If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   The ugly truth about "school choice" and who's behind it   (salon.com) divider line 314
    More: Interesting, corporate campaign, civil rights movement, 23rd state, National Labor Relations Board, pet projects, minority group, redistribute wealth, presidential executive order  
•       •       •

4913 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Jan 2012 at 10:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



314 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-25 08:42:29 AM
If the public schools had any idea how to teach Johnny how to read, this wouldn't be an issue. But they don't. Those of us who live in districts that spend 14K or 15K per student per year are tired of the public schools telling us it's a funding problem. The public schools don't know how to do their jobs, and parents are going to try other ways to get their children educations.Who's conducting the experiments? Parents don't care. They want their kids to know how to read.
 
2012-01-25 08:53:53 AM
Parents are too stupid to choose schools. Obviously, the closest one to their house is the best. Right?
 
2012-01-25 09:38:17 AM

rumpelstiltskin: If the public schools had any idea how to teach Johnny how to read, this wouldn't be an issue. But they don't. Those of us who live in districts that spend 14K or 15K per student per year are tired of the public schools telling us it's a funding problem. The public schools don't know how to do their jobs, and parents are going to try other ways to get their children educations.Who's conducting the experiments? Parents don't care. They want their kids to know how to read.


If you want your kid to know how to read, read to your kid. a lot.
 
2012-01-25 10:09:08 AM

sno man: rumpelstiltskin: If the public schools had any idea how to teach Johnny how to read, this wouldn't be an issue. But they don't. Those of us who live in districts that spend 14K or 15K per student per year are tired of the public schools telling us it's a funding problem. The public schools don't know how to do their jobs, and parents are going to try other ways to get their children educations.Who's conducting the experiments? Parents don't care. They want their kids to know how to read.

If you want your kid to know how to read, read to your kid. a lot.


crow202.org
 
2012-01-25 10:15:11 AM
School choice is fairly simple: it's bait and switch, and always has been.

It's not about teachers overwhelmed by classroom sizes, or administrators who don't support them. It's not about a labyrinthine system of testing-funding equations that look at teachers as the last responsible unit, as opposed to the principles and administrators who are in charge of those school systems to hold accountable for performance standards. It's not about underfunding systems, and then declaring the best way to make those systems better, is to cut more funding from them, and shove even more kids into them with consolidation efforts that are designed to stress the schools more to prove a point about magnet and private schools' "competitiveness" to our public schools. It's not even about the differences between private and public schools in that private schools are not on the same playing field since they are not required by law to take everyone, and can then jigger their numbers and successes by simply flushing kids who underperform or cause trouble.

It's none of those things. School choice is about getting the American taxpayer to pay for private school education, and call that fair, to make the American public feel bad about their schools and DEMAND that the taxpayer take on sending kids to private schools, and schools for profit, and subsidize these efforts. It is about getting public money into private hands, plain and simple.

It is about getting the public to pay for religious schooling or private school education, and the bait and switch comes down to the idea that when school choice is implemented across the board, that students from the less well off families will be allowed to attend those schools as a "choice" beyond a few token charity cases to maintain the illusion. It is about getting public money into private hands, and rather than examine education in a fashion that is open and honest, we have a lot of folks who are looking to game the system in order to get sweet cheddar from it. From testing firms, from coaching and tutoring firms, from those who are investing in private magnet schools, from those who are looking at their own private institutions to be paid for out of public monies. They smell public fund gravy, and they want it. Badly. And they are willing to lie, they ware willing to pay folks at a local and state level to game the system so badly that the public will scream for them to step in, and once they do, they will extract a large amount of cash from the system, and Johnny will be back in public school, his teachers will not be unionized and hold very little power to affect change in their school systems, and the administrators will be so beholden the state, that they will do damn near anything to keep their jobs, as opposed to doing the jobs that they know they should do.

"School Choice" is disingenuous bullsh*t from the get go. It's bullsh*t plain and simple and no matter how much you dress it up, it's about getting public money for folks who just want the public to pour money into their trough. And they are willing to pay a lot of folks to scare the bejeebus out of you to get you to willingly do that.
 
2012-01-25 10:38:13 AM

hubiestubert: It's none of those things. School choice is about getting the American taxpayer to pay for private school education, and call that fair, to make the American public feel bad about their schools and DEMAND that the taxpayer take on sending kids to private schools, and schools for profit, and subsidize these efforts. It is about getting public money into private hands, plain and simple.


