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.

(Fox News)   Fox News flips out that Matt Damon sends his kids to private school   (foxnews.com) divider line 269
    More: Obvious, Matt Damon, Fox News, private schools, Hannah, Sean Hannity  
•       •       •

3082 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Aug 2013 at 8:21 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-09 01:07:40 PM  

odinsposse: ltr77: BMFPitt:

Reforms such as what?

School choice, school competition, merit pay, parent triggers, etc.

None of which work.  Even NRO wrote an article the other day how school choice doesn't work.  Of course, they promised if only we spent MORE money on it it would.  If we want a system that works, we should emulate Finland the best system in the world.  However, the current crop of school reformers seem more keen on emulating Somalia.

True. I feel a prerequisite for this discussion is this book. It's by Diane Ratvitch who was an assistant secretary of education for H.W. Bush and Clinton. She was at that time an advocate of school choice, vouchers etc. However her research and experience lead to to write that book which explains why those movements are seriously damaging American schools.


Today's education "reformers" remind me a lot of the alchemists of days gone by.  Any moment now, they will come up with a formula that turns lead into gold.  They are certain of it, no matter what science and history tells them.
 
2013-08-09 01:11:46 PM  
 At Weasle News this is what qualifies outrage? Just because Matt Damon advocates for poor people and sends his kids to a private school?!  Well I suppose they attack anyone that advocates for the poor, but since he's "one of their class" they feel threatened by it.
 
2013-08-09 01:13:39 PM  
"For thee, but not for me"

Let's agree to call out hypocrites of all political persuasions.

thepersuasionslive.com
 
2013-08-09 01:14:29 PM  

BMFPitt: And any place where such schools could find parents willing to send their kids there probably has the same thing going on in public schools right now. At least that would be cheaper for the taxpayers, leaving more money to fund actual good schools for the kids that have a chance.


Actually, no.  Public schools are not legally allowed to teach creationism.  Or to house children in cubicles, have them watch movies all day, and call that 'teaching'.  And how in the world could diverting money from a public school by using the percentage of the funding they'd spend on a student to a scholarship for that student to go to a private school possibly 'leave more money to fund' that public school.

BMFPitt: I don't share your opinion that teachers are interchangeable cogs who are incapable of producing measurable results or demonstrating varying levels of skill to observers. I also can't comprehend why you call the giving of higher raises to some to be docking the pay of others.


I call it docking the pay of others because some of the proposals for merit pay in my state have actually including docking teachers pay if they didn't meet some legislatively set standard.

BMFPitt: You think that punching him solves some of the factors? Well given the rest of your logic, I'm not surprised.


I'm not too concerned for how you view my logic, given your obvious inability to determine the person you're responding to.
 
2013-08-09 01:17:05 PM  
Matt Damon opted out of the public school system because it sucks and he can.

I hope he starts advocating for everyone to have the same choice available.
 
2013-08-09 01:19:19 PM  

odinsposse: ltr77: BMFPitt:

Reforms such as what?

School choice, school competition, merit pay, parent triggers, etc.

None of which work.  Even NRO wrote an article the other day how school choice doesn't work.  Of course, they promised if only we spent MORE money on it it would.  If we want a system that works, we should emulate Finland the best system in the world.  However, the current crop of school reformers seem more keen on emulating Somalia.

True. I feel a prerequisite for this discussion is this book. It's by Diane Ratvitch who was an assistant secretary of education for H.W. Bush and Clinton. She was at that time an advocate of school choice, vouchers etc. However her research and experience lead to to write that book which explains why those movements are seriously damaging American schools.

I agree, another great book is Schools our Children Deserve by Alfie Kohn.  Of course, it advocates against standardized testing and unfortunately there is A LOT of money to be made off of those.
 
2013-08-09 01:20:16 PM  

SunsetLament: theknuckler_33: FIELDS: He loves talking them up, but doesn't want to send his kids there.
You know, he said he didn't have a choice. He had to do it. Actually he did have a choice. The people who don't have a choice are the rest of Americans who don't have Matt Damon's bank account and can't afford to send their kids to a private school.
...
HANNITY: She's brining up a point you're ignoring. Why not give every American a choice?

