Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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
    More: Interesting, corporate campaign, civil rights movement, 23rd state, National Labor Relations Board, pet projects, minority group, redistribute wealth, presidential executive order  
•       •       •

4915 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Jan 2012 at 10:59 AM (4 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 11:58:35 AM  

MasterThief: 1. It is the teachers' responsibility to teach. If the students fail to learn, then yes, the teacher has not done their job. And in any well-functioning organization, people who do not do their jobs get fired.


What if instead of going home and doing their assignments or studying the lessons the students go home and sit on Facebook all night or play video games? Is that the teachers fault? And if so how can the teacher make the student study if the parents won't? If the kid won't study their lessons most of the time they will fail. In my opinion this is the reason why American students have such low scores, not because teachers are bad.
 
2012-01-25 11:59:50 AM  

qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: More than 50% of my Catholic high school's students were on some form of financial aid provided by the school. We were also far more diverse than the public school of the town we were in.

One Catholic school didn't in the past, so obviously no Catholic school ever did, does, or ever will do in the future.

You're making the absolute statements based on what seems to be a projection. I provided a counter example. Are you imagining private schooling to be something from an 80's movie?

I'm pointing out that the plural of anecdote is not data. Your Catholic school worked one way, which doesn't mean that all Catholic schools work that way.


And you still have your highly suspect original statement that caused this.
 
2012-01-25 12:00:01 PM  

BloodySaxon: qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: More than 50% of my Catholic high school's students were on some form of financial aid provided by the school. We were also far more diverse than the public school of the town we were in.

One Catholic school didn't in the past, so obviously no Catholic school ever did, does, or ever will do in the future.

You're making the absolute statements based on what seems to be a projection. I provided a counter example. Are you imagining private schooling to be something from an 80's movie?


I was the only Tim in a class of Muffys, Buffys, Chip, Chads and Thurstons. Our uniform was by Ralph Lauren. Instead of ties we had to wear sweaters tied around our necks.
 
2012-01-25 12:03:41 PM  
jigger: So they have to pay for school twice if they don't want to go to a shiatty school? Most people can't afford that.


The Homer Tax
Tough shiat. Seriously.

What about all the people who don't have school-aged children? Do we all get vouchers as well since we're not sending kids to the public school system?


I don't have children, but my property taxes are supposedly funding public schools. I think it's utter BULLSHIAT. All children have a RIGHT to an education, and the quality of that education should NOT be dependent on how wealthy or poor the neighborhood is. If you want to fix this mess, fund the schools in some other, MORE EQUITABLE way. I'll pay whatever tax, because I believe that education is a RIGHT, not a priviledge.
 
2012-01-25 12:04:25 PM  

BloodySaxon: qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: More than 50% of my Catholic high school's students were on some form of financial aid provided by the school. We were also far more diverse than the public school of the town we were in.

One Catholic school didn't in the past, so obviously no Catholic school ever did, does, or ever will do in the future.

You're making the absolute statements based on what seems to be a projection. I provided a counter example. Are you imagining private schooling to be something from an 80's movie?

I'm pointing out that the plural of anecdote is not data. Your Catholic school worked one way, which doesn't mean that all Catholic schools work that way.

And you still have your highly suspect original statement that caused this.


The original quote (which was not mine) is:
"Right..... Because the really nice private schools wouldn't increase tuition to keep out the riffraff, now would they?" which is a blanket statement about private schools.

You responded:
"No, they don't retard. More than 50% of my Catholic high school's students were on some form of financial aid provided by the school. We were also far more diverse than the public school of the town we were in," which is clearly an anecdote about your personal Catholic high school education.

I responded:
"One Catholic school didn't in the past, so obviously no Catholic school ever did, does, or ever will do in the future," as a comment about the absurdity of responding to a general statement with an anecdote about your personal experience.
 
2012-01-25 12:04:53 PM  

hubiestubert: I don't think that the current system is broken. I do think that NCLB strains it quite a bit though.


I agree about NCLB, but I'm basing my statements on my own experience of graduating from a very rural public school in 2000, before NCLB. It was an ok education. Not great. Lots of bad teachers, loads of jesus freaks, and about 500 kids who wanted different things out of life but were all crammed together in one building. I think I would have been better served in a school that offered more AP classes but no auto shop. Other kids would have been better off in a school with more vocational training and no band program. One size does not fit all.
 
