In the past two decades, some schools have sprung up that defy and refute what former president George W. Bush memorably called "the soft bigotry of low expectations." Generally operating outside of school bureaucracies as charter schools, programs like KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program) have produced inner-city schools with high graduation rates (85 percent). KIPP schools don't cherry-pick they take anyone who will sign a contract to play by the rules, which require some parental involvement. And they are not one-shot wonders. There are now 82 KIPP schools in 19 states and the District of Columbia, and, routinely, they far outperform the local public schools. KIPP schools are mercifully free of red tape and bureaucratic rules (their motto is "Work hard. Be nice," which about sums up the classroom requirements). KIPP schools require longer school days and a longer school year, but their greatest advantage is better teaching."

A strong case for school vouchers.

Never actually heard a strong case for school vouchers that didn't violate the United States Constitution.

Never actually heard a strong case for school vouchers that didn't violate the United States Constitution.

They are no more a violation of the constitution than any form of public education administered at a federal level.

Seriously Doc, how are vouchers any less constitutional than the current public educational system?

They are no more a violation of the constitution than any form of public education administered at a federal level.

Except that many of the private schools that the vouchers are going to are religious schools and that violates the concept of separation of church and state.

Be Well.

Except that many of the private schools that the vouchers are going to are religious schools and that violates the concept of separation of church and state.

Not to mention they can discriminate based on sexual orientation of the parents.

Except that many of the private schools that the vouchers are going to are religious schools and that violates the concept of separation of church and state.

No more so than a welfare recipient donating a portion of their stipend to their church.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In the case of a voucher, congress is merely apportioning money that is to be spent (with certain limitations) at the recipients' discretion. Now, if the voucher stipulated that its value MUST be spent at a religious school - then your argument would hold water.

As it turns out, at a federal level, ALL of this shit is unconstitutional. I am merely pointing out that vouchers, even if redeemed at religious schools, are no more unconstitutional than the existing public school system.

On school vouchers, there's a church-state problem.

As for the federal government providing funds to the states for educational purposes, how is that unconstitutional?

As for the federal government providing funds to the states for educational purposes, how is that unconstitutional?

Article 1, Section 8 pretty clearly lays out what the government, at the Federal level, CAN spend money on. The 10th Ammendment adds further clarification by articulating that these spending powers NOT enumerated to the federal government are deferred to the states.

On school vouchers, there's a church-state problem.

No, there isn't. They are not "making law". They are merely allocating monies with the sole provision that said monies be spent on education. Again, if they restricted educational choice to religious-based schools I would completely agree - but that is not the case.

"As for the federal government providing funds to the states for educational purposes, how is that unconstitutional?"

Where is the power to fund and regulate schools etc. enumerated in the Constitution?

The Tenth Amendment
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people."

"On school vouchers, there's a church-state problem."

A statement with which, Jeff, you disagree. Problem is, you're talking money going to church-operated schools. We can disagree -- obviously -- but from my perspective that's government funding of religion.

but from my perspective that's government funding of religion.

How is it any moreso than a welfare-recipient who chooses to tithe some of their stipend to their church?

Also, how is any moreso than granting tax-free status to a church - and if you are going to go there, how is a church any different than any other tax-exempt organization?

"We can disagree -- obviously -- but from my perspective that's government funding of religion."

Federal money shouldn't be going to schools PERIOD. However, once it is given to individuals in the form of vouchers, the federal government should have NO SAY regarding which schools may or may not participate.

The First Amendment states;

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

Providing a voucher which might be used at an accredited religious school DOES NOT establish a religion. On the other hand, I might argue that there are laws prohibiting the "free exercise thereof."

I've no problem with the federal government's involvement in public education in this country. I do, however, have a problem with my money being used to support sectarian schools.

Well done, Jest.

That is exactly how I see it.

For those who are interested, this is a great read:

"I've no problem with the federal government's involvement in public education in this country."

Even though it is a power not granted to them by the Constitution?

"I do, however, have a problem with my money being used to support sectarian schools."

