Fucking union <_<
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704398304574598221889538680.html
Quote'Duplicitous and Shameful'
Democrats vote to send poor kids to inferior schools
The waiting is finally over for some of the District of Columbia's most ambitious school children and their parents. Democrats in Congress voted to kill the District's Opportunity Scholarship Program, which provides 1,700 disadvantaged kids with vouchers worth up to $7,500 per year to attend a private school.
On Sunday the Senate approved a spending bill that phases out funding for the five-year-old program. Several prominent Senators this week sent a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid pleading for a reconsideration. Signed by Independent-Democrat Joe Lieberman, Democrats Robert Byrd and Dianne Feinstein, and Republicans Susan Collins and John Ensign, it asked to save a program that has "provided a lifeline to many low-income students in the District of Columbia." President Obama signed the bill Thursday.
The program's popularity has generated long waiting lists. A federal evaluation earlier this year said the mostly black and Hispanic participants are making significant academic gains and narrowing the achievement gap. But for the teachers unions, this just can't happen. The National Education Association instructed Democratic lawmakers to kill it.
"Opposition to vouchers is a top priority for NEA," declared the union in a letter sent to every Democrat in the House and Senate in March. "We expect that Members of Congress who support public education, and whom we have supported, will stand firm against any proposal to extend the pilot program. Actions associated with these issues WILL be included in the NEA Legislative Report Card for the 111th Congress."
Senator Dick Durbin, who heads the subcommittee that oversees funding, has been saying for the better part of a year that he's open to supporting the program's continuation if certain conditions were met. In retrospect, this looks like bad faith.
Earlier this year, Mr. Durbin said the local D.C. Council needed to sign off on the program before Congress could reauthorize it. The council did exactly that, sending Congress a letter expressing solid support for the scholarships. Senator Durbin then said he wants participating schools to administer the same exams to voucher students that D.C. public school students take. Done, said proponents.
The program's supporters now feel they've been had. "Durbin has engaged in that classic game of moving the goal posts," says Kevin Chavous, a former D.C. council member and one of many local Democratic leaders who back school vouchers. "He's just been less than honest. He's made promises to colleagues and school leaders—like Michelle Rhee, our schools Chancellor—saying, 'All I need is this.' But the reality is that they've been finding reasons not to support the program."
The voucher program is closed to new students. "It's duplicitous and shameful," says Mr. Chavous. Strong language. But if you're a kid in D.C. trying to escape its awful schools, maybe not strong enough.
I don't really get it. What are vouchers exactly and that do they do? Are they some kind of educational grant?
Disappointing.
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:21:15 PM
I don't really get it. What are vouchers exactly and that do they do? Are they some kind of educational grant?
They're like scholarships that allow students that show some merit to pay tuition to private schools, rather than going to gladiator academy in the black/latino-packed public schools.
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:28:57 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:21:15 PM
I don't really get it. What are vouchers exactly and that do they do? Are they some kind of educational grant?
They're like scholarships that allow students that show some merit to pay tuition to private schools, rather than going to gladiator academy in the black/latino-packed public schools.
Mmm, I think I get it. Who funds it, is it public in full or only in part?
Sounds awful on its philosophy, in the context of the whole educational framework, though.
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:31:34 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:28:57 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:21:15 PM
I don't really get it. What are vouchers exactly and that do they do? Are they some kind of educational grant?
They're like scholarships that allow students that show some merit to pay tuition to private schools, rather than going to gladiator academy in the black/latino-packed public schools.
Mmm, I think I get it. Who funds it, is it public in full or only in part?
Sounds awful on its philosophy, in the context of the whole educational framework, though.
Publicly funded.
It's not really that bad. Think of it like the German system, with the whole streaming thing and whatnot. Besides, how is it fair to force kids that might have a chance to go to public school?
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:39:31 PM
Publicly funded.
It's not really that bad. Think of it like the German system, with the whole streaming thing and whatnot. Besides, how is it fair to force kids that might have a chance to go to public school?
The implication is that the public system is crap and for someone to have a chance they have to go private. From the system's perspective, it's terrible IMO.
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:41:39 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:39:31 PM
Publicly funded.
It's not really that bad. Think of it like the German system, with the whole streaming thing and whatnot. Besides, how is it fair to force kids that might have a chance to go to public school?
The implication is that the public system is crap and for someone to have a chance they have to go private. From the system's perspective, it's terrible IMO.
Depending on where you live, that's the case. Education is largely funded by local taxes. For kids that live in neighborhoods full of blacks and latinos (and the crime that follows that scum around), their schools are not only terrible, but stand no chance of improving. Ever.
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:48:26 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:41:39 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:39:31 PM
Publicly funded.
It's not really that bad. Think of it like the German system, with the whole streaming thing and whatnot. Besides, how is it fair to force kids that might have a chance to go to public school?
The implication is that the public system is crap and for someone to have a chance they have to go private. From the system's perspective, it's terrible IMO.
Depending on where you live, that's the case. Education is largely funded by local taxes. For kids that live in neighborhoods full of blacks and latinos (and the crime that follows that scum around), their schools are not only terrible, but stand no chance of improving. Ever.
Schools are funded locally over there? That must be a huge problem for places with a small base, I'd say. Better to have them at least regionally funded, States have way more resources.
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:50:41 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:48:26 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:41:39 PM
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:39:31 PM
Publicly funded.
It's not really that bad. Think of it like the German system, with the whole streaming thing and whatnot. Besides, how is it fair to force kids that might have a chance to go to public school?
The implication is that the public system is crap and for someone to have a chance they have to go private. From the system's perspective, it's terrible IMO.
Depending on where you live, that's the case. Education is largely funded by local taxes. For kids that live in neighborhoods full of blacks and latinos (and the crime that follows that scum around), their schools are not only terrible, but stand no chance of improving. Ever.
Schools are funded locally over there? That must be a huge problem for places with a small base, I'd say. Better to have them at least regionally funded, States have way more resources.
Been an argument about that forever. For afluent areas there is no incentive to change. They're doing just fine and don't want to see their kids suffer by sending tax money elsewhere.
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:50:41 PM
Schools are funded locally over there? That must be a huge problem for places with a small base, I'd say. Better to have them at least regionally funded, States have way more resources.
It's an artifact of how the American school system was built.
Quote from: Neil on December 20, 2009, 09:58:36 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:50:41 PM
Schools are funded locally over there? That must be a huge problem for places with a small base, I'd say. Better to have them at least regionally funded, States have way more resources.
It's an artifact of how the American school system was built.
Sounds terrible. Hasn't there been enough time to reform that?
@ DW: But can't things be worked on a different way? Even if affluent areas have no incentive to change it, you'd think that there's way more people interested in it changing. Who'd resist such a reform?
FYI DC spends much, much more per student in the public school system than any state in the US.
How does it compare to other metro areas though?