You heard it here first, America. Sean Hannity advocating giving every American the money they need to send their kids to private schools.

Nope.  Hannity is advocating giving every American child back the money the government intends to spend on their schooling and letting their parents choose whether to spend it on public schooling or private schooling.  Big difference (which, of course, you were aware of when you typed out your troll post).


I've never understood this argument. It will undoubtedly cost more to send the kids to private schools so there's a gap to be made up. If you're willing to pay the difference, why resist an equivalently expensive tax increase in order to fund public schools well enough to make them if comparable quality?

Note: that's actually ignoring the fact that it wouldn't be equivalently expensive because of economies of scale.

Difficulty: no relying on "gubmint bad, therefore public schools will suck no matter what" argument.
 
2013-08-09 01:26:00 PM  

ManRay: Matt Damon opted out of the public school system because it sucks and he can.

I hope he starts advocating for everyone to have the same choice available.


Hear, hear! He should be advocating for everyone to have an income that's much higher than the average. That would make a lot of sense if it wasn't for, you know, math.
 
2013-08-09 01:26:17 PM  
Liberals know what is best for everyone.

And they especially know that it doesn't apply to them.
 
2013-08-09 01:26:49 PM  

ManRay: Matt Damon opted out of the public school system because it sucks and he can.

I hope he starts advocating for everyone to have the same choice available.


Public schools are public because they're required to take all comers.  They can't reject anyone, and they're supported by public dollars.

Now, if you think everyone should have the same choice then you're limited to a few options:

1) As it is now: where if you have the money and your kid's well enough behaved, you can send him to a private school.
2) You drop public schools, and tell people to send their kids to private schools without supporting them - basically doing away with widespread education and literacy.
3) Require private schools to take all comers - which would basically turn them into public schools.
 
2013-08-09 01:27:55 PM  

cchris_39: Liberals know what is best for everyone.

And they especially know that it doesn't apply to them.


We do, it's true! What's best for you would be a Cleveland Steamer.
 
2013-08-09 01:33:57 PM  
My own little fantasy is that there be a rule that Democrats must send their kids to public schools. That would include the Secretary of Education, the President, city mayors, teachers and the media elite.

In real life I believe in freedom so I would never like this to be a law ....but it would warm my heart to see people practice what they preach.
 
2013-08-09 01:38:53 PM  

Mikey1969: Wow... So if Matt Damon contributed money to homeless shelters wold Fox immediately call him a hypocrite for living in a house of his own?


I think a more apt example of hypocrisy would be if he advocated that everyone donated to homeless shelters and then we found out that he never did.
 
2013-08-09 01:48:48 PM  

Vectron: I think a more apt example of hypocrisy would be if he advocated that everyone donated to homeless shelters and then we found out that he never did.


So.... has Matt Damon advocated for everyone else to send their kids to public school?

Because from what I can tell, he's actually been rather critical about the current state of the public education system and publicly lamented what he views as a decline since he attended and his father taught.

In fact, he's currently under attack from LA public school boosters over his comments....
 
2013-08-09 01:50:10 PM  

Vectron: In real life I believe in freedom so I would never like this to be a law ....but it would warm my heart to see people practice what they preach consume public resources which they do not need.

 
2013-08-09 01:50:45 PM  
okazakifragments.files.wordpress.com
FOX News outraged? Unpossible! Thank you for keeping us infromed!
 
2013-08-09 02:00:12 PM  

kronicfeld: Vectron: In real life I believe in freedom so I would never like this to be a law ....but it would warm my heart to see people practice what they preach consume public resources which they do not need.


That's just spin. But let me turn it around. Think how much public schools would benefit if say in New York City, all the parents with kids in private school became engaged in their children's public school.
Or in Washington DC; all the parents with children at Sidwell Friends were suddenly engaged in the DC school system.
 
2013-08-09 02:01:05 PM  

Karac: ManRay: Matt Damon opted out of the public school system because it sucks and he can.

I hope he starts advocating for everyone to have the same choice available.

Public schools are public because they're required to take all comers.  They can't reject anyone, and they're supported by public dollars.