Great. Abolish the Department of Education, get the federal government out of our schools and you won't have that problem.

I've no problem with the federal government's involvement in public education

Your opinion is fine, but the constitution doesn't support it - not even close.

No problem with your dislike for schools with a religious background. However, your argument, at least as far as I can tell, ignores the constitution.

Doc,

Once we begin 'cherry-picking' the constitution, it ceases to exist as a restraining document. In certain circumstances you'll likely applaud this. When the pendulum swings massively the other way you will cling to this document (that you until recently snubbed) as a means of holding off a power-machine that you are fundamentally at-odds with.

#2 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS
"Never actually heard a strong case for school vouchers that didn't violate the United States Constitution."

I don't see any actual violation, as there's no overt "establishment" of religion.
If a student at a bad public school has, through vouchers, a shot at getting a quality education in a good learning environment, then I say go for it.
If that school also happens to require learning catechism or the like, I still say the education itself trumps all.
The key here is accreditation.

Federal money shouldn't be going to schools PERIOD

Does the federal government write a check to individual schools or do they send money to the states so that the states can distribute it to the schools?

In the past 10 years, my opinion on school vouchers has drastically changed. The public school system in our country is broken. Vouchers wont fix the problem but it will at least keep middle class families in cities with the worst the school districts. It's a crappy situation but at least it maintains a tax base and cohesion in neighborhoods and could potentially be a catalyst for an urban middle class.

I've known so many couples who live in cities but as soon as they marry and start having kids, they immediately move to the suburbs. The number one reason is because of the abysmal school districts.

As it is, in so many urban areas in our country, there are essentially three classes: The rich, the poor, and the predominately young (and childless) adult professionals. Vouchers can encourage the young adults to actually stay put when they start having kids by bringing down the cost private school to more manageable levels. Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic but if they stick around, it will increase property values and the tax base, so public schools might actual stabilize. Cities need a middle class and the current model of having gentrified rich neighborhoods and 3rd world slums just isn't working.

Even with all its problems, I love the city I live in but when our kids get to school age, there's a good chance we'll sell our house and move somewhere with better schools (our district is amongst the worst in the nation). If you have children, practicality often overrides idealism.

Well said, Katie!

I agree wtih Thetom.

Well said.

I've no problem with the federal government's involvement in public education in this country. I do, however, have a problem with my money being used to support sectarian schools.

that opinion doesn't surprise me.

you want your cake and you want to eat it.

Both Jeff and Katie make very good cases for vouchers.

I would say as long as they are implemented in such a way that people who actually need that kind of assistance get them and not people who can already afford private schools.

I would say as long as they are implemented in such a way that people who actually need that kind of assistance get them and not people who can already afford private schools.

Whether or not parents get vouchers should be based on the quality of the school. If the school is classified as "failing", then every parent with a child in the failing school should be provided a voucher for each child. Of course there would have to be some quantitative measure to define "failing".

Except that many of the private schools that the vouchers are going to are religious schools and that violates the concept of separation of church and state.

Be Well.

#5 | Posted by dethspud

Can't a college student at Notre Dame or Duquesne get Pell grants or federal student loans? What about a grad student or faculty at either school getting NSF grants for their research?

Is that violating the separation of church and state?

Never actually heard a strong case for school vouchers that didn't violate the United States Constitution.

#2 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2010

yeah well...just so you can get an idea where you are on this one....you should know that I have used that same argument...which should make you to immediately sit down and think it over again.

HOWEVER>..teachers who cant cut it should be fired but if you think that will solve the problem then you dont understand the problem

"Whether or not parents get vouchers should be based on the quality of the school. If the school is classified as "failing", then every parent with a child in the failing school should be provided a voucher for each child."

You assume that "voucher" would be enough to enroll their child in a private school.
Would the private schools be subject to the same tests as private schools?
Would the private schools have the right to reject students who don't meet their standards and thereby have an advantage over the public school who has to accept everyone??

Never actually heard a strong case for school vouchers that didn't violate the United States Constitution.

#2 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

How would you know, you've never read it?