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 10:09:10 PM
Sounds terrible. Hasn't there been enough time to reform that?
@ DW: But can't things be worked on a different way? Even if affluent areas have no incentive to change it, you'd think that there's way more people interested in it changing. Who'd resist such a reform?
It is hardly a national system Larch it varies. In Texas we have the "robin hood" scheme where we make the rich districts share with the poorer ones.
I am not sure if it is working but it sure drives the property taxes sky high in the rich areas in an attempt to keep the schools good.
Besides I am pretty sure DC has only a singular school system so this problem would not exist there. In that city the rich people send their kids to private school.
Finally the reason the funding works the way it does is because the schools are controlled, and thus funded locally. To reform that would take the power from the local community and put it in the hands of the State or Federal government and that would be unacceptable to alot of people.
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 12:16:18 AM
Finally the reason the funding works the way it does is because the schools are controlled, and thus funded locally. To reform that would take the power from the local community and put it in the hands of the State or Federal government and that would be unacceptable to alot of people.
Indeed. They're already pretty pissed off that the Constitution prevents them from turning regular school into Jesus school.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 20, 2009, 10:23:09 PM
FYI DC spends much, much more per student in the public school system than any state in the US.
FYI, this is incorrect. In 2006 NYS and NJ spent more (about $14.8k per student in 2006, while DC spent $13.8k, about the same as Hawaii) but it did spend more than the national average of $9.1k
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/education/011747.html (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/education/011747.html)
Interestingly, state governments finance over half of all revenue for public schools, contrary to what has been implied in this thread. Though this can and does still lead to gaps in per-pupil spending between rich and poor districts, it isn't as bad as it once was.
The problem with voucher programs, as has been noted, is that it "supports" non-union teaching. Obviously, the unions are going to oppose it.
This is disappointing indeed. Even in Massachusetts Governor Patrick has tried to increase vouchers and charter schools, against great opposition. Not sure where the Governor stands now on this issue though.
Quote from: KRonn on December 21, 2009, 09:24:00 AM
This is disappointing indeed. Even in Massachusetts Governor Patrick has tried to increase vouchers and charter schools, against great opposition. Not sure where the Governor stands now on this issue though.
Still wishy washy in favor of it.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on December 21, 2009, 09:26:34 AM
Quote from: KRonn on December 21, 2009, 09:24:00 AM
This is disappointing indeed. Even in Massachusetts Governor Patrick has tried to increase vouchers and charter schools, against great opposition. Not sure where the Governor stands now on this issue though.
Still wishy washy in favor of it.
Yeah, that's kind of what I think. Which is amazing, given the political and Union opposition. So I give him some credit for trying. But many parents/voters favor it.
Of course they do. Many people want some say where their kid goes, and would prefer to send them to a private school.
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:41:39 PM
The implication is that the public system is crap
<gasp> O RLY? :lol:
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 12:16:18 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 10:09:10 PM
Sounds terrible. Hasn't there been enough time to reform that?
@ DW: But can't things be worked on a different way? Even if affluent areas have no incentive to change it, you'd think that there's way more people interested in it changing. Who'd resist such a reform?
It is hardly a national system Larch it varies. In Texas we have the "robin hood" scheme where we make the rich districts share with the poorer ones.
I am not sure if it is working but it sure drives the property taxes sky high in the rich areas in an attempt to keep the schools good.
Besides I am pretty sure DC has only a singular school system so this problem would not exist there. In that city the rich people send their kids to private school.
Finally the reason the funding works the way it does is because the schools are controlled, and thus funded locally. To reform that would take the power from the local community and put it in the hands of the State or Federal government and that would be unacceptable to alot of people.
Ok, I've read a bit on the issue, and it seems even more screwed up to me, although I guess it's more a political culture shock. Over here the concept of an educational district with powers to raise taxes and exercise eminent domain, all while mostly autonomous from regional government is totally alien, so most of the related concepts and issues are shocking as well.
Personally, I'd have no issue with it, each place governs itself as it sees more fit, but this system seems to me like a breeding ground for inequality.
That Robin Hood system thingie sounds better than the "each district for itself" approach, though.
Quote from: derspiess on December 21, 2009, 09:44:46 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 20, 2009, 09:41:39 PM
The implication is that the public system is crap
<gasp> O RLY? :lol:
Even if it's vox populi, an admission of it being so by the system itself seems a terrible implication.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:20:53 AM
Ok, I've read a bit on the issue, and it seems even more screwed up to me, although I guess it's more a political culture shock. Over here the concept of an educational district with powers to raise taxes and exercise eminent domain, all while mostly autonomous from regional government is totally alien, so most of the related concepts and issues are shocking as well.
Personally, I'd have no issue with it, each place governs itself as it sees more fit, but this system seems to me like a breeding ground for inequality.
That Robin Hood system thingie sounds better than the "each district for itself" approach, though.
The problems with the system are less financial--DC public schools are comparatively swimming in cash. The major problem is that your poor, less educated districts aren't fit to govern themselves. See Poor Rural School Districts run by boards with members elected on intelligent design platforms, and basically any inner city district in the country.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:20:53 AM
Personally, I'd have no issue with it, each place governs itself as it sees more fit, but this system seems to me like a breeding ground for inequality.
It is a breeding ground for inequality. The quality of education varies wildly from district to district. That has alot to do with how seriously the local community takes education and/or how many resources they have at their disposal versus the number of children to be educated. The kids are thus the victims/beneficiaries of tons of factors outside of their control but I guess that is true for almost every factor in their lives.
Anyway our political system has always been very decentralized due to the colonial way the entire country was settled. The school system is one of the most extreme examples though the feds and the states have gotten more and more involved over the years.
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 11:28:20 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:20:53 AM
Personally, I'd have no issue with it, each place governs itself as it sees more fit, but this system seems to me like a breeding ground for inequality.
It is a breeding ground for inequality. The quality of education varies wildly from district to district. That has alot to do with how seriously the local community takes education and/or how many resources they have at their disposal versus the number of children to be educated. The kids are thus the victims/beneficiaries of tons of factors outside of their control but I guess that is true for almost every factor in their lives.
Anyway our political system has always been very decentralized due to the colonial way the entire country was settled. The school system is one of the most extreme examples though the feds and the states have gotten more and more involved over the years.
Then there's an even better measure to reduce inequality than vouchers, have school districts run at least at a county level, under a general state level. Works for the rest of the Western world. :lol: Inequalities, even without dissapearing completely, are evend out quite nicely.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 20, 2009, 06:45:25 PM
Fucking union <_<
I have to say I am coming over to the perspective that the singular biggest problem in public policy in the United States is the Public Worker Unions. Their political power is incredible and it puts a tremendous burden on our flexibility. Public policy seems like it is done to further the interests of the public workers rather than the interests of the population...but I guess this is endemic of the whole political system where minority interests who are properly motivated and funded can have their way over the general welfare in almost every area of government.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:32:41 AM
Then there's an even better measure to reduce inequality than vouchers, have school districts run at least at a county level, under a general state level. Works for the rest of the Western world. :lol: Inequalities, even without dissapearing completely, are evend out quite nicely.