Now, if you think everyone should have the same choice then you're limited to a few options:

1) As it is now: where if you have the money and your kid's well enough behaved, you can send him to a private school.
2) You drop public schools, and tell people to send their kids to private schools without supporting them - basically doing away with widespread education and literacy.
3) Require private schools to take all comers - which would basically turn them into public schools.


1) So if you don't have the money you are condemned to whatever school the government provides?
2) Who is advocating that? No one. "The money follows the student" is not "defund everything, everyone is on their own".
3) Public schools with (likely) different standards? OK.  Matt Damon wanted a more progressive education for his kids and the public school does not provide that so he choose something else because he has the means to.

Matt Damon is a big supporter of teachers and public schools because his mother was a teacher. He looked at the public school his children would go to and determined they were not a good fit. I respect that choice. I want the single mother in the 'hood to have the same options (even within the public school district) as MD does.
 
2013-08-09 02:06:17 PM  
Liberals claim to want clean air, but breathe dirty air daily.  This hypocrisy exposed, tonight on Hannity.
 
2013-08-09 02:13:20 PM  

ManRay: Karac: ManRay: Matt Damon opted out of the public school system because it sucks and he can.

I hope he starts advocating for everyone to have the same choice available.

Public schools are public because they're required to take all comers.  They can't reject anyone, and they're supported by public dollars.

Now, if you think everyone should have the same choice then you're limited to a few options:

1) As it is now: where if you have the money and your kid's well enough behaved, you can send him to a private school.
2) You drop public schools, and tell people to send their kids to private schools without supporting them - basically doing away with widespread education and literacy.
3) Require private schools to take all comers - which would basically turn them into public schools.

1) So if you don't have the money you are condemned to whatever school the government provides?
2) Who is advocating that? No one. "The money follows the student" is not "defund everything, everyone is on their own".
3) Public schools with (likely) different standards? OK.  Matt Damon wanted a more progressive education for his kids and the public school does not provide that so he choose something else because he has the means to.

Matt Damon is a big supporter of teachers and public schools because his mother was a teacher. He looked at the public school his children would go to and determined they were not a good fit. I respect that choice. I want the single mother in the 'hood to have the same options (even within the public school district) as MD does.


1) Yeah, that's about how it works.  If you don't have the money to afford an option, then you take what you can get for free.
2) "The money follows the student", *is* 'defund everything'.  Or it's just running a con on voters because you know that there's no way private schools could take all comers - meaning that 'choice' is still a pipe dream for anyone who can't already afford it.
3) Look at the 'standards' Louisiana has set up for private schools getting public monies.  Some of them don't even deserve the title 'school'.  And if your school is running off of taxpayer dollars, then yes - the government should be able to set certain minimum standards for the product it's buying.

School choice - just within public schools, is something I can get behind.  I doubt it would work too well - after all, if your kids school is shiatty, then it's a pretty good bet that all of the local schools are shiatty; and an almost certain bet that whichever one isn't shiatty is already at capacity.

But school choice as the local district sending a check to whichever private school you decide to send Johnny to?  That's just a scheme for people who can already afford to send their kid to a private school to get a tax cut.  I've NEVER seen a plan for that which would give any kind of reasonable number of students 'choice'.  At most it'll have a handful of kids to trot out as tokens, but the vast majority of it will be just another method to 'starve the beast' of government.
 
2013-08-09 02:15:15 PM  
Stoopid Fox News.

I feel so bad for Matt Damon and his children.  The poor guy is being forced to send his kids to private school because of the right wing nut jobs that run the LA Public School system.

For shame, America.  For shame...
 
2013-08-09 02:15:34 PM  
FIELDS: Matt Damon said he didn't want to send his children there because it wasn't progressive enough. What about Americans who think the public school system is too progressive? What if they want a school with Christian values. They can't send their kids there.

Um, people send their kids to conservative Christian schools all the damn time.
 
2013-08-09 02:22:18 PM  

Truther: Stoopid Fox News.

I feel so bad for Matt Damon and his children.  The poor guy is being forced to send his kids to private school because of the right wing nut jobs that run the LA Public School system.

For shame, America.  For shame...