That and the balkanization of the voting public. Public schools were originally intended to assimilate immigrants from all over the world that were flooding the country as it expanded westward. If they're not being educated together, learning about each other, getting in petty school fights and learning to get along anyway, then you're just making for a bigger fight later on.
 
2012-01-25 10:38:14 AM

hubiestubert: "School Choice" is disingenuous bullsh*t from the get go. It's bullsh*t plain and simple and no matter how much you dress it up, it's about getting public money for folks who just want the public to pour money into their trough. And they are willing to pay a lot of folks to scare the bejeebus out of you to get you to willingly do that.


Everything you said is correct. In addition, there is, in my experience, a rather overt racism in the VAST majority of "school choice" advocates. Yes, you can cherrypick any number of racially diverse spokesmouths who claim to be in favor of school choice legislation, but when you actually spend twelve years dealing with your local school system, talking to scores of other parents, going to meetings, PTA events, etc., it tends to jump out at you that virtually EVERY time a parent gets all up in arms about wanting "school choice", what they're actually saying is:

1: "I want my child to have religious schooling, and I can't get it paid for by the state, so I want a voucher for tax money I can use to send my kid to Jesusland school."

and/or,

2: "Wow, there's a whole lot of blacks/messicans in my kid's school, and I equate that with "school failure". So I want a taxpayer funded voucher to send my kid to a far, far whiter school."
 
2012-01-25 10:52:46 AM

hubiestubert: Johnny will be back in public school, his teachers will not be unionized and hold very little power to affect change in their school systems, and the administrators will be so beholden the state, that they will do damn near anything to keep their jobs, as opposed to doing the jobs that they know they should do.


Aside from the unionized part, how is that any different from now?

Isn't this a situation where the GOP wet dream of 'free market solutions' might actually work? Private schools will have to compete for students, so things like the amount of money spent on students and class size and graduation rates and college/employment rates become selling points. It would basically turn K-12 education into the college model, and while there are shady places like Kaplan that exist to only turn a profit, there are other reputable schools out there too. It would also allow for technical and vocational high schools to open and teach trades so that people are actually prepared to enter the workforce at 18.

I find the whole thing distasteful as well, but it's not like public education is working great as it is. Doesn't this have a chance of making it better?.
 
2012-01-25 11:01:56 AM
It's just public monies being funneled to private religious interests. The law passed here in Indiana is already forcing districts to choose between buses and and actual schooling. It's going to be a disaster.
 
2012-01-25 11:04:53 AM

ignatius_crumbcake: Isn't this a situation where the GOP wet dream of 'free market solutions' might actually work? Private schools will have to compete for students, so things like the amount of money spent on students and class size and graduation rates and college/employment rates become selling points. It would basically turn K-12 education into the college model, and while there are shady places like Kaplan that exist to only turn a profit, there are other reputable schools out there too. It would also allow for technical and vocational high schools to open and teach trades so that people are actually prepared to enter the workforce at 18.

I find the whole thing distasteful as well, but it's not like public education is working great as it is. Doesn't this have a chance of making it better?.


Most of these private schools don't have to deal with standards as high as the public schools. Also not having MR kids dragging down your testing scores helps too.
 
2012-01-25 11:05:13 AM
"School choice" is simply a new moniker for reinstituting state-sponsored segregation. A way to keep your precious upper class snowflakes away from the lower class darkies.
 
2012-01-25 11:05:43 AM
Alternet link on Fark... I predict a lot of projection and ad hominem attacks, few facts, and supposed liberals clinging to the dismal status quo.


/quick, throw more money at teacher's unions!
 
2012-01-25 11:07:04 AM
Paying tax dollars to fund public schools and paying more tax dollars to people to have people not send their kids there is farking nonsensical.
 
2012-01-25 11:08:47 AM
Lost Thought 00

"School choice" is simply a new moniker for reinstituting state-sponsored segregation. A way to keep your precious upper class snowflakes away from the lower class darkies.

DING DING DING!!! We have a winner!!!
 
2012-01-25 11:09:37 AM
Article fails with out mention of Besty Prince DeVos (new window)

Sister of the founder of Black Water and a big school choice advocate so that children can learn about Supply Side Jesus
 
2012-01-25 11:10:50 AM

hubiestubert: "School Choice" is disingenuous bullsh*t from the get go. It's bullsh*t plain and simple and no matter how much you dress it up, it's about getting public money for folks who just want the public to pour money into their trough. And they are willing to pay a lot of folks to scare the bejeebus out of you to get you to willingly do that.