Too many people benefit from the system for it to be easily changed. Further any sort of centralization of power will always be opposed by those who find that ideologically offensive. That is a powerful political coalition right there.
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 11:32:57 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 20, 2009, 06:45:25 PM
Fucking union <_<
I have to say I am coming over to the perspective that the singular biggest problem in public policy in the United States is the Public Worker Unions. Their political power is incredible and it puts a tremendous burden on our flexibility. Public policy seems like it is done to further the interests of the public workers rather than the interests of the population...but I guess this is endemic of the whole political system where minority interests who are properly motivated and funded can have their way over the general welfare in almost every area of government.
I'm in one of them. I pay 64/month in dues and most of what I get back are e-mails asking me to donate to their PACs.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on December 21, 2009, 11:37:53 AM
I'm in one of them. I pay 64/month in dues and most of what I get back are e-mails asking me to donate to their PACs.
And why public workers rarely go on strike, though they do from time to time, in the US. Why strike when PACs are so powerful?
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 11:35:28 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:32:41 AM
Then there's an even better measure to reduce inequality than vouchers, have school districts run at least at a county level, under a general state level. Works for the rest of the Western world. :lol: Inequalities, even without dissapearing completely, are evend out quite nicely.
Too many people benefit from the system for it to be easily changed. Further any sort of centralization of power will always be opposed by those who find that ideologically offensive. That is a powerful political coalition right there.
So, what can "unlucky" school districts do about it, then?
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:32:41 AM
Then there's an even better measure to reduce inequality than vouchers, have school districts run at least at a county level, under a general state level. Works for the rest of the Western world. :lol: Inequalities, even without dissapearing completely, are evend out quite nicely.
I agree, but two comments: 1) in this specific case Washington DC is its own political unit--there isn't a larger group it can practically become a part of (I seriously doubt Maryland or Virginia want to absorb the DC public school system0, 2) a major selling point when buying a home is the school district. A lot of families that are located in a part of town with a good school are going to strongly object to changes. Also, local school boards are going to fight to keep control of their little fiefdoms.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:40:37 AM
So, what can "unlucky" school districts do about it, then?
That question has been the primary focus of education reformers for over 100 years. There is not much they can do but muddle on.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:40:37 AM
So, what can "unlucky" school districts do about it, then?
Two options: private school, or move to a better district. You don't buy a home in the US without taking into account the school district.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 11:43:49 AM
Two options: private school, or move to a better district. You don't buy a home in the US without taking into account the school district.
Even if you do not and never plan on having children live with you, it is still the determining factor in how large your property taxes are going to be.
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 11:32:57 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 20, 2009, 06:45:25 PM
Fucking union <_<
I have to say I am coming over to the perspective that the singular biggest problem in public policy in the United States is the Public Worker Unions. Their political power is incredible and it puts a tremendous burden on our flexibility. Public policy seems like it is done to further the interests of the public workers rather than the interests of the population...but I guess this is endemic of the whole political system where minority interests who are properly motivated and funded can have their way over the general welfare in almost every area of government.
Agreed. The problem with public unions is that they are so unbalanced. In the private sector, unions can get hammered just by economic realities. If they don't budge, then companies saddled with them just go out of business, and get replaced by companies without the union cancer. There is no such pressure on the public unions, and they also get to face off against politicians rather than executives.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 11:43:49 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:40:37 AM
So, what can "unlucky" school districts do about it, then?
Two options: private school, or move to a better district. You don't buy a home in the US without taking into account the school district.
I was thinking more about the district itself rather than people living on it. I mean, over here where you live also counts towards where you'll probably end up studying in the public system, as living close to the school counts heavily towards elegibility, but it's nothing as radical as the US' case.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:50:19 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 11:43:49 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:40:37 AM
So, what can "unlucky" school districts do about it, then?
Two options: private school, or move to a better district. You don't buy a home in the US without taking into account the school district.
I was thinking more about the district itself rather than people living on it. I mean, over here where you live also counts towards where you'll probably end up studying in the public system, as living close to the school counts heavily towards elegibility, but it's nothing as radical as the US' case.
You probably can't talk about this issue in the US for very long without coming back to segregation. As a legal reality it may have ended a 40 years ago, but our housing is still very segregated, with pockets of high poverty, functional illiteracy and crime. People don't want their kids going into those schools, and don't want those kids coming into their schools.
Another question, how are school districts formed? I mean, how is it decided that street or neighbourhood X belongs to this or that school district. About the property taxes issue, who decides them? The district? The city? The county? The state?
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 11:57:07 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:50:19 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 11:43:49 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:40:37 AM
So, what can "unlucky" school districts do about it, then?
Two options: private school, or move to a better district. You don't buy a home in the US without taking into account the school district.
I was thinking more about the district itself rather than people living on it. I mean, over here where you live also counts towards where you'll probably end up studying in the public system, as living close to the school counts heavily towards elegibility, but it's nothing as radical as the US' case.
You probably can't talk about this issue in the US for very long without coming back to segregation. As a legal reality it may have ended a 40 years ago, but our housing is still very segregated, with pockets of high poverty, functional illiteracy and crime. People don't want their kids going into those schools, and don't want those kids coming into their schools.
I know about that, I'm watching The Wire. :lol: Funnily enough, the 4th season, the one I'm watching right now, deals with the issue of education in an inner city middle school.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:32:41 AM
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 11:28:20 AM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:20:53 AM
Personally, I'd have no issue with it, each place governs itself as it sees more fit, but this system seems to me like a breeding ground for inequality.
It is a breeding ground for inequality. The quality of education varies wildly from district to district. That has alot to do with how seriously the local community takes education and/or how many resources they have at their disposal versus the number of children to be educated. The kids are thus the victims/beneficiaries of tons of factors outside of their control but I guess that is true for almost every factor in their lives.
Anyway our political system has always been very decentralized due to the colonial way the entire country was settled. The school system is one of the most extreme examples though the feds and the states have gotten more and more involved over the years.
Then there's an even better measure to reduce inequality than vouchers, have school districts run at least at a county level, under a general state level. Works for the rest of the Western world. :lol: Inequalities, even without dissapearing completely, are evend out quite nicely.
That's essentially how it's done in WV. Individual, local schools don't have their own board or any autonomy; they are governed by the county school board of the county in which they are located. And the state school board oversees the county boards, sets general policies, and can, in certain circumstances, suspend the authority of a county board and take over its functions. Also, funding is equalized among the counties.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:57:30 AM
Another question, how are school districts formed? I mean, how is it decided that street or neighbourhood X belongs to this or that school district. About the property taxes issue, who decides them? The district? The city? The county? The state?
