Jump to content

Talk:Neta Hebrew: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Nekng (talk | contribs)
Line 16: Line 16:


Every claim NETA makes, such as number of participating schools, etc. has been factual, as opposed to the childish actions of anti-NETA authors, like fabricating universities and professors to substantiate their subjective claims. Referring to NETA as "socialistic" simply due to use of the term laissez-faire is absurd and adolescent. Please, let us keep this article free of personal biases. Notice- we have preserved facts such as the existence of anti-NETA facebook groups, regardless of our own opinions. - The NETA Team
Every claim NETA makes, such as number of participating schools, etc. has been factual, as opposed to the childish actions of anti-NETA authors, like fabricating universities and professors to substantiate their subjective claims. Referring to NETA as "socialistic" simply due to use of the term laissez-faire is absurd and adolescent. Please, let us keep this article free of personal biases. Notice- we have preserved facts such as the existence of anti-NETA facebook groups, regardless of our own opinions. - The NETA Team
:While this is all well and good unfortunately you need to backup your claims with data. You may want to post this supposed data on your website and then cite it in the article. Until that time the previous claims of this article appear to be true. [[User:Nekng|Nekng]] ([[User talk:Nekng|talk]]) 22:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:46, 24 January 2010

Who is matt teitlebach? can someone support the notion that he's an expert? --Vonfraginoff 04:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Matt Teitelbach" does not exist. Neither does "The University of South New Mexico". Under the circumstances, we have taken the liberty of removing this "Study" that comes very close to slander. Please help us keep our entry clean and factual.... - The NETA Team


Well, NETA TEAM, you are wrong. The information given was not slander and is very, VERY close to the truth. The studies did not exist, however, the facts are straight. Your program does not work. In the school that i attend, we use your program, unfortunately. We are forced to re lean things that we knew. You think there is a 'philosophy' to everything that you teach. Let me tell you. Litlle red riding hood, yes other people, we do learn about little red in hebrew, IS NOT PHILISOPHICAL AND NEITHER IS ANYTHING YOU TEACH US. Your program puts the hebrew language to SHAME. you should fell sorry for yourselves. I hope the world learns about your abomination to the hebrew language!

Ok-why are the teachers forced to join "i hate neta"? i mean wouldnt they have a choice? they are not forced therefore i think that that part should bet taken out. in fact, i shall do so. I like the group though ;-)66.99.28.98 15:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)a suffering Neta student[reply]

The facts are that your program is completely socialistic, and repudiates capitalism on your website by calling the NETA program the "antidote to the more laissez faire teaching methods so prevalent at Jewish day schools." The students that love the program are too much like teenagers to admit that it's so amazingly easy! I haven't learned anything new from the NETA program. I'm lucky my teacher teaches content ahead of what's in our book. The pace is incredibly slow, and after taking Spanish for two years, and Hebrew for 4 with the NETA program plus elsewhere since Kindergarten, I am more comfortable speaking Spanish. I am the best in my class, and I plan to go on to become a linguistics major, and this program does not teach you the language and immerse you in studying it. It gives you childrens' stories about dreamers atop of red roofs! And yes, my class burns our books every year! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.82.233 (talk) 08:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Constant reverting of this page

It looks like someone from NETA is constantly reverting this page. It may be more helpful for them to spend more energy citing their sources so they stop looking so bad.Nekng (talk) 08:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Every claim NETA makes, such as number of participating schools, etc. has been factual, as opposed to the childish actions of anti-NETA authors, like fabricating universities and professors to substantiate their subjective claims. Referring to NETA as "socialistic" simply due to use of the term laissez-faire is absurd and adolescent. Please, let us keep this article free of personal biases. Notice- we have preserved facts such as the existence of anti-NETA facebook groups, regardless of our own opinions. - The NETA Team

While this is all well and good unfortunately you need to backup your claims with data. You may want to post this supposed data on your website and then cite it in the article. Until that time the previous claims of this article appear to be true. Nekng (talk) 22:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]