OK, you're trolling, but for anyone who's interested, here's a good article on the decline of California's public education system:

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/02/california_educations_painful_declin e/

It will come as no surprise to anyone with a functional cerebrum that this decline wasn't precipitated by a bunch of goddamned lefty teachers.
 
2013-08-09 02:29:09 PM  
I bet that private school doesn't even teach "Intelligent Design".
 
2013-08-09 02:30:37 PM  

Delawheredad: When Jimmy Carter was president he sent Amy to a PUBLIC elementary school in Washington, D.C. Carter was not a good president but what you could never fault him on was this. He was and is a man of integrity. If all the smart and rich kids like Matt Damon's go to private schools the public schools are AUTOMATICALLY SHORTCHANGED AND MADE WORSE!

  I've been on all sides of the debate. I have home schooled my kids AND sent them to public schools. When I first decided to home school my oldest son his public school teacher responded with "There go the class test scores!"
My son got a better education but his peers lost out on his presence. The SAME thing is happening with Matt Damon's kids!


Have you ever read Amy Carter's account of being in public school? She was miserable because due to security concerns she was never fully able to leave the facilities and mingle with other students. It's a dumb comparison and you should feel bad.
 
2013-08-09 02:35:45 PM  

HeadLever: Public school is for poor people.  Why should I send my kids there?


Yes because there are no public schools in upper-middle and wealthy areas. Derp!
 
2013-08-09 03:30:43 PM  

Poopspasm: SunsetLament: theknuckler_33: FIELDS: He loves talking them up, but doesn't want to send his kids there.
You know, he said he didn't have a choice. He had to do it. Actually he did have a choice. The people who don't have a choice are the rest of Americans who don't have Matt Damon's bank account and can't afford to send their kids to a private school.
...
HANNITY: She's brining up a point you're ignoring. Why not give every American a choice?

You heard it here first, America. Sean Hannity advocating giving every American the money they need to send their kids to private schools.

Nope.  Hannity is advocating giving every American child back the money the government intends to spend on their schooling and letting their parents choose whether to spend it on public schooling or private schooling.  Big difference (which, of course, you were aware of when you typed out your troll post).

I've never understood this argument. It will undoubtedly cost more to send the kids to private schools so there's a gap to be made up. If you're willing to pay the difference, why resist an equivalently expensive tax increase in order to fund public schools well enough to make them if comparable quality?

Note: that's actually ignoring the fact that it wouldn't be equivalently expensive because of economies of scale.

Difficulty: no relying on "gubmint bad, therefore public schools will suck no matter what" argument.


Because there are certain things some parents don't want their kids being taught in school (one example would be sex education) and the point of the vouchers is that they can take the money and use it to get their kids the education that they feel is best.  You say "Difficulty: no relying on "gubmint bad" ... but sorry, there's a huge portion of this country's populace that believes gubmint has been farking up the public education system for decades (and it's getting worse, not better).  If the private sector provides a better (or more cost effective) education than the public sector, why should the populace be forced to prop up these uneffective public schools further?

ANSWER:  Because it's an entity (the education system) that liberals have a complete stranglehold over and they don't want anyone to slip out of the system under any circumstances.
 
2013-08-09 03:31:58 PM  

Wooly Bully: Truther: Stoopid Fox News.

I feel so bad for Matt Damon and his children.  The poor guy is being forced to send his kids to private school because of the right wing nut jobs that run the LA Public School system.

For shame, America.  For shame...

OK, you're trolling, but for anyone who's interested, here's a good article on the decline of California's public education system:

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/02/california_educations_painful_declin e/

It will come as no surprise to anyone with a functional cerebrum that this decline wasn't precipitated by a bunch of goddamned lefty teachers.


No trolling, being sarcastic.

Damon spoke out, quite loudly, about public schools and the need to support them (and against school choice).

Personally, I am happy he can afford to send his kids to the school he thinks will be best for his kids.  I think all parents should have some choices in choosing the school that they feel would give their children the best education.

I don't blame the "lefty teachers" - they have a really tough job.  I do blame those who say they know what's best for us, while not subscribing to the beliefs they push on us.
 