Basically, there are 50 different answers to each of those questions.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:57:30 AM
Another question, how are school districts formed? I mean, how is it decided that street or neighbourhood X belongs to this or that school district. About the property taxes issue, who decides them? The district? The city? The county? The state?
All of the above, though not in every state. For purposes of education, it is almost as though we are 50 countries rather than 1.
If there are so many possibilities, can you tell me for instance what's your local situation where you live?
Also, the WV systems sounds cool to me, I guess. How does it work? Are there any terrible pitfalls?
WV is the most backward state in US by almost any measure. I'm sure even Louisiana and Mississippi mock it.
Quote from: DGuller on December 21, 2009, 12:17:10 PM
WV is the most backward state in US by almost any measure. I'm sure even Louisiana and Mississippi mock it.
Even in administrative planning?
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 12:15:47 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 12:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 12:12:40 PM
Also, the WV systems sounds cool to me,
:lol:
:huh:
WV has the reputation as being one of the least educated states (not that you would have any reason to know that).
I actually don't know the situation where I live. I pay property taxes to everyone (state, city, county, and school taxes). Each entity sets their own, but I'm not sure about who sets the school taxes.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 12:20:27 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 12:15:47 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 12:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 12:12:40 PM
Also, the WV systems sounds cool to me,
:lol:
:huh:
WV has the reputation as being one of the least educated states (not that you would have any reason to know that).
I actually don't know the situation where I live. I pay property taxes to everyone (state, city, county, and school taxes). Each entity sets their own, but I'm not sure about who sets the school taxes.
I knew WV is usually lumped in the backward bottom part of the states, but even a broken clock is right a couple of times per day. :P
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 12:12:40 PM
If there are so many possibilities, can you tell me for instance what's your local situation where you live?
Also, the WV systems sounds cool to me, I guess. How does it work? Are there any terrible pitfalls?
Well, I think that structually, the system in WV is actually pretty good. The biggest problem is that the people who run for positions on the school boards tend to be teachers, so the whole system is run for the benefit of the teachers, rather than for that of the students. (Of course, I'm sure that if we had any teachers from WV who post here, they would dispute the notion that the system is run mostly for their benefit.)
Also, while having spending per pupil equalized among the counties may sound fair, I'm not entirely convinced that it's actually that great an idea. For example, Randolph and Pocahontas counties are quite rural areas (especially Pocahontas county--there's a reason they put the National Radio Observatory there, and it's not just because Senator Byrd is so good at bringing home the pork) but very large in area. So they probably spend a lot more per pupil on just transporting the students to and from school than other counties. which means that they are spending less per pupil on everything else.
We have vouchers in Sweden.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:32:41 AM
Then there's an even better measure to reduce inequality than vouchers, have school districts run at least at a county level, under a general state level. Works for the rest of the Western world. :lol: Inequalities, even without dissapearing completely, are evend out quite nicely.
Nice theory, but that theory does not work in practice. In Virginia, schools
are "run... at a county level, under a general state level." Just like "the rest of the Western world. :lol:" However, it turns out that "inequalities" are not "evend [sic] out quite nicely," but rather persist in a fashion pretty much indistinguishable from states with city and country school systems.
The problem is not one of funding (although funding adds a lot to the problem). The problem is due to three factor, IMO:
(1) Highly differential levels of parental and student involvement. Students whose parents care about their education do much, much better than those whose parents don't, even if attending much less well-funded schools; students who perceive that education is something done for them, rather than to them, stay in school.
(2) Highly differentiated levels of teacher preparation, professionalism, and educational leadership. American education is a highly bureaucratic system, with the highest levels dominated by local politics. The school systems most in need of excellent leaders are the ones least able to attract them. The most important position in the American educational system in terms of impact on quality is the school principal; principals are also the people least likely to be highly proficient at their jobs, because their selection is so tainted by politics.
(3) The "factory" model of education wherein students proceed down an 'assembly line" of courses over the years is poorly suited to the needs of modern education, and yet is being reinforced by such things as national educational policies (eg "No Child Left Alive" with its emphasis on the testing for mere recollection of facts). Most education systems worldwide do this as well, but all that means is that most education systems worldwide do it wrong as well.
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2009, 11:40:20 AM
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on December 21, 2009, 11:37:53 AM
I'm in one of them. I pay 64/month in dues and most of what I get back are e-mails asking me to donate to their PACs.
And why public workers rarely go on strike, though they do from time to time, in the US. Why strike when PACs are so powerful?
They don't do much for us though. There is a perception that they do, and in other states, like Cali, maybe they do.
Quote from: grumbler on December 21, 2009, 02:19:46 PM
(3) The "factory" model of education wherein students proceed down an 'assembly line" of courses over the years is poorly suited to the needs of modern education, and yet is being reinforced by such things as national educational policies (eg "No Child Left Alive" with its emphasis on the testing for mere recollection of facts). Most education systems worldwide do this as well, but all that means is that most education systems worldwide do it wrong as well.
It's easy to criticize this, but is it easy to come up with something better and implement it system-wide?
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 12:23:54 PM
I knew WV is usually lumped in the backward bottom part of the states, but even a broken clock is right a couple of times per day. :P
I went through the WV public school system, and don't really have too many positive things to say about it. Probably the best thing I can say is that given the limited funding, it probably wasn't as bad as it could have been.
Amount of $$ spent does not automatically bring results, as the Kansas City example shows: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html
Vouchers in general IMO, are a flawed way to address the problem of some kids simply being forced to go to awful schools that will limit their opportunities. They're not great, but they're better than nothing.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 21, 2009, 04:01:55 PM
Vouchers in general IMO, are a flawed way to address the problem of some kids simply being forced to go to awful schools that will limit their opportunities. They're not great, but they're better than nothing.
Personally, it strikes me as a cop-out. Instead of thinking hard about making schools work better, we're just letting the best students abandon it, leaving the public system even more gutted.
On the other hand, I'm not sure it's even a given that we should have a public school system. Maybe giving vouchers to everyone would be a better idea. I don't see any compelling non-statist reason why education has to be provided by the government.
In Sweden everyone gets vouchers.
Quote from: DGuller on December 21, 2009, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 21, 2009, 04:01:55 PM
Vouchers in general IMO, are a flawed way to address the problem of some kids simply being forced to go to awful schools that will limit their opportunities. They're not great, but they're better than nothing.
Personally, it strikes me as a cop-out. Instead of thinking hard about making schools work better, we're just letting the best students abandon it, leaving the public system even more gutted.
Gutting a deeply flawed system isn't necessarily a bad thing. De-funding bad public schools forces them to either compete or wither away. I don't see what is so sacred about keeping the public school system intact, but then again I'm not in the teacher's union.