Just exactly what part would it violate?

The quality of the teachers pales in comparison with the quality of the students and parents and there is little that can be done about it other than adoption into middle class homes. (Bell Curve)

Jest, you have a firm grip on it. The feds have NO business in schools. It is nowhere in the constitution, therefore it is reserved for the state or the people.

Would the private schools be subject to the same tests as private schools?

#30 | Posted by danni at 2010-03-10 04:01 PM

Never actually heard a strong case for school vouchers that didn't violate the United States Constitution.

#2 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS AT 2010-03-10 07:56 AM | REPLY | FLAG

I think you're wrong, and thus far, the constitutionality of vouchers has held water - even when they are used to attend religious institutions.

I agree... Fire the teachers who can't pass an exam... No more political brainwashing.... No more Ugly Lunch ladies either.... We had this beast named Mildred... Man was she mean...

I agree. But who is going to replace them? Why would anyone want to be a teacher in this country in this day and age? and yes, I am one and I love it. I may be a dying breed, however.

SCC: Kudos. I have great respect for teachers like you. My sister is one of those rare good teachers (5th grade) who loves her job too.

I say replace them with better ones and double their salary. Though I'm an empty-nester, I'll gladly pay the increase in property taxes. There is nothing more important than a good education and that can't be had without good educators like you.

"Where is the power to fund and regulate schools etc. enumerated in the Constitution?
#10 | Posted by jestgettinalong"

The General Welfare Clause.

As long as school funding is tied to real estate taxes, you'll have disparities.

As long as school funding is tied to real estate taxes, you'll have disparities.

???

that's not true. The schools in the poor part of the county get the exact same funding per student as the schools in the wealthier part of the county. Same with state level school taxes.

Something else you know nothing about. Kudos.

The General Welfare Clause.

#39 | Posted by mOntecOre

That one seems to cover everything you want it to. Its a fucking blank check.

It is what it is, eh Sniper? It's like the Second Amendment, but it applies to good things instead of deadly ones.

Something else you know nothing about.

And still again the message is "I can't rebut your argument, so I'll just call you stupid". Nothing screams ignorance like that response. Kudos indeed

The education level/results of students was better decades ago because the federal govt had very little input. There seems to be a direct correlation whereas the more fed govt involvement the worse the results.

Why does there need to be a federal department of education, and what are they good for?

#30 | Posted by danni

You bring up some of the concerns I have always had about vouchers.

Unless you prohibit schools that take vouchers from taking any other form of additional payment then those schools would have a competitive advantage in hiring the best teachers, and would be able to price poor (undesirable) students out by simply forcing payment of the voucher plus the difference in tuition.

Even if the situation I just described were resolved, once some schools developed an academic advantage, isn't that where ALL the students would want to go? How are vouchers going to resolve the eventual issues with under-performing schools when few students are attending the under-performing schools, so those schools have little revenue and will have to close? Also, the better performing schools will eventually become overcrowded and their performance will decline, as additional staff is not added for the sake of profits. It seems too me that vouchers may just distribute the money differently, without really addressing the problems of education.

I really don't think most people have thought the entire voucher system through, except maybe the owners of private schools that are hoping to collect their regular tuition, PLUS cash in on the vouchers.

Ok, this is ridiculous. We are seeing fallout of what started in the 60s and 70s in education today. There are so many factors in this it is absolutely ridiculous. I agree - fire poor teachers - and doctors, nurses, pharmacists, lawyers, engineers, managers, laborers etc.

There is more paper work in teaching then there is teaching anymore. How about we eliminate that and some of the other pressures and let teachers teach? How about we give them some control over there classrooms?

Why are inner city classrooms so bad? Because inner city families are so f'd up. Same goes for a lot of areas. Divorces are over 50% in general and when you get parents playing games back and forth it makes for some f'd up kids to deal with. This isn't all about teachers and teaching styles. It is about society in general. When you go to Europe. They don't think every kid is equal. Let's face it there are some pretty dumb kids out there. Not to mention they don't spend tons of money on the education of the uneducatable - SpEd Spuds... Kids have respect for teachers. There are consequences if they screw up. Then again you get into the illegal immigrant ghetto type areas and they do have problems. Funny how that works... But even there the parents mostly have expectations for their children. Other then sports that is.