2013-08-09 03:40:30 PM  
Damon seems like a well meaning guy, but if you are going to open your mouth in public, your foot is going to go in there eventually.
 
2013-08-09 03:42:12 PM  
This is me doing the "wanking" motion.
 
2013-08-09 03:50:19 PM  

Vectron: Damon seems like a well meaning guy, but if you are going to open your mouth in public, your foot is going to go in there eventually.


Still waitin' on an answer to my question, buddy....
 
2013-08-09 03:50:46 PM  

SunsetLament: Because there are certain things some parents don't want their kids being taught in school (one example would be sex education)


Even school in the nation allows parents to opt their kids out of the birds & bees classes.

Now as for other things, such as including lessons on the non-biblical based math or evolution - well, if you object to your kids learning about objective reality, then you have a lot of problems unassociated with the ebil gubmint.
 
2013-08-09 03:58:14 PM  

skozlaw: Vectron: Damon seems like a well meaning guy, but if you are going to open your mouth in public, your foot is going to go in there eventually.

Still waitin' on an answer to my question, buddy....


skozlaw: So.... has Matt Damon advocated for everyone else to send their kids to public school?


I don't know all his comments but in my opinion, if you are going to be an advocate for better public education (is that an unfair characterization?) one should support it by being active in the schools. That's what my wife and I did. We both helped out at our public school to make it better for everyone. That's just what normal people do.
 
2013-08-09 04:09:47 PM  

austerity101: FIELDS: Matt Damon said he didn't want to send his children there because it wasn't progressive enough. What about Americans who think the public school system is too progressive? What if they want a school with Christian values. They can't send their kids there.

Um, people send their kids to conservative Christian schools all the damn time.


The issue is that these folks demand a handout to take that option. And that is the bugbear of "school choice" are a ton of people who want to opt out of public school systems, while still having said education paid for by the public. It is a position that IS baffling--almost as much as the folks who want to know why THEY should pay for public schools when they have no children themselves--ignoring of course that they might one day like to employ, be employed by, or even go to doctor or contractor who has an education...
 
2013-08-09 04:21:17 PM  

Truther: No trolling, being sarcastic.


Hey, if you sound exactly like a troll and pick a login like "Truther", expect people to react accordingly.

You ignored the information in that Salon piece. The story of how those schools became so bad has absolutely nothing to do with a lack of "choice", and there is absolutely no evidence that introducing "choice" will make things any better.
 
2013-08-09 04:28:32 PM  

Karac: SunsetLament: Because there are certain things some parents don't want their kids being taught in school (one example would be sex education)

Even school in the nation allows parents to opt their kids out of the birds & bees classes.

Now as for other things, such as including lessons on the non-biblical based math or evolution - well, if you object to your kids learning about objective reality, then you have a lot of problems unassociated with the ebil gubmint.


Meanwhile, when given the opportunity, people are flocking away from public schools en mass.
 
2013-08-09 04:50:33 PM  

SunsetLament: Because there are certain things some parents don't want their kids being taught in school (one example would be sex education) and the point of the vouchers is that they can take the money and use it to get their kids the education that they feel is best.


I would argue that parents shouldn't get to opt their kids out of sex ed.  A lack of comprehensive sexual education causes unwanted pregnancies and the spread of disease, demonstrated in states with abstinence-only education.  Society at large has a very vested interest in a populace that understands the biology and physiology of sex.

You say "Difficulty: no relying on "gubmint bad" ... but sorry, there's a huge portion of this country's populace that believes gubmint has been farking up the public education system for decades (and it's getting worse, not better).  If the private sector provides a better (or more cost effective) education than the public sector, why should the populace be forced to prop up these uneffective public schools further?

The government that has been farking up the public education system is the one that they (i.e., the conservatives) have been electing.  It seems ironic at best and hypocritical at worst that they would complain about the education reforms effected by the very people they put in charge to do that.

Also, the private sector does not provide a better or more cost-effective education.  The mere fact that the private sector functions on profit necessitates that this be true.  If the private sector were better at education, we'd find that the world's best education systems were private; they're not.

ANSWER:  Because it's an entity (the education system) that liberals have a complete stranglehold over and they don't want anyone to slip out of the system under any circumstances.