QuoteOn the other hand, I'm not sure it's even a given that we should have a public school system. Maybe giving vouchers to everyone would be a better idea. I don't see any compelling non-statist reason why education has to be provided by the government.
Now you're getting it :P
I'm okay with publicly-funded education, but I don't see why it has to be publicly-run.
Quote from: derspiess on December 21, 2009, 04:16:54 PM
I'm okay with publicly-funded education, but I don't see why it has to be publicly-run.
The nightmare senario would be private schools enticing parents that don't care about education with programs focusing on PE. As bad as some public schools are, at least you know they cover the basics and have some standards for teachers.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 04:31:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 21, 2009, 04:16:54 PM
I'm okay with publicly-funded education, but I don't see why it has to be publicly-run.
The nightmare senario would be private schools enticing parents that don't care about education with programs focusing on PE. As bad as some public schools are, at least you know they cover the basics and have some standards for teachers.
Child suicides we skyrocket as failing gym becomes worse than failing Inglush!
Here in Oregon most of the school districts are based on the city, though some smaller rural cities will merge into one. A 1990 ballot measure caused the majority of the funding to come from the state, instead of locally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Ballot_Measure_5_(1990)
Some cherry-picked paragraphs from:
http://www.schoolfunding.info/states/or/lit_or.php3
QuoteIn the early 1970s, local government provided 78% of Oregon's school funding, primarily from property taxes. School district per-pupil property values varied from about $19,000 to about $203,000 and tax rates varied from about $9 per thousand dollars of value to about $20 per thousand. The resultant per-pupil spending varied from $674 to $1,795 among districts. In 1976 in Olsen v. State, 554 P.2d 139, an "equity" case, the Oregon Supreme Court acknowledged these disparities and the causal link to reduced educational opportunity for students in lower wealth, lower spending districts. The court concluded that the school finance system was not necessarily "desirable" but, nonetheless, was not violating either the equal protection or education clauses of the Oregon Constitution. The court found that the constitution sets a minimal standard, whereby the state is in compliance "if the state requires and provides for a minimum of educational opportunities . . . and permits the districts to exercise local control over what they desire, and can furnish, over the minimum."
QuoteUsing the initiative and referendum process, voters passed Measure 5 in November 1991. This constitutional amendment greatly limited local property taxes and required the state to "replace from the State's general fund any revenue lost by the public school system because of the limitations." In recent years, the state has provided about 75% of school funding, which is close to 50% of the state's general fund budget. As primary responsibility for school funding shifted from local property taxes to the state, the legislature dramatically improved per-pupil spending equity among school districts.
QuoteIn a decision issued on January 23, 2009, the Oregon Supreme Court declared that the legislature had failed to fund the public school system at the constitutionally-required level, but nevertheless refused to issue an injunction requiring them to do so, because of the seemingly contradictory language of Art. VIII, sec 8 of the state constitution (added by referendum in 2000) which provides in relevant part that:
The Legislative Assembly shall appropriate in each biennium a sum of money sufficient to ensure that the state's system of public education meets the quality goals established by law, and publish a report that either demonstrates the appropriation is sufficient, or identifies the reasons for the insufficiency, its extent, and its impact on the ability of the state's system of public education to meet those goals.
The Court held that each provision of this inconsistent constitutional clause should be read separately and enforced separately: i.e. the legislature is obligated to appropriate the amount of money that is necessary to meet the quality educational goals, but if it doesn't meet this obligation, it should issue a report that admits to the under funding and explains to the public why it did not meet its obligation and what impact the under funding will have on the state's public education system.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 21, 2009, 04:31:18 PM
The nightmare senario would be private schools enticing parents that don't care about education with programs focusing on PE. As bad as some public schools are, at least you know they cover the basics and have some standards for teachers.
A nightmare for fat kids, maybe :P
Anyway, the state can always suggest or even mandate that certain things be covered-- verify it by standardized tests if you like.
And the 'standards' for public school teachers are often so useless that you might as well throw them out altogether. Has teacher quality been an issue for private schools? I'm not sure I've heard of anything, but that's an honest question.
Quote from: The Brain on December 21, 2009, 04:12:48 PM
In Sweden everyone gets vouchers.
We'll have this if the Tories win :)
This is an interesting article from San Angelo, TX that covers much of what has been discussed in this thread.
QuoteTLC Academy enrollment is surging
But gains are costly for San Angelo district
By Laurel L. Scott
Saturday, October 31, 2009
SAN ANGELO, Texas — TLC Academy, San Angelo's first charter school, has shot ahead of its enrollment goal.
The school, which opened Aug. 24, has 629 students this fall. The school's founders set an enrollment goal of 550 last spring.
"We had so many kindergartners we expanded to five classrooms," TLC Academy Superintendent Walt Landers said. "Our goal, if we maxed our 19:1 (student-teacher) ratio all the way up, is 670 students. We went ahead and expanded with additional modulars (portable buildings)."
The academy's success has come at a big price to San Angelo's public schools. The San Angelo Independent School District, which last year experienced its first uptick in student enrollment in at least a decade, is down by as many as 400 students this fall. The drop, which has affected even successful campuses such as Santa Rita Elementary School, could cost the district close to $2 million in state funding.
"If this charter school decrease hit us even two years ago, it would have hit us harder," said SAISD Superintendent Carol Ann Bonds.
She said demographers hired by the school district and the city about four years ago foresaw an increase in the city's population.
"They predicted we'd turn the corner and we did last year," Bonds said. "We're seeing the kids coming to school from the increased births."
That growth, however, came to an end when TLC opened.
Landers, who is also the pastor of TLC Church, said he led the effort to get approval for a charter school because many parents who wanted to enroll their children in the church's previous private school couldn't afford to.
"It's a lot of extra work but the challenge that was always facing us on being able to hire and pay for quality education for our kids, the amount you'd have to charge a parent was just astronomical," Landers said.
"A lot of parents just could not afford it. A lot of parents felt stuck in the system," he said. "I just ran into parent after parent after parent who wanted to put their kid in our school and they just couldn't afford it. Being able to offer that free tuition, with the private school approach, to me that was a big part of that reason."
In 1995, the Texas Legislature established the charter school program to encourage local initiative. Charter schools receive state funding and cannot charge tuition but are subject to fewer state laws than public school districts, according to the Texas Education Agency.
"The same money is given to each charter school whether you're in San Angelo, Texas, or in Dallas, Texas," Landers said.
Charter schools also do not receive property tax funds that the local public school district receives.
Measuring success
When it comes to accountability and measuring academic success, charter schools are monitored and accredited under the statewide testing and accountability system, the TEA says. The majority of the state's more than 200 charter schools are "open enrollment," which means they cannot discriminate on the basis of gender, race, income or ability. About 113,000 students attend charter schools in Texas.
"With open enrollment, if we have an open slot we take them. If not, they go on the waiting list. If a spot comes open, then it's a lottery," Landers said.