Agreed, and don't forget the link between real estate prices and public school quality. Districts with good schools attract wealthier parents, which drives up the price of housing in those areas. I'm amazed at how openly real estate agents push us away from certain neighborhoods (even though we don't have kids), partly because it raises their commission, but then they'll say, "No, only black kids and messicans go to those schools. You don't want them as neighbors, do you?"
 
2012-01-25 11:10:59 AM
It is designed to further weaken and destroy the public education system, so that schooling is privatized for profit and even basic education is put out of reach of the poorest among us?

The Dominionist goal of destroying public secular education is just icing on the money cake.
 
2012-01-25 11:12:32 AM
Arguments against public schools often smack of elitism to me.. either explicit or as an undertone.
 
2012-01-25 11:13:30 AM

Lost Thought 00: "School choice" is simply a new moniker for reinstituting state-sponsored segregation. A way to keep your precious upper class snowflakes away from the lower class darkies.


I thought that was what AP and IB classes were for?
 
2012-01-25 11:13:43 AM

rumpelstiltskin: If the public schools had any idea how to teach Johnny how to read, this wouldn't be an issue. But they don't.


You sure about that?

(TL;DR: when you look at a nationwide survey which is structurally resistant to gaming -- unlike most high-stakes bubble-filling-expeditions -- the data says that public schools have made huge increases in closing the gap between rich white schools, which everyone knows do fine in teaching kids to read, and poor black schools.)
 
2012-01-25 11:13:59 AM

Lost Thought 00: "School choice" is simply a new moniker for reinstituting state-sponsored segregation. A way to keep your precious upper class snowflakes away from the lower class darkies.


And poorer white people. Well, beyond the already-established private school nonsense.

You want to make public schools better? Pay the teachers a fair wage, drop the pretense of making it a business, and get rid of the overpaid superintendents who do nothing but use tax money as their petty cash. Put teachers in charge of schools, and let them teach your kids. The way the business mentality has infected America is obscene. I noticed Obama had a hardon for this last night, and not five minutes later went on about BAILOUTS. Hello?

Being a business doesn't mean saving money or being successful automatically. We need institutions that teach and make for a better educated populace.
 
2012-01-25 11:14:16 AM

Lost Thought 00: "School choice" is simply a new moniker for reinstituting state-sponsored segregation. A way to keep your precious upper class snowflakes away from the lower class darkies.


Yep. Only white people send their kids to private schools.
 
2012-01-25 11:14:25 AM

hubiestubert: School choice is fairly simple: it's bait and switch, and always has been.

It's not about teachers overwhelmed by classroom sizes, or administrators who don't support them. It's not about a labyrinthine system of testing-funding equations that look at teachers as the last responsible unit, as opposed to the principles and administrators who are in charge of those school systems to hold accountable for performance standards. It's not about underfunding systems, and then declaring the best way to make those systems better, is to cut more funding from them, and shove even more kids into them with consolidation efforts that are designed to stress the schools more to prove a point about magnet and private schools' "competitiveness" to our public schools. It's not even about the differences between private and public schools in that private schools are not on the same playing field since they are not required by law to take everyone, and can then jigger their numbers and successes by simply flushing kids who underperform or cause trouble.

It's none of those things. School choice is about getting the American taxpayer to pay for private school education, and call that fair, to make the American public feel bad about their schools and DEMAND that the taxpayer take on sending kids to private schools, and schools for profit, and subsidize these efforts. It is about getting public money into private hands, plain and simple.

It is about getting the public to pay for religious schooling or private school education, and the bait and switch comes down to the idea that when school choice is implemented across the board, that students from the less well off families will be allowed to attend those schools as a "choice" beyond a few token charity cases to maintain the illusion. It is about getting public money into private hands, and rather than examine education in a fashion that is open and honest, we have a lot of folks who are looking to game the system in order to get sweet c ...


Yeah, good luck fitting that on a bumper sticker, Libtard.
 
2012-01-25 11:14:32 AM
The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.
 
2012-01-25 11:14:45 AM

sno man: If you want your kid to know how to read, read to your kid. a lot.


This.