Well that's just silly.
 
2013-08-09 05:12:57 PM  

Wooly Bully: Truther: No trolling, being sarcastic.

Hey, if you sound exactly like a troll and pick a login like "Truther", expect people to react accordingly.

You ignored the information in that Salon piece. The story of how those schools became so bad has absolutely nothing to do with a lack of "choice", and there is absolutely no evidence that introducing "choice" will make things any better.


When you label everything you disagree with "trolling"...

As other have pointed out, why doesnt he send his kids there and work to make those schools better?  As he TELLS EVERYONE ELSE THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOULD DO.

That's the joy of Fark Politics.  You are right, 100% of the time.

Anyone who disagrees is either a troll, dumb or an evil republican!!
 
2013-08-09 05:21:38 PM  

Truther: Wooly Bully: Truther: No trolling, being sarcastic.

Hey, if you sound exactly like a troll and pick a login like "Truther", expect people to react accordingly.

You ignored the information in that Salon piece. The story of how those schools became so bad has absolutely nothing to do with a lack of "choice", and there is absolutely no evidence that introducing "choice" will make things any better.

When you label everything you disagree with "trolling"...

As other have pointed out, why doesnt he send his kids there and work to make those schools better?  As he TELLS EVERYONE ELSE THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOULD DO.

That's the joy of Fark Politics.  You are right, 100% of the time.

Anyone who disagrees is either a troll, dumb or an evil republican!!


Well that little rant certainly boosted your credibility.
 
2013-08-09 05:27:02 PM  

Truther: As other have pointed out, why doesnt he send his kids there and work to make those schools better? As he TELLS EVERYONE ELSE THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOULD DO.


He tells everyone not to enroll in private schools?  I'm sure you have a quote on this.
 
2013-08-09 05:45:10 PM  

Fart_Machine: Truther: As other have pointed out, why doesnt he send his kids there and work to make those schools better? As he TELLS EVERYONE ELSE THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOULD DO.

He tells everyone not to enroll in private schools?  I'm sure you have a quote on this.


It was in large bold caps, isn't that enough?
 
2013-08-09 05:55:20 PM  
Wealthy, Smug progressives push for policies for which they have no plan to participate?  Sounds par for the course....

Every foreign car with an Obama sticker on it is a daily reminder about how every idea in progressivism is for everyone else.  Socialism is after all for the people, and not the socialist himself.  Matt Damon is a proponent of public schools he just chooses not to send his kids there.  The Chicago teachers Union went on strike for more money to "Make the schools better" when in reality, half of them send their kids to private school.
 
2013-08-09 06:19:23 PM  

Dr.Mxyzptlk.: Ivandrago: I find this confusing. You can't be an advocate of public schools if you send your kids to private schools? I'm an advocate of strong public schools, but I went to a private high school. Does that make me a hypocrite? Why does wanting everyone to get a good education regardless of wealth make me a hypocrite?

I think it's the lack of a good education and graduation rates in many schools that concern people.
 Not the pursuit of a good education.
Matt Damon and others only reinforce the same policies and administration that have left millions trapped in a poverty,
These families are living the broken earth while he is the one actually living in Elysium.

Waiting for Superman addressed all this crap but was ignored and buried .http://youtu.be/ZKTfaro96dg

It's easier to just "derp" Romney "derp" republicans "derp" white guys. Rather than dig in and do the real work.
Matt Damon didn't change one damn thing with his little feel good speech.


Waiting for Superman wasn't ignored, It was debunked. Matt Damon isn't taking resources from public schools (the way the voucher people or the privatisers do). That means that he is not living in Elysium, especially when he spends his time and resources to help make public school better, as opposed to those who are merely looting the system.

Oh, and charter schools, on average, perform either on the same level or worse than public schools.
 
2013-08-09 06:59:20 PM  
Aggressively advocating for wars you have absolutely NO intention of enlisting to fight in is still cool, though. Right?
 
2013-08-09 07:04:34 PM  

technicolor-misfit: Aggressively advocating for wars you have absolutely NO intention of enlisting to fight in is still cool, though. Right?