TLC Academy, in common with other charter schools, can reject a student who has a criminal record or a record of discipline problems.
Midland has three charter schools, one of which is Midland Academy Charter School. The school has an enrollment of 540 students in prekindergarten through ninth grade.
"We get a lot of interest from families who are moving into Midland from small schools because we're a Class A district, so we have that small school feel in a big city," Midland Academy Superintendent Jill Lankford said.
The school, which Lankford said has been rated as Recognized by the state for three years in a row, opened in 1999.
"When you're in a community such as Midland and the only options other than attending Midland ISD is some private schools where tuition is a factor — to provide an option that was low cost or in this case no cost was an option that the community thought was a benefit," Lankford said.
Woodrow Bailey, communications director for the 21,000-student Midland Independent School District, said the relationship between the city's public school district and its charter schools is not contentious.
"They provide a service for those parents who feel a charter school education better suits their child's needs," Bailey said. "The charter schools have been here for a while and we also have a large amount of private schools here in Midland; it's really a matter of parental choice."
Odessa also has a charter school, as does Brownwood, but most of the state's charter schools are in large urban areas.
"Most of the charter schools in the urban areas are really to help dropout recovery, are typically high schools, are typically nontraditional, so they can work through to graduation," said David Dunn, executive director of Texas Charter Schools Association, an advocacy organization.
"We think it's important that parents and students have choices in education. For some parents and students, the model there (in San Angelo) fits their needs better," Dunn said. "We don't view it as competition so much as opportunities for parents and children."
Bonds has a different perspective.
"The need for charter schools in our nation is for places where schools are failing," the superintendent said. "Large, inner-city school districts in urban areas. A parent in a neighborhood with multiple years of a failing school needs choice.
"I'm not philosophically opposed to charter schools," she said. "Tom Green County doesn't have failing schools."
The effect on the school district's finances is one of the immediate concerns.
Jeff Bright, SAISD's assistant superintendent for business and support services, said state funding is based on the weighted average daily attendance of students in the district. The San Angelo district gets nearly $5,000 per student, based on that attendance.
"In January, I feel like I can look back at a semester and draw a conclusion. It's still a little bit early. Until last week, we were still adding, enrolling more students each Monday," he said in mid-October. "This needs to be a work in progress as we study the long-term implications."
Landers, on the other hand, sees an economic benefit to the city from the charter school.
According to the academy's records, at least 89 of its students attended a private school last year and 28 were home-schooled. Most of the private school students were from the church's private school, now closed except for prekindergarten for 3- and 4-year-olds.
"San Angelo wasn't receiving any federal or state money from any of these students. That's a big economic impact for San Angelo," Landers said.
At TLC Academy, students wear uniforms and parents are required to sign a contract agreeing to active participation in their child's education, including visiting the child's classroom each semester. The school's goal is to emphasize character and leadership along with education.
The academy is limited to 1,000 students under its state charter.
More than half of TLC Academy's enrollment is in its elementary grades.
The school has three classrooms of each grade for first through fifth grades and four classes of sixth-graders. In the equivalent of middle and high school, there are three classrooms for each of seventh, eighth and ninth grades, two of 10th and 11th grade and one classroom of 12th-graders.
The elementary campus shares facilities with the church and the private prekindergarten at 5687 Melrose Ave. in the Bluffs.
Sixth-graders are housed in a facility across the street from the high school classrooms, which are at 126 S. Jackson St., Landers said.
"The plan is we're adding on to the Melrose campus and this year's fifth-graders will move into brand new classrooms when they're sixth-graders," Landers said. "They'll be on with the elementary school. That's what the parents want."
Landers is also looking ahead to next year's registrations.
"We're looking at building on to the pre-k to bring it to 100," he said. "We're looking at going ahead and growing that because it becomes a natural feeder to the charter school. A lot of those kids are already here, they're used to our system, they wear uniforms similar to our charter school's."
Area enrollment
The academy's enrollment has affected some of SAISD's schools more than others.
Santa Rita Elementary School, which consistently earns the state's highest Exemplary rating, has 11 children who live in its district but attend TLC Academy. This year, 10 SAISD elementary schools were rated as Exemplary.
Bonham Elementary School, which is in the Southland neighborhood, has by far the highest number of elementary students who live in its district but attend TLC with 67. Bonham's rating improved from Recognized to Exemplary for this past year's performance.
The charter school also proved popular for students who might otherwise have attended SAISD's middle schools. Lee Middle School lost the most potential students, with 63 of the academy's students living in its district. Glenn Middle School might have registered an additional 44 and Lincoln Middle School an additional 43, according to the academy's records.
'Whole other culture'
About 31 of TLC's students came from area schools outside the San Angelo district and two are from other countries: Portugal and Colombia.
"One of the things that we found is that our elementary is almost a whole other culture," Landers said. "Our high school, a lot of the kids we got were not in trouble, not a problem, but they weren't being educated. They kind of were falling through the cracks. We have a real challenge, but we chose this battle. We just have to step up to the challenge.
"I'm not sure how that's going to shake out for our rating overall," he said. "We're exempt from counting Year One for or against us. We'll know more as we move along here. I have to have two out of three years acceptable rating to keep the doors open. Of course, our goals are a lot higher than that.
"We're going to go on, we're going to invest in our community and in these kids, do what we have to do. If we're a success and look like we're going to stay around, I think we're going to have our doors knocked down."
Enrollment figures
Enrollment at SAISD schools by years, with the number of students from the school neighborhood who are enrolled in TLC Academy for the 2009-10 school year
School 2007-08 2008-09 Oct. 2009 TLC
Academy
Alta Loma 292 315 316 29
Austin 475 504 467 28
Belaire 369 366 385 5
Bonham 562 562 499 67
Bowie 499 496 452 31
Bradford 445 460 474 16
Crockett 375 365 350 10
Fannin 408 383 404 19
Fort Concho 294 308 304 3
Glenmore 406 446 489 10
Goliad 582 566 573 24
Holiman 297 337 332 20
Lamar 578 592 527 30
McGill 274 291 277 23
Reagan 360 378 381 13
San Jacinto 383 413 408 9
Santa Rita 417 416 393 11
Total elementary 7,016 7,198 7,031 348
Glenn 1,077 1,098 1,158 44
Lee 1,043 1,018 915 63
Lincoln 862 848 882 43
Total middle 2,982 2,964 2,955 150
Central Freshman 752 753 658 31
Central 2,245 2,240 2,140 45
Lake View 1,272 1,231 1,201 24
Total high school 4,269 4,224 3,999 100
District Total 14,267 14,386 13,985 598
Sources: SAISD, TLC Academy
Quote from: derspiess on December 21, 2009, 05:16:37 PMHas teacher quality been an issue for private schools? I'm not sure I've heard of anything, but that's an honest question.