Read to your kids every day from the day they are born.

Of course, this assumes a parent knows how to read. What do we do then?
 
2012-01-25 11:18:53 AM

Podna: ignatius_crumbcake: Isn't this a situation where the GOP wet dream of 'free market solutions' might actually work? Private schools will have to compete for students, so things like the amount of money spent on students and class size and graduation rates and college/employment rates become selling points. It would basically turn K-12 education into the college model, and while there are shady places like Kaplan that exist to only turn a profit, there are other reputable schools out there too. It would also allow for technical and vocational high schools to open and teach trades so that people are actually prepared to enter the workforce at 18.

I find the whole thing distasteful as well, but it's not like public education is working great as it is. Doesn't this have a chance of making it better?.

Most of these private schools don't have to deal with standards as high as the public schools. Also not having MR kids dragging down your testing scores helps too.


And being able to expel/not accept any troublemakers. It's easy to look great if you can cull the bottom 5 or 10% from your enrollment. They not only bring down averages but they adversely affect the top 90 or 95% by influencing them and requiring disproportional resources.

All the debate about funding or teacher training, etc., is minor compared to the quality of the inputs (students) into the system. Public schools are required to deal with the worst of the inputs, one way or another, whereas private schools can avoid the dregs.
 
2012-01-25 11:19:00 AM

Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.


It works? It works at what? Lowering education quality? It does that. Sending yet more public money flying into the hands of private corporate interests? Eeyup. Driving wage standards for teachers through the floor even further? Yep, that too. Yeah, it works at farking over kids and teachers to make the wealthiest aristocracy in the history of the world a few dollars more, just like every other rightist policy.
 
2012-01-25 11:19:22 AM

Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.


Of course it works. The parents with the means shuffle their kids to the good schools, leaving the already struggling ones with even less resources. Most places funding is per student. An exodus of students lowers already decreasing funds.

They don't take 3 classes of students and divide them up to make smaller classes as parents pull their kids out. They fire a teacher and make the two remaining take on the extra kids.

Let's take the Republican mantra of getting "skin in the game" and apply it to public schools. I goddamn guarantee that public school education would improve if everyone had to send their kids to public school.
 
2012-01-25 11:19:33 AM

Podna: Most of these private schools don't have to deal with standards as high as the public schools.


Right, but they have to get students in the door. That doesn't happen if their tagline is "we have crappy standards!"

To use a restaurant analogy, places like Applebees are complete chain crap, but they don't get customers in the door by serving poisoned food. They serve generic, consistent food to an unimaginative public that craves mediocrity. The majority of private schools would be in the same mold, with a minority of schools appealing to the dedicated parents who seek out the best for their kids, just as the food-conscious seek out the best places to eat. Wouldn't the majority of students get the exact same level of mediocre education they get now? At least with school choice it would give families the chance to find the truly exceptional place to send their kid if they care to put in the effort to find it.

I guess my thinking is that if the majority of American schools were the education equivalent of Applebees, isn't that better than what we have now? The upside would be that some kids would get to eat at Charlie Trotter's, and that wouldn't be decided by income anymore.
 
2012-01-25 11:21:21 AM
School choice saves lives. Literally. We have a considerable population of students from neighborhoods you wouldn't drive through during daylight hours. Their parents consistently cite gang activity in their school system as why they chose our school.

I have folder full of letters from parents thanking our school for finally implementing their student's IEP. Plenty of them are the kinds of parents who brought lawsuits against their former districts, searching for something better, and they've found it at our school.

Is there a corporate mentality of bottom line profits and trying to recruit as many students as possible? Yes.

But that's not to say there isn't a considerable upside for many of the families we help. Sorry you're brick and mortar fantasies are crumbling. In 50 years most high schools will probably be converted into condos.
 
2012-01-25 11:21:29 AM
While I agree that "Throwing more money at schools" probably won't solve the problem, taking all the money away from public schools won't solve the problem either. There's likely a "sweet spot" for per pupil spending, and I don't know what it is.

That said, the reason private schools are successful is because they are allowed to select for higher acheiving students and aren't chained down by the requirement to educate everyone. Certain students cost much, much, more to educate than other students.

IMHO, the true solution to "fixing" public schools involves fixing the incentive model. The way things are structured today. The incentive is for the best teachers to go to the best schools with the best students and just have them to continue to achieve at an already high level. The incentive system needs to be inverted so where the best teachers are encouraged to go to the worst schools with the worst students and raise their achievement level.You don't need a good teacher to teach good students have have them acheieve well, an average teacher can do that.
 
