Isn't it our responsibility as parents/citizens to make sure our children get the education they deserve? If you are saying "we" would be better off, who is "we?" If you mean society in general, wouldn't that imply that we depend on kids and young adults to become well educated? If we fail to allow them to set and reach higher goals how will they ever attain them? "If you are lazy, you are lazy" are you saying if the student is lazy and doesn't want to learn it's their fault? Where do parents, peers, and members of the community fall in line. One cannot blame a child for being a child we have all been teenagers at one point in time. We as a society demand the best from our young adults, why not give them every tool possible to allow them to be our future leaders. We as adults gripe when we don't have the equipment we demand at work, yet we let our children get by with a lower standards and equipment then we allow ourselves to get by with.

Ms. Lauric,

"The sooner you kids take responsibility for YOUR education the better off we will all be. All of this fancy stuff---like the building that was proposed---was not going to help you learn. If you are lazy, you are lazy. If you do not want to learn and make the most of your education then you turn out the way that you turn out."

-Almost all of those statistics I spouted out were the standards that the state set for our education system. Very few of them had to do with actual success of students. I didn't imply that students in Idaho don't succeed, because they do. I am saying that our standards are low! Who says students aren't taking responsibility for their education? Now, if you would like I could give you some statistics on the success of students in Idaho. I am afraid that you will take what I am saying as contradictive to my earlier post. Just because we (as students) are able to be successful with the low standards set by the state, doesn't mesn the state should not raise these standards, so even all the students merely 'getting by' have met our new higher standards. Maybe if the state raised our education standards (in every way) there would be less people on welfare!!!

"As far as welfare---we have generation welfare in this country. People who think it is their right to breed over and over and live off of those of us that work. It is many times bred into people. They learn from a very early age how to work the system. If our welfare system drug tested, 70% of the people on welfare would be off welfare. If we had mandatory sterilization for people who breed for "sport" we would have less people on welfare. An MBA would not help this class of people because they have been raised/bred to do as little as they can to get by---just like you speak of---and collect a check."

Ms. Lauric, you could never convince me that better education standards and better educational facilities for the people who are on welfare, wouldn't reduce the amount of people on welfare.

"They learn from a very early age how to work the system." - you even admit that it has to do with what these individuals have been taught. So, apparently these individuals have recieved a very low standard of education if according to you, this is all they know.

"your life is what you CHOOSE to make of it. I am sorry that you feel the taxpayers of this community are responsible to motivate you and keep you in fancy schools, etc. I would direct you to once again read the law on what you are "ENTITLED" to as far as education. If you choose to be lazy and just get by, that is on you and your parents. A big, fancy school was not going to help you."

This is my problem.

'I would direct you to once again read the law on what you are "ENTITLED"'-YOU are implying here that our standards are low. Our state mandates do not require much. I believe the law needs to change. We should expect more of our schools, students, teachers, and education system in every way. Why should we only give our students the bare minimum? Why should we want to be stingy and cheap with our education system?

"Many of our grandparents, probably yours included, were educated in 1 room school houses." -This was acceptable then, because most people didn't have to continue their education past high school... heck, some didn't even have to finish high school to be successfull in that time. In today's world, it is extremely unlikely that I would be as successful as my 'very wise grandfather' (who by the way IS very wise and successful! (: ) with the same education that he recieved.

"No fancy gyms, no computers." -- Actually, in today's world, as a college student you cannot be successful if you do not know how to use a computer. Many of our jobs and industries and schools are turning to computers. Computers are now essential to our society/education system.

Source: U.S. Dept. of Ed., Natl. Ctr.

According to this source, in FY 2005 Idaho was ranked no. 45 in the country for Student/teacher ratio.

Idaho was ranked no. 30 for average teacher salary.

Idaho was ranked no. 13 for Percent of Students Reporting Incidents in Previous 12 Months.

Idaho was ranked no. 50 for Combined Federal, State, and Local Revenues Per Pupil.

In Idaho, it was estimated that only 77% of students graduated high school on time.

In Idaho, it was estimated that only 34% of students immediately enter college after high school.

In Idaho, it was estimated that only 22% of students were still enrolled in college their sophomore year of college.

In Idaho, it was estimated that only 14% of students graduated college on time.

Again.... all of this was from 2004-2006 US Department of Education.

Education Week's Quality Counts in 2007 ranked Idaho at number 35.