Here's a comment from the article I just posted.
Quote
smorrow writes:
I worked last year as a fill in for TLC's High School as a Social Studies teacher. I want to state that I realize I along with others am not perfect. I have worked as Police officer, Fire Fighter decided to go into teaching so I have Masters in Education with Gifted and Talented specialization from University of North Texas and I am currently working on PhD in Public Administration at Walden University. Coming in to TLC and the history of being a church school for 34 years I figure discipline, and love would be solid in their foundation. Not only was that not on their agenda but they lacked discipline, tardy policy, books, workbooks, and every other resource that was needed to teach the high school student in social studies. I did not have enough books for all the classes. Today I hope with them signing on to have the Cscope program they bought enough resources for their teachers to teach. Nothing harder than working at a school that does not provide curriculum and resources for their teachers. I heard this was the fact this year at TLCA that text books, and curriculum was not ready when school year began I hope this information was wrong. Landers plan was not to have all certified teachers (to save money) as long as you looked highly qualified he could hire you. Contracts were given to few when I was leaving with no job description and no money amounts attached, but if you wanted to work there you would sign. The numbers in the paper today are the numbers he wanted last school year when putting it together. He told us that 30% of the students leave the new charter schools due to not liking the education that is received there for I believe he let more than the state minimum so he can meet the enrollment numbers. TLC can lose a percentage of the enrollment count and still be ok with state standards. My biggest concern is the community being sold a package deal that is not true. When the commercials were made about the certified teachers and discipline I was one of three that were certified. Landers planned to have one certified kindergarten teacher and the rest aids under that teacher. I believe that not every great teacher has been certified, but you have to be gifted to teach and educate our children. TLCA needs to be held accountable for the promises that they make. There is a great opportunity for TLCA to help students and parents in San Angelo from an honest hard working charter school.
Quote from: DGuller on December 21, 2009, 03:28:57 PM
It's easy to criticize this, but is it easy to come up with something better and implement it system-wide?
I am not sure what "easy" has to do with anything. People have rejected reform after reform because they were not "easy," even when they were effective.
Time and again, reforms that offered students/parents choice between differentiated schools have been effective, and time and again they have been rescinded, despite their success, because powerful interests were weighed against them (primarily, the teachers' unions and primarily on behalf of teachers who cannot teach and shouldn't be in classrrooms - and aren't, when charter and private schools are used to give parents choices).
It would be far easier to demolish the state monopoly on factory-like education than on factory-like steelmaking or whatnot. Fund the students via vouchers, allow anyone who is qualified to establish a school and seek students, and provide some measures by which parents can distinguish between schools based on the type of student the school is recruiting. That isn't "easy" but it is easier than compensating for failures to educate.
Sorry, but why are we getting rid of factory-style education?
Quote from: citizen k on December 21, 2009, 06:29:08 PM
Here's a comment from the article I just posted.
Quote
smorrow writes:
I worked last year as a fill in for TLC's High School as a Social Studies teacher. I want to state that I realize I along with others am not perfect. I have worked as Police officer, Fire Fighter decided to go into teaching so I have Masters in Education with Gifted and Talented specialization from University of North Texas and I am currently working on PhD in Public Administration at Walden University. Coming in to TLC and the history of being a church school for 34 years I figure discipline, and love would be solid in their foundation. (snip)
Love those high standards for a masters degree in education and a PhD candidate: in just three sentences, he has about a dozen errors in writing. It never gets better, either.
Quote from: grumbler on December 21, 2009, 02:19:46 PM
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 11:32:41 AM
Then there's an even better measure to reduce inequality than vouchers, have school districts run at least at a county level, under a general state level. Works for the rest of the Western world. :lol: Inequalities, even without dissapearing completely, are evend out quite nicely.
Nice theory, but that theory does not work in practice. In Virginia, schools are "run... at a county level, under a general state level." Just like "the rest of the Western world. :lol:" However, it turns out that "inequalities" are not "evend [sic] out quite nicely," but rather persist in a fashion pretty much indistinguishable from states with city and country school systems.
The problem is not one of funding (although funding adds a lot to the problem). The problem is due to three factor, IMO:
(1) Highly differential levels of parental and student involvement. Students whose parents care about their education do much, much better than those whose parents don't, even if attending much less well-funded schools; students who perceive that education is something done for them, rather than to them, stay in school.
Yeah, even in the very worst schools, you can get a decent education if you care about learning; even in the very best schools, you'll be an ignoramous if you don't care; and the biggest factor over whether or not students care about learning is the attitude of their parents towards education.
Quote(2) Highly differentiated levels of teacher preparation, professionalism, and educational leadership. American education is a highly bureaucratic system, with the highest levels dominated by local politics. The school systems most in need of excellent leaders are the ones least able to attract them. The most important position in the American educational system in terms of impact on quality is the school principal; principals are also the people least likely to be highly proficient at their jobs, because their selection is so tainted by politics.
:yes:
Quote(3) The "factory" model of education wherein students proceed down an 'assembly line" of courses over the years is poorly suited to the needs of modern education, and yet is being reinforced by such things as national educational policies (eg "No Child Left Alive" with its emphasis on the testing for mere recollection of facts). Most education systems worldwide do this as well, but all that means is that most education systems worldwide do it wrong as well.
I'm not sure that I agree with this part, if for no other reason than that I don't think there are really better alternatives given the number of students in the system.
Quote from: derspiessI went through the WV public school system, and don't really have too many positive things to say about it. Probably the best thing I can say is that given the limited funding, it probably wasn't as bad as it could have been.
Well, as I posted before, I don't think that the system itself in WV is that bad. I know it gets a lot of flack, but most of its problems are the problems that you find pretty much everywhere in the US.
Quote from: dps on December 21, 2009, 07:55:50 PM
I'm not sure that I agree with this part, if for no other reason than that I don't think there are really better alternatives given the number of students in the system.
Technology can help here a lot, and we don't teach college (which also have a lot of students) this way.
What is important is mastery of a topic, not time spent on it. Every student in every class does not have to get the same instruction at the same pace, if you use technology wisely (and if programs are available in your subject areas).
Quote from: citizen k on December 21, 2009, 06:29:08 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 21, 2009, 05:16:37 PMHas teacher quality been an issue for private schools? I'm not sure I've heard of anything, but that's an honest question.
Here's a comment from the article I just posted.
Quote...30% of the students leave the new charter schools due to not liking the education that is received there...
...TLCA needs to be held accountable for the promises that they make.
Sounds like they are being held accountable, in a way that the public schools aren't.
Quote from: grumbler on December 21, 2009, 07:55:40 PM
Quote from: citizen k on December 21, 2009, 06:29:08 PM
Here's a comment from the article I just posted.