2012-01-25 11:21:43 AM
I thought the school choice (aka voucher) movement was run by, and for the benefit of, Bible-thumpers and other conservatives who want tax money to subsidize sending their kids to private schools (and probably desire to see the public school systems destroyed).

AFAIC, if you want to send you kid to private school, pony up the money. It doesn't excuse you from supporting public schools through taxation, or entitle you to a subsidy from the gummint. Public education is an integral part of modern civilization, and it's everyone's obligation to support it. AFAIC, if some people with yard apes get a check from the gummint because they don't send their kid to public school, I also am entitled to a check from the gummint because I have no kids in public school. IOW, the whole idea is bullsh*t.

All that having been said, the fatheads running our public school systems are obviously incompetent and are doing it wrong. Of course, since most parents are themselves ignoramuses and expect education to be like a product you buy off the shelf, and provide a crappy home environment, the public schools are bound to fail. What can a school do with spoiled fat monsters who spend their waking hours playing video games and begging for Twinkies and french fries? The whole thing is a clusterf*ck, but more money isn't the answer.
 
2012-01-25 11:21:50 AM

ignatius_crumbcake: Podna: Most of these private schools don't have to deal with standards as high as the public schools.

Right, but they have to get students in the door. That doesn't happen if their tagline is "we have crappy standards!"

To use a restaurant analogy, places like Applebees are complete chain crap, but they don't get customers in the door by serving poisoned food. They serve generic, consistent food to an unimaginative public that craves mediocrity. The majority of private schools would be in the same mold, with a minority of schools appealing to the dedicated parents who seek out the best for their kids, just as the food-conscious seek out the best places to eat. Wouldn't the majority of students get the exact same level of mediocre education they get now? At least with school choice it would give families the chance to find the truly exceptional place to send their kid if they care to put in the effort to find it.

I guess my thinking is that if the majority of American schools were the education equivalent of Applebees, isn't that better than what we have now? The upside would be that some kids would get to eat at Charlie Trotter's, and that wouldn't be decided by income anymore.


Right..... Because the really nice private schools wouldn't increase tuition to keep out the riffraff, now would they?
 
2012-01-25 11:22:04 AM
Any conservative-lead project is designed primarily to screw over minorities and the poor in general. This is core philosophy for them.
 
2012-01-25 11:23:10 AM

Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.


No, it doesn't work.

And is isn't good for the education system.
 
2012-01-25 11:23:36 AM
ignatius_crumbcake: The problem being, that the "free market solution" is that public schools are not able to compete fairly. Private institutions are not fettered in the same fashion that public schools are. It's not even the same game. Private schools don't have to take everyone. In part, their success is due to the fact that they game their own numbers. It is comparing apples and kumquats. Not even the same family of education when you compare private and public institutions, because the rules are markedly different for both.

And the folks who push, know this, which is why this is disingenuous bullsh*t of the highest order.

When I was getting that pesky education degree--BS, Secondary Ed, Language Arts, with concentrations in Special Ed and Theater--part of the training was based on the models for suggestions by the NEA for integrating teaching methods that opened up our kids to whole learning. Not just strict skill sets in one subject, then another, but integrating skill sets across the board. Critical thinking skills, critical reading, problem solving, across subject matter. Science, math, reading, art, all to encourage and enhance the others. Cross disciplinary approaches were found to strengthen skills and provide our kids with skill sets that were useful for more than just coming up with a right answer, but building skills to be able to find answers to questions not asked yet.

This went out the window with NCLB.

Worse, NCLB built up a dependency, and created cash flow problems for schools, not just for their funding being dependent upon the tests, but a dependency on the very test companies being required. BTW: those testing companies aren't public, they are private firms who skim off education dollars from every school system in the nation. It is a huge subsidy and a whole cloth creation of the legislation. It created a whole market for testing, and is an artificial creation. Why? Because testing is big business. And it stays a big business, not to benefit our schools, but act as a measure of control over them to STFU and not rock the boat, and that boat is shipping out public dollars to private firms.
 
2012-01-25 11:24:05 AM

meat0918: Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.

Of course it works. The parents with the means shuffle their kids to the good schools, leaving the already struggling ones with even less resources. Most places funding is per student. An exodus of students lowers already decreasing funds.