No that sucks too. That's a hallmark of neo-conservatism. All the chicken hawks make me sick.
 
2013-08-09 07:04:55 PM  
Well... what kind of idiot sends his kids to public school?
 
2013-08-09 07:13:41 PM  

o5iiawah: Wealthy, Smug progressives push for policies for which they have no plan to participate? Sounds par for the course....


Because I'm sure he's exempt from his taxes going towards public education?

o5iiawah: Every foreign car with an Obama sticker on it is a daily reminder about how every idea in progressivism is for everyone else.


You're making even less sense that you usually do.
 
2013-08-09 07:15:35 PM  

vonster: Ctrl-Alt-Del: "Lib Media flips out when [famous conservative] does [any action]"

Same same


Gee, I hope you have a good example of such an unjustified flipping out and aren't just fabricating narratives from your own lack of perception.
 
2013-08-09 07:19:47 PM  

Hickory-smoked: Gee, I hope you have a good example of such an unjustified flipping out and aren't just fabricating narratives from your own lack of perception.


Ted Nugent threatens to machine gun the President.  Matt Damon sends his kid to a private school.  Both sides are bad.
 
2013-08-09 08:42:21 PM  

ltr77: Today's education "reformers" remind me a lot of the alchemists of days gone by.  Any moment now, they will come up with a formula that turns lead into gold.  They are certain of it, no matter what science and history tells them.


While anti-reformers just keep pointing at lead and saying that it would become gold if we just added more lead.

Karac: Actually, no.  Public schools are not legally allowed to teach creationism.


And yet it's been all of 3 days since a story on Fark about a public school teacher teaching creationism.  Or if you'd prefer one where it is overtly state sponsored, here's this.

And how in the world could diverting money from a public school by using the percentage of the funding they'd spend on a student to a scholarship for that student to go to a private school possibly 'leave more money to fund' that public school.

Charter schools typically get a fraction of what traditional public schools get per student.  Therefore the budget can remain the same while throwing even more money at the problem for those students who don't opt out.

I call it docking the pay of others because some of the proposals for merit pay in my state have actually including docking teachers pay if they didn't meet some legislatively set standard.

Well that's a separate issue, and I'd say that if you're bad enough to have your pay docked you shouldn't be working there.

ManRay: Matt Damon is a big supporter of teachers and public schools because his mother was a teacher.


If only he was as big a supporter of students.

Karac: School choice - just within public schools, is something I can get behind.  I doubt it would work too well - after all, if your kids school is shiatty, then it's a pretty good bet that all of the local schools are shiatty; and an almost certain bet that whichever one isn't shiatty is already at capacity.


So ignoring the fact that this is basically the entire premise of charter schools, which are public schools,

But school choice as the local district sending a check to whichever private school you decide to send Johnny to?  That's just a scheme for people who can already afford to send their kid to a private school to get a tax cut.

Even the ones exclusive to low-income kids who have already spent years in a failing school?

I've NEVER seen a plan for that which would give any kind of reasonable number of students 'choice'.  At most it'll have a handful of kids to trot out as tokens, but the vast majority of it will be just another method to 'starve the beast' of government.

I agree that such programs should be expanded so more kids have a choice.

DeaH: Oh, and charter schools, on average, perform either on the same level or worse than public schools.


Actually, as per the article you cited, the same number overperformed as underperformed.  For a lower price tag.  And the results are quickly improving over time while traditional public schools are stagnant.

And if you actually click through to the study, it gets much worse for your side:

"The difference in learning in New Orleans charter school equates to four months of additional learning in reading and five more months of learning in math. These outcomes are consistent with the result that charter schools have significantly better results than TPS for Black students who are in poverty. A substantial share of Louisiana charter schools appear to outpace TPS in how well they support academic learning gains in their students in both reading and math."

"Fifty percent of New Orleans charter schools have significantly better learning gains in reading than their local option, while 62 percent of charters outperform in math. Just 6 percent and 4 percent of New Orleans charter schools have lower learning gains than TPS in reading and math, respectively."


So thanks for that.  It's fresher data than what I previously had bookmarked.
 
Displayed 50 of 269 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is 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