2012-01-25 12:05:49 PM  

Delawheredad: Lost Thought 00

The appropriate solution, obviously, is to shut down the entire public education system

Not at all but there HAS to be some mechanism for getting rid of bad and incompetent teachers in both private and public schools. The plain fact is that private schools can weed out the bad teachers much more quickly. I maintain that EVERY school both public and private has bad teachers. You can't use the phrase "bogey man of bad teachers" and expect to be taken seriously. Hell even universities have incompetent and lousy professors. It is a basic FACT that some people in EVERY profession are LOUSY at their jobs!

How do you propose to get rid of bad teachers? Are you in agreement with the author of the Salon article that bad teachers are a "bogey man?" If so you are delusional.


I only have anecdotal evidence, but my experience as a teacher has shown that it is very much possible to get rid of underperforming teachers, even ones who have tenure. I've seen it happen, and in each case the administrator had a paper trail documenting the sub-par performance, evidence that they offered professional development/mentoring to help the teacher improve, and copies of all written warnings. In cases where poorly performing teachers aren't removed it's usually due to a lack of motivation/documentation on the part of the administrator or that the teacher has a certification that's extremely difficult to fill. As a teacher, I would definitely like to see those who don't do their jobs removed. No one likes picking up the slack of a slacker.

I am not saying this is universally true, but I've taught in several different schools and my colleagues at other schools report similar experiences. YMMV.
 
2012-01-25 12:06:15 PM  

The Homer Tax: jigger: So they have to pay for school twice if they don't want to go to a shiatty school? Most people can't afford that.

Tough shiat. Seriously.

What about all the people who don't have school-aged children? Do we all get vouchers as well since we're not sending kids to the public school system?


I agree. You shouldn't have to pay for upper middle class kids to go to the suburban public school where their parents drop them off in Lexus SUVs.

A Dark Evil Omen: jigger: A Dark Evil Omen: jigger: When you deny school choice, what you're telling the student is "No, you can't go to a better school. You have to keep going to that shiatty school. Tough luck, kid."

We could try improving schools instead of shutting them down and turning to yet another horrifically bad "market-based solution". There's that.

Wow. No one ever thought of improving government schools before. Great idea.

I mean actually improve, not right-wing "improvements" where they dismantle the actual education part, try to shiatcan all the teachers and give massive raises to distant school board bureaucrats for turning the lunch room into a profit center.



Maybe the US can improve the schools just like they did in Sweden. Wouldn't you like to be more like Sweden?
 
2012-01-25 12:06:33 PM  

SuperTramp: jigger: So they have to pay for school twice if they don't want to go to a shiatty school? Most people can't afford that.


The Homer Tax
Tough shiat. Seriously.

What about all the people who don't have school-aged children? Do we all get vouchers as well since we're not sending kids to the public school system?

I don't have children, but my property taxes are supposedly funding public schools. I think it's utter BULLSHIAT. All children have a RIGHT to an education, and the quality of that education should NOT be dependent on how wealthy or poor the neighborhood is. If you want to fix this mess, fund the schools in some other, MORE EQUITABLE way. I'll pay whatever tax, because I believe that education is a RIGHT, not a priviledge.


Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.
 
2012-01-25 12:08:06 PM  

jigger: I agree. You shouldn't have to pay for upper middle class kids to go to the suburban public school where their parents drop them off in Lexus SUVs.


That's good, because we're not. Those parents in their Lexus SUVs pay their property taxes too.
 
2012-01-25 12:08:23 PM  
1. Pay teachers better so that some folk that couldn't afford to be teachers can now do so. Also, if you require continuing ed for teachers to stay teachers, pay for it!
2. Don't kill unions, but don't let them keep you from firing people that have no business teaching (remembering a student film of a teacher reading the paper and not doing any work at all, think it happened in Milwaukee).
3. Realize that students coming in aren't the same and tailor the schools to the area. Kids not being read to by parents because the parents are working 2 jobs or alternatively can't read? Add more time to the school day for said kids to be read to by teachers. Area too dangerous to begin with? Have dorms for high risk kids. English not native language for many kids? Have reading classes in spanish. Hell encourage english speaking kids to take them. We need more bilingual people. We also wait too long for languages to be taught, before age 10 is the best time to do it.