They don't take 3 classes of students and divide them up to make smaller classes as parents pull their kids out. They fire a teacher and make the two remaining take on the extra kids.

Let's take the Republican mantra of getting "skin in the game" and apply it to public schools. I goddamn guarantee that public school education would improve if everyone had to send their kids to public school.


Not that I agree with 'school choice', but a part of that is because the kids who are being pulled from public schools now would bring the public school average performance up if sent back.
 
2012-01-25 11:24:58 AM
I wonder how many people advocating school vouchers also decry "socialist" Federal student loan programs for the skyrocketing costs of a college education?
 
2012-01-25 11:25:01 AM

ignatius_crumbcake: Podna: Most of these private schools don't have to deal with standards as high as the public schools.

Right, but they have to get students in the door. That doesn't happen if their tagline is "we have crappy standards!"

To use a restaurant analogy, places like Applebees are complete chain crap, but they don't get customers in the door by serving poisoned food. They serve generic, consistent food to an unimaginative public that craves mediocrity. The majority of private schools would be in the same mold, with a minority of schools appealing to the dedicated parents who seek out the best for their kids, just as the food-conscious seek out the best places to eat. Wouldn't the majority of students get the exact same level of mediocre education they get now? At least with school choice it would give families the chance to find the truly exceptional place to send their kid if they care to put in the effort to find it.

I guess my thinking is that if the majority of American schools were the education equivalent of Applebees, isn't that better than what we have now? The upside would be that some kids would get to eat at Charlie Trotter's, and that wouldn't be decided by income anymore.


Except it doesn't work that way. The "good schools" would be accessible only to the wealthy, as they are now. Education costs would skyrocket, just as they have in every other area with a benighted "public-private partnership". Wages for teachers would drop, making it even harder to find good teachers.

The state of things is only poor because of rightist anti-education policies. More rightist anti-education policies are not the solution.
 
2012-01-25 11:25:10 AM

The Homer Tax: While I agree that "Throwing more money at schools" probably won't solve the problem, taking all the money away from public schools won't solve the problem either. There's likely a "sweet spot" for per pupil spending, and I don't know what it is.

That said, the reason private schools are successful is because they are allowed to select for higher acheiving students and aren't chained down by the requirement to educate everyone. Certain students cost much, much, more to educate than other students.

IMHO, the true solution to "fixing" public schools involves fixing the incentive model. The way things are structured today. The incentive is for the best teachers to go to the best schools with the best students and just have them to continue to achieve at an already high level. The incentive system needs to be inverted so where the best teachers are encouraged to go to the worst schools with the worst students and raise their achievement level.You don't need a good teacher to teach good students have have them acheieve well, an average teacher can do that.


I've read the amount is 8K-10K. Fall below, and quality plummets. Gain after 10K is minimal. It can vary with socioeconomic base of school district.

Yes, I am searching for the citation.
 
2012-01-25 11:25:41 AM

A Dark Evil Omen: Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.

It works? It works at what? Lowering education quality? It does that. Sending yet more public money flying into the hands of private corporate interests? Eeyup. Driving wage standards for teachers through the floor even further? Yep, that too. Yeah, it works at farking over kids and teachers to make the wealthiest aristocracy in the history of the world a few dollars more, just like every other rightist policy.


Corporate schools are the only way to keep radical evolutionists from brainwashing kids with "science" that isn't even bible based
 
2012-01-25 11:26:18 AM

A Dark Evil Omen: Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.

It works? It works at what? Lowering education quality? It does that. Sending yet more public money flying into the hands of private corporate interests? Eeyup. Driving wage standards for teachers through the floor even further? Yep, that too. Yeah, it works at farking over kids and teachers to make the wealthiest aristocracy in the history of the world a few dollars more, just like every other rightist policy.


Parents in DC liked it. (new window) Children who wouldn't have been able to attend private schools were able to and their test scores increased. Parents who had no interest in their children's education languished in the poor schools they were in before and for them nothing changed.
 
2012-01-25 11:27:43 AM

Lost Thought 00: I wonder how many people advocating school vouchers also decry "socialist" Federal student loan programs for the skyrocketing costs of a college education?


They advocate school vouchers now only because it's moving in the "right" direction. They want everything to move in a monotonous trajectory away from the poor, the working class and anyone else they see as undesirables being able to do anything at all except play Steppin Fetchit.