Quote
smorrow writes:
I worked last year as a fill in for TLC's High School as a Social Studies teacher. I want to state that I realize I along with others am not perfect. I have worked as Police officer, Fire Fighter decided to go into teaching so I have Masters in Education with Gifted and Talented specialization from University of North Texas and I am currently working on PhD in Public Administration at Walden University. Coming in to TLC and the history of being a church school for 34 years I figure discipline, and love would be solid in their foundation. (snip)
Love those high standards for a masters degree in education and a PhD candidate: in just three sentences, he has about a dozen errors in writing. It never gets better, either.
I have a hard time believing he has a masters in anything with writing like that, he fucks up verb tenses and leaves out articles over and over.
Quote from: grumbler on December 21, 2009, 07:55:40 PMLove those high standards for a masters degree in education and a PhD candidate: in just three sentences, he has about a dozen errors in writing. It never gets better, either.
I know, I corrected the spelling of "planed" to "planned" in "Landers planned to have one certified kindergarten teacher and the rest aids under that teacher."
And then gave up on the aids. :rolleyes: :lmfao:
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 21, 2009, 08:14:48 PM
I have a hard time believing he has a masters in anything with writing like that, he fucks up verb tenses and leaves out articles over and over.
This is Texas. He's a fucking genius compared to most Texans. He probably writes better than any of his professors at North Texas did.
Bill in Sinton sounds like the Shakespeare of Texas because he knows better than to use words of more than two syllables.
Quote from: grumbler on December 21, 2009, 07:46:08 PM
Quote from: DGuller on December 21, 2009, 03:28:57 PM
It's easy to criticize this, but is it easy to come up with something better and implement it system-wide?
I am not sure what "easy" has to do with anything. People have rejected reform after reform because they were not "easy," even when they were effective.
Time and again, reforms that offered students/parents choice between differentiated schools have been effective, and time and again they have been rescinded, despite their success, because powerful interests were weighed against them (primarily, the teachers' unions and primarily on behalf of teachers who cannot teach and shouldn't be in classrrooms - and aren't, when charter and private schools are used to give parents choices).
It would be far easier to demolish the state monopoly on factory-like education than on factory-like steelmaking or whatnot. Fund the students via vouchers, allow anyone who is qualified to establish a school and seek students, and provide some measures by which parents can distinguish between schools based on the type of student the school is recruiting. That isn't "easy" but it is easier than compensating for failures to educate.
I was actually asking about a "testing a recollection of facts" part. Obviously this is not a perfect way to structure the education, no breath needs to be wasted expounding on why. However, is it realistically possible to change the educational and testing methods to significantly de-emphasize rote on a wide scale?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 21, 2009, 08:14:48 PM
I have a hard time believing he has a masters in anything with writing like that, he fucks up verb tenses and leaves out articles over and over.
What's wrong with leaving out article or two?
Quote from: DGuller on December 21, 2009, 09:47:05 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 21, 2009, 08:14:48 PM
I have a hard time believing he has a masters in anything with writing like that, he fucks up verb tenses and leaves out articles over and over.
What's wrong with leaving out article or two?
Just don't make habit it.
Quote from: The Larch on December 21, 2009, 12:19:07 PM
Even in administrative planning?
Especially in administrative planning.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 21, 2009, 08:14:48 PM
I have a hard time believing he has a masters in anything with writing like that, he fucks up verb tenses and leaves out articles over and over.
I can believe it. From my high school, I can think of at least 3 teachers with Masters in Education, who would speak or write worse than this dude's example.
Most teachers at my high school had their Masters degrees, which tells me Marshall's Masters degree in Education program is nothing more than a degree mill.
Are Masters standard for teachers in the US? We've only just required that our new teachers be university educated.
Quote from: DGuller on December 21, 2009, 09:47:05 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 21, 2009, 08:14:48 PM
I have a hard time believing he has a masters in anything with writing like that, he fucks up verb tenses and leaves out articles over and over.
What's wrong with leaving out article or two?
Makes you sound like Russian.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 23, 2009, 02:22:43 AM
Are Masters standard for teachers in the US? We've only just required that our new teachers be university educated.
It isn't standard, but it is common and encouraged. Many states require teachers to take the equivalent of a college course every year or so to stay qualified, so many teachers just go ahead and take the masters degree courses.
In my mother's school district, the teachers are all organized as a chapter of the NEA, and this is how it works for them:
A master's degree is never a hiring requirement (an Ed.D. is for some administrative positions, I believe). However, if you don't have an Ed.M., your salary cap is substantially lower than teachers with the Ed.M. In addition, teachers get an automatic pay grade increase once they earn an Ed.M. and I believe their annual increase is slightly increased once they earn it. Thus, since a monkey could obtain a master's in education and most teachers have all summer off to work on it, you'd have to be a complete retard to not plan on earning one. Every teacher in her high school who is at least 30 years old has one, and a fair number come into the profession with one because they were in joint bachelor's/master's programs as an undergrad. My mom earned her first master's degree the year after she got her bachelor's degree, in 1970.
Interesting. In the UK teachers over 30-40 generally speaking don't have degrees. They went to teacher training schools.
All teachers have to go on courses and training days fairly regularly to keep up (when I was at primary school in Scotland all the teachers had to learn French because the government decided to start teaching a second language at primary school - unfortunately this mean our teacher was only one lesson ahead of us).
Nowadays most teachers have a BA/BSc and then do a vocational teaching course. A number of my friends have done TeachFirst which is a government programme. Basically they all went to a good university and they get a government grant and decent wage if they sign up to teach in an inner city (or a failing) school for a year or two before they go into whatever they go into (or during a gap year). I believe many fall in love with teaching and stay.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 23, 2009, 10:01:48 AM
Interesting. In the UK teachers over 30-40 generally speaking don't have degrees. They went to teacher training schools.
That is consistent with the generally higher level of education that used to be a hallmark of the British (and most European) systems. In the US, college degrees are easy to get (as Cal noted, even any masters degree is easy to get if you pick the right school).
QuoteAll teachers have to go on courses and training days fairly regularly to keep up (when I was at primary school in Scotland all the teachers had to learn French because the government decided to start teaching a second language at primary school - unfortunately this mean our teacher was only one lesson ahead of us).
Whether or not the training days are useful in the US is strictly dependent on local conditions. In Fall Church schools, they were quite good; from what I hear from my public school counterparts out here in the boonies, they are widely regarded as useless except to check off the fact that they were held.
QuoteNowadays most teachers have a BA/BSc and then do a vocational teaching course. A number of my friends have done TeachFirst which is a government programme. Basically they all went to a good university and they get a government grant and decent wage if they sign up to teach in an inner city (or a failing) school for a year or two before they go into whatever they go into (or during a gap year). I believe many fall in love with teaching and stay.
The US has Teach for America, which is similar. Whether or not the new teachers stay on is almost entirely dependent on who they have as a principal. I saw a stat somewhere that said basically that TFA retention, when examined by school, was either 80% or 20%.