/hum probably too expensive
 
2012-01-25 12:08:26 PM  

ongbok: Is that the teachers fault?


Yes, but the situation is more complicated. Several people may be at fault with varying levels of fault. Proper pedagogy includes encouraging intrinsic student motivation. Students should want to complete assignments. This is a lofty goal when speaking in totality, but I am not speaking such. A few, as opposed to the current state of none.
 
2012-01-25 12:08:57 PM  
I want road choice. Why should I have to play for a street I don't drive on!
 
2012-01-25 12:09:32 PM  

jigger: I agree. You shouldn't have to pay for upper middle class kids to go to the suburban public school where their parents drop them off in Lexus SUVs.


So, for the record, you're not actually in favor of "school choice" or any other such notion. You're in favor of the elimination of the public school system.
 
2012-01-25 12:10:16 PM  

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.


But he's too busy watching his little portable TV everywhere he goes!
 
2012-01-25 12:10:50 PM  

qorkfiend: Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.


like pretty much every other tax you pay except income?
 
2012-01-25 12:11:50 PM  

sno man: Parents need to step up and take an interest in their kids eduction, read to them when younger, have them read to you as soon as they can, be involved, be on the kid to do the homework. More money by itself does nothing


Noooo. That would then mean people would have to start taking responsibility for their own kids and their kids education. So when Little Johnny fails it is his fault and the parents fault, and they would have to work with the teacher to see what went wrong. It's easier just to blame the teachers when little Johnny has low test scores. They ignore the fact that little Johnny comes home from school and plays video games or is on Facebook until he goes to sleep and doesn't crack open a single book. Or the fact that they have never read a single book to little Johnny ever in his life.
 
2012-01-25 12:12:13 PM  

qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: qorkfiend: BloodySaxon: More than 50% of my Catholic high school's students were on some form of financial aid provided by the school. We were also far more diverse than the public school of the town we were in.

One Catholic school didn't in the past, so obviously no Catholic school ever did, does, or ever will do in the future.

You're making the absolute statements based on what seems to be a projection. I provided a counter example. Are you imagining private schooling to be something from an 80's movie?

I'm pointing out that the plural of anecdote is not data. Your Catholic school worked one way, which doesn't mean that all Catholic schools work that way.

And you still have your highly suspect original statement that caused this.

The original quote (which was not mine) is:
"Right..... Because the really nice private schools wouldn't increase tuition to keep out the riffraff, now would they?" which is a blanket statement about private schools.

You responded:
"No, they don't retard. More than 50% of my Catholic high school's students were on some form of financial aid provided by the school. We were also far more diverse than the public school of the town we were in," which is clearly an anecdote about your personal Catholic high school education.

I responded:
"One Catholic school didn't in the past, so obviously no Catholic school ever did, does, or ever will do in the future," as a comment about the absurdity of responding to a general statement with an anecdote about your personal experience.


So, you made a useless and empty statement to begin with and shame on me for reading. I cede your point.
 
2012-01-25 12:12:23 PM  

meat0918: sno man: MasterThief: [...]
But how do we do that when we "failed" generations of students, and many parents couldn't give a damn about their kids education?
[...]


That's the trick question... The whole cool to be dumb thing really needs to be over. The media need to start calling politicians on it when they do it. T.V. needs to step up and stop reveling in stupidity, I'm looking at you Jersey Shore. There needs to be a cultural shift away from the race to the bottom. There needs to be an actual shot at the American DreamTM, not just the memory of it once being so. A carrot for the masses, that with a little effort, and education you to can get the brass ring...
 
2012-01-25 12:12:39 PM  

Bolebuns: I want road choice. Why should I have to play for a street I don't drive on!


you have road choice. You're not required to only drive on the roads near your house, are you? You can drive on roads in the next state even!
 
2012-01-25 12:14:22 PM  

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 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.


This.

/except for your spelling of "principal."
 
2012-01-25 12:14:26 PM  

qorkfiend: Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.


