long term gains hurt for a little while...  But you are the one that wants
to take the easy way, without appearent regard for the long-term.

> : and really doesn't understand how the system works.
> 
> I understand how the system works:  The system is screwed.  To do <X> for a
> living it should only matter how well you do <X>.  If colleges institute 
> football majors, then fine.  But I see no reason to have this academic charade
> in place.

	But until you do <X> for a living, it doesn't matter how well you
do <X>, does it?  You should hedge your bets by learning <Y> in case <X> isn't
an option.  If everyone who was on the football program went into the Pro's,
I probably wouldn't have a problem with it.  However, that is rarely the case.

	Again, if you really had any concern, you would want them to be
better prepared for a variety of outcomes.  However, you have shown time
and again that you only look at the now.

> 
> John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
>         My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
          like I actually had any doubts...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
David L. Cathey		                |INET: davidc@montagar.com
Montagar Software Concepts              |UUCP: ...!montagar!davidc
P. O. Box 260772, Plano TX  75026-0772  |Fone: (214)-618-2117