It's not so much a boot stamping on a human face forever. Picture a shoe shine box.
 
2012-01-25 11:27:45 AM

thismomentinblackhistory: School choice saves lives. Literally. We have a considerable population of students from neighborhoods you wouldn't drive through during daylight hours. Their parents consistently cite gang activity in their school system as why they chose our school.


FWIW, I think what you're calling "school choice" is different from the "school choice" as described in the artice. If you're saying what I think you're saying, I support your version of "school choice."

TFA is talking about "School Choice" as in the new message-driving word that used to be called "school vouchers." As people started to figure out what that meant, they changed the name to something with a better connotation. The "School Choice" as described in this article means people getting tax vouchers to send their kids to private schools.
 
2012-01-25 11:28:16 AM
I'm as liberal as they come and I like school choice initiatives. There has to be a way for the school system to separate motivated kids from not-motivated kids. If you push 5 motivated kids into a classroom with 20 un-motivated kids and all the focus goes towards bringing those 20 up to speed and you risk loosing the other 5. Lots of school districts have this already with lottery schools and magnet programs etc... but it needs to be done more.
 
2012-01-25 11:28:28 AM

odinsposse: Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works. That drives people like Kristin Rawls crazy. The fact something her philosophy and ethics degree tells her is just so unfair and unjust produces results must send her into an fit of rage.

No, it doesn't work.

And is isn't good for the education system.


From your first link:

"Charter middle schools in urban areas-as well as those serving higher proportions of low-income and low achieving students-were more effective (relative to their nearby traditional public schools) than were other charter schools in improving math test scores"

That seems like a good thing.
 
2012-01-25 11:28:31 AM
I had to laugh at the phrase "bogey man of bad teachers." As if there are NO bad teachers anywhere in any district. Every parent who has had a kid in school will tell you that EVERY school has at least one bad teacher who has no business being around children.

i ended up not going to the college of my choice because one of my high school teachers was a pedophile who made every guy in his classes creeped out to the max. Because of his constant staring at my junk and inappropriate comments I got a C in English for the ONLY time in my life. We complained endlessly about the guy but the school administration claimed that we were imagining things and making things up. About 10 years after i graduated they were finally forced to get rid of him because he propositioned a teenager in a parking lot and a cop happened to see it. For over two decades this pervert was ruining the education of countless numbers of young men but he must have just been a "bogey man." .
 
2012-01-25 11:29:26 AM

karmaceutical: I'm as liberal as they come and I like school choice initiatives. There has to be a way for the school system to separate motivated kids from not-motivated kids. If you push 5 motivated kids into a classroom with 20 un-motivated kids and all the focus goes towards bringing those 20 up to speed and you risk loosing the other 5. Lots of school districts have this already with lottery schools and magnet programs etc... but it needs to be done more.


And, even assuming I agree, school vouchers and closing the public schools entirely are the way to do this? Really?

Orwellian farking language. It's not "school choice", it's closing the public schools.
 
2012-01-25 11:29:50 AM
The most important sentence in the entire article by far:

"School Choice Week is backed by many private schools associated with the Christian Right, which have an interest in steering children away from public schools that they believe will "indoctrinate" their children with liberal ideology, tolerance for LGBT people, and instruction that recognizes evolution as a viable scientific concept."

That's it. Done. This entire movement is nothing more than a bunch of Christians trying to get federal tax dollars to cover the cost of a private education for their kids that teaches creationism.
 
2012-01-25 11:30:38 AM

Delawheredad: I had to laugh at the phrase "bogey man of bad teachers." As if there are NO bad teachers anywhere in any district. Every parent who has had a kid in school will tell you that EVERY school has at least one bad teacher who has no business being around children.

i ended up not going to the college of my choice because one of my high school teachers was a pedophile who made every guy in his classes creeped out to the max. Because of his constant staring at my junk and inappropriate comments I got a C in English for the ONLY time in my life. We complained endlessly about the guy but the school administration claimed that we were imagining things and making things up. About 10 years after i graduated they were finally forced to get rid of him because he propositioned a teenager in a parking lot and a cop happened to see it. For over two decades this pervert was ruining the education of countless numbers of young men but he must have just been a "bogey man." .


The appropriate solution, obviously, is to shut down the entire public education system
 
Displayed 50 of 314 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report