People should look at how Oregon farked up their school funding before sprinting away from property tax as it's base.

Tying it to an income tax and the general fund is a bad idea.

However, property taxes as the large base, with some income tax or sales tax smoothing out the differences between districts could work.
 
2012-01-25 12:14:27 PM  
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-kee p-ignoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/
 
2012-01-25 12:15:52 PM  

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


So basically we'd get a few thousand dollars voucher to spend at private schools that will end up costing upwards of $40K?
 
2012-01-25 12:15:59 PM  
qorkfiend

Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.

A state income tax, an increased sales tax, perhaps. But reliance predominately on property taxes to fund schools is a major part of the reason (at least in Illinois) for school inequities, which are shocking.
 
2012-01-25 12:16:00 PM  

jigger: The Homer Tax: jigger: When you deny school choice, what you're telling the student is "No, you can't go to a better school. You have to keep going to that shiatty school. Tough luck, kid."

They can go to that school, their parents just aren't going to get a subsidy from the taxpayers to do it.

So they have to pay for school twice if they don't want to go to a shiatty school? Most people can't afford that.

Hell, I paid property taxes for decades before I had kids. Price of civilization and all that.


You've seen the footage of little kids crying when they didn't win the lottery to get into a charter school and get out of the shiatty school their in, and when they do win the lottery it's super happy joy time.


Yup, that's farked up. This won't fix it.


Why do you want to make more kids cry?


Don't be stupid.
 
2012-01-25 12:16:10 PM  

skullkrusher: qorkfiend: Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.

like pretty much every other tax you pay except income?


And most of those would benefit from being made more progressive, though I don't know how you could make a sales tax more progressive.
 
2012-01-25 12:16:41 PM  

ignatius_crumbcake: 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?.


Actually, no. Look at the countries that consistently score the best in educational outcomes. What do you see? Is it free market schools? No; its robust, integrated, publicly funded school systems that focus on equity of educational outcome for every child. Sure, in places like Japan and Korea there are big tutoring industries, but those are sitting on top of excellently funded, excellently managed, excellently staffed public education systems, and the big winner of the last 10 years, Finland, has no tutor industry to speak of.

Here's (new window) a good article on Finland's school system.
 
2012-01-25 12:16:49 PM  

skullkrusher: you have road choice. You're not required to only drive on the roads near your house, are you? You can drive on roads in the next state even!


Yeah but If I want to drive on toll roads because they are better, the government doesn't cut me a check to subsidize that cost.
 
2012-01-25 12:17:52 PM  

qorkfiend: jigger: I agree. You shouldn't have to pay for upper middle class kids to go to the suburban public school where their parents drop them off in Lexus SUVs.

That's good, because we're not. Those parents in their Lexus SUVs pay their property taxes too.


But they likely don't pay $15k+ in property taxes. Poor childless people are subsidizing the richer kids too.


The Homer Tax: jigger: I agree. You shouldn't have to pay for upper middle class kids to go to the suburban public school where their parents drop them off in Lexus SUVs.

So, for the record, you're not actually in favor of "school choice" or any other such notion. You're in favor of the elimination of the public school system.


I'm definitely not in favor of poor people having to support the rich, which is what happens right now.
 
2012-01-25 12:17:56 PM  

sno man: meat0918: sno man: MasterThief: [...]
But how do we do that when we "failed" generations of students, and many parents couldn't give a damn about their kids education?
[...]

That's the trick question... The whole cool to be dumb thing really needs to be over. The media need to start calling politicians on it when they do it. T.V. needs to step up and stop reveling in stupidity, I'm looking at you Jersey Shore. There needs to be a cultural shift away from the race to the bottom. There needs to be an actual shot at the American DreamTM, not just the memory of it once being so. A carrot for the masses, that with a little effort, and education you to can get the brass ring...


You're preaching to the choir here.

The demonization of intelligence in the media needs to end. Unfortunately... dumb sells.
 
2012-01-25 12:19:16 PM  

SuperTramp: qorkfiend

Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.

A state income tax, an increased sales tax, perhaps. But reliance predominately on property taxes to fund schools is a major part of the reason (at least in Illinois) for school inequities, which are shocking.


I'd largely agree, but the income tax and sales tax are more susceptible to swings in the economy (both drop during recessions, etc.) while property taxes generally aren't.
 
2012-01-25 12:19:16 PM  

qorkfiend: skullkrusher: qorkfiend: Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.

like pretty much every other tax you pay except income?

And most of those would benefit from being made more progressive, though I don't know how you could make a sales tax more progressive.


what's wrong with say a 1% tax on all earnings to pay for public schools? The number is made up, but why not just say that this is your obligation to support our school system: x% of your income?
 
2012-01-25 12:19:39 PM  

Vangor: ongbok: Is that the teachers fault?

Yes, but the situation is more complicated. Several people may be at fault with varying levels of fault. Proper pedagogy includes encouraging intrinsic student motivation. Students should want to complete assignments. This is a lofty goal when speaking in totality, but I am not speaking such. A few, as opposed to the current state of none.


Newsflash.
Most students don't want to study or complete assignments. It is their parents that make them do this by setting up the atmosphere that studying is expected to be done. The teacher can't do this. Once the student leaves the class room they are out of the teachers control. Studying outside of the classroom is the only way most students are going to learn a subject.

People want to blame teachers for their kids failures because they don't want to take responsibility for their and their kids short comings.
 
2012-01-25 12:19:55 PM  
man, those Koch brothers are awesome. Destroying Unions, bringing quality education to the masses, they truly are public benefactors.
 
2012-01-25 12:19:56 PM  

The Homer Tax: skullkrusher: you have road choice. You're not required to only drive on the roads near your house, are you? You can drive on roads in the next state even!

Yeah but If I want to drive on toll roads because they are better, the government doesn't cut me a check to subsidize that cost.


yeah I'd imagine that would be a logistical nightmare. Probably why there isn't a road choice movement
 
2012-01-25 12:20:05 PM  
What this basically comes down to is some alter shill in love with the status quo turning this into an artificial left right wedge issue, when shaking up the current system is anything but. There are plenty of villains to go around without pretending that charter and voucher systems are nothing but reactionary religious conspiracies.

Some people probably do want an idiot paradise of fake science for a choice. Some of us really want to figure out just when we decided to ruin ourselves and what options we have for turning the tide. There are not a lot of easy choices.

For those speaking out of their ass about these issues with no background in civics, politics, or education, take the easy way out and try the latter seasons of The Wire. Then go ahead and follow those topics in a more serious sense. Become familiar with the plight of inner city education, the sould crushing nature of bureaucratic control, and the dark side of capitalism. Somewhere in the mix there are better ways to go.
 
2012-01-25 12:20:44 PM  

lysdexic: Bag of Hammers: Yeah, good luck fitting that on a bumper sticker, Libtard.

Translation: tl;cra


t3.gstatic.com
 
2012-01-25 12:21:07 PM  

sweetmelissa31: 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

So basically we'd get a few thousand dollars voucher to spend at private schools that will end up costing upwards of $40K?


And downwards of 3k. Your point?
 
2012-01-25 12:21:13 PM  

Bolebuns: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-ke e p-ignoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/


I got a 404 but was able to search for it Link (new window)
 
2012-01-25 12:22:11 PM  

lysdexic: You've seen the footage of little kids crying when they didn't win the lottery to get into a charter school and get out of the shiatty school their in, and when they do win the lottery it's super happy joy time.


Yup, that's farked up. This won't fix it.



So sayeth lysdexic.


Why do you want to make more kids cry?

Don't be stupid.


The longer you deny school choice, the more scenes there will be of kids crying because they weren't allowed to leave their shiatty school.
 
2012-01-25 12:22:25 PM  

meat0918: sno man: meat0918: sno man: MasterThief: [...]
But how do we do that when we "failed" generations of students, and many parents couldn't give a damn about their kids education?
[...]

That's the trick question... The whole cool to be dumb thing really needs to be over. The media need to start calling politicians on it when they do it. T.V. needs to step up and stop reveling in stupidity, I'm looking at you Jersey Shore. There needs to be a cultural shift away from the race to the bottom. There needs to be an actual shot at the American DreamTM, not just the memory of it once being so. A carrot for the masses, that with a little effort, and education you to can get the brass ring...

You're preaching to the choir here.

The demonization of intelligence in the media needs to end. Unfortunately... dumb sells.


Lowest common denominator = cash cash cash.
 
2012-01-25 12:22:29 PM  

jigger: But they likely don't pay $15k+ in property taxes. Poor childless people are subsidizing the richer kids too.

Everyone

subsidizes public education, because they all benefit from having an educated populace. It's one of those things society provides to all its members, regardless of whether or not they actually need it at the moment. Should you get a tax refund if your house never catches fire and you don't need the fire department?
 
2012-01-25 12:22:33 PM  

SuperTramp: qorkfiend

Some sort of flat school tax, then? Bad idea for the same reasons as all other flat taxes.

A state income tax, an increased sales tax, perhaps. But reliance predominately on property taxes to fund schools is a major part of the reason (at least in Illinois) for school inequities, which are shocking.


Here is an essay exploring what not to do, and is unfortunately also a blueprint some other states are apparently following to defund and destroy public education.

Link (new window)
 
2012-01-25 12:23:57 PM  

CitizensUnited: man, those Koch brothers are awesome. Destroying Unions, bringing quality education to the masses, they truly are public benefactors.


Hey! What are you doing out of school? Do your parents know where you are?
 
2012-01-25 12:24:44 PM  

Bag of Hammers: lysdexic: Bag of Hammers: Yeah, good luck fitting that on a bumper sticker, Libtard.

Translation: tl;cra

[t3.gstatic.com image 244x178]


Heh, noted.
 
2012-01-25 12:25:21 PM  

BloodySaxon: What this basically comes down to is some alter shill in love with the status quo turning this into an artificial left right wedge issue, when shaking up the current system is anything but. There are plenty of villains to go around without pretending that charter and voucher systems are nothing but reactionary religious conspiracies.


There's plenty of ways to advocate a departure from "the status quo" regarding education without giving people taxpayer money to send their kids to private schools.
 
2012-01-25 12:25:31 PM  

BloodySaxon: sweetmelissa31: 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

So basically we'd get a few thousand dollars voucher to spend at private schools that will end up costing upwards of $40K?

And downwards of 3k. Your point?


3K per child is still out of reach for most Americans that already live paycheck to paycheck.
 
2012-01-25 12:25:53 PM  

qorkfiend: jigger: But they likely don't pay $15k+ in property taxes. Poor childless people are subsidizing the richer kids too.

Everyone subsidizes public education, because they all benefit from having an educated populace.


And yet there are huge swaths of the populace who are not educated.

It's one of those things society provides to all its members, regardless of whether or not they actually need it at the moment. Should you get a tax refund if your house never catches fire and you don't need the fire department?

Eh, this is going to start a whole new discussion of everything that's funded through taxes and I've got shiat to do, so...
 
2012-01-25 12:26:04 PM  

Carth: The biggest problem with school choice? It works.


Citation needed.

Here, let me counter your assertion with some facts of recent vintage.

But in recent months, almost unnoticed by the mainstream media, the school voucher movement has abruptly stalled. Some stalwart advocates of vouchers have either repudiated the idea entirely or considerably tempered their enthusiasm for it. Exhibit A is "School Choice Isn't Enough," an article in the winter 2008 City Journal (the quarterly published by the conservative Manhattan Institute) written by the former voucher proponent Sol Stern. Acknowledging that voucher programs for poor children had "hit a wall," Stern concluded: "Education reformers ought to resist unreflective support for elegant-sounding theories, derived from the study of economic activity, that don't produce verifiable results in the classroom." His conversion has triggered an intense debate in conservative circles. The center-right education scholar Chester E. Finn Jr., president of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and a longtime critic of public school bureaucracies and teachers unions, told the New York Sun that he was sympathetic to Stern's argument. In his newly published memoirs, Finn also writes of his increasing skepticism that "the market's invisible hand" produces improved performance on its own. Howard Fuller, an African American who was the superintendent of schools in Milwaukee when the voucher program was launched there, and who received substantial support from the Bradley Foundation and other conservative institutions over the years, has conceded, "It hasn't worked like we thought it would in theory."
 
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 »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report