Rant Off...

Newsweek: Fire Bad Teachers

Ha-ha-ha... Try to get that past the Union Bosses who own the Dem Party.

" How about we give them some control over there(sic) classrooms? "

It's too late, apparently.

As long as nonsense like Bush's "No Child Left Behind" crap is the sort of excreta coming from the government we're fucked.

Today I received an email from Alan I. Leshner, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Here is an excerpt from the introductory paragraph: "A couple of weeks ago, I wrote to you about a number of startling statistics, including the fact that the U.S. ranks an abysmal 25th in math and 21st in science out of 30 developed nations. I hope my letter reached you."

Anti-thought is an American tradition.

The teachers aren't the problem. Fire the government school monopoly. Privatize it. Abolish school taxes. Make them compete.

It's actually sort of funny this came up today....

I don't think you'll find any teacher anywhere who won't agree that bad teachers should be let go. The problem you run into is how to figure out that a teacher is "bad." I've always taught in small districts, so generally you can just pretty much "know." But in those districts, you also see sometimes abuses of power by administrators to harass individual teachers. Luckily, I don't see that as much in the district I'm in now. But ultimately, there needs to be a way to identify bad teachers and protect the ones who are good or who can become good.

And this is where it gets messy. The buzzwords of "accountability" and "merit pay," among others, generate nausea for teachers not because they want to be held unaccountable or because there's some big Union conspiracy -- it's because these things are VERY hard to measure in the real world of education.

Today at school my students participated in some standardized testing that was meant to measure their progress over the past year. If I understand correctly, according to Race to the Top's goals, I would get paid based off the results of this test. Some of my students improved. Some did not. Some may have even slipped backwards a little bit.

Here's what the test doesn't take into account:

I've got two students who have close relatives who are dying, one of whom is losing his mother to cancer and has no father figure.
I've got two ELL students (a very low number, but since I teach in two subject areas, these are only the students tested in the one area, so they do have an impact on my average scores).
At least four students are new to the area and came from poverty-ridden areas with, as the guidance department puts it, "sketchy" record keeping.
20% of the school population comes from one of the poorest counties in the nation.
I've got one autistic student, one EBD student, and several LD students.

More that the test doesn't take into account:

I've gotten my autistic student to truly interact with his peers.
I've gotten several poor readers turned on to certain books.
I've given several of these kids confidence to speak in front of groups of people.
I've taught these students how to work in groups and problem solve.
I've created somewhat better writers.

And none of this takes into account my extra-curricular commitments, which are many. When I saw nearly six years of teaching and two years of working on a Masters' degree, plus workshops, conferences, discussions, and countless hours spent mentoring, advising, leading, organizing, and helping kids from all backgrounds and with all ability levels summed up as one score on a test that could have the impact of saying whether I was a "good teacher" or not, I was disgusted.

Are there bad teachers? Yes. Are there bad schools? Certainly. But you can't be surprised when professional educators bristle when words like accountability are tied to ridiculous ideas like test scores.

Very well said, Dylanfan.

I've gotten my autistic student to truly interact with his peers.
I've gotten several poor readers turned on to certain books.
I've given several of these kids confidence to speak in front of groups of people.
I've taught these students how to work in groups and problem solve.
I've created somewhat better writers.

Kudos to another good teacher. America needs more like you. Keep up the good work

I have a market-based approach.

Get rid of the education department. Allow the teachers to form a business and compete with the church and / or civic organizations that want to teach the children. Teachers can rent space in the schools, or in a church, or teach the kids in a strip-mall if they want.

Good teachers will have parents beating a path to their door. Bad teachers will have no students and find a new line of work.

Problems would work themselves out in short order, and the market would decide.

If the average price per student is 9,154 bucks [2005-2006 school year]... and a teacher has 30 students, that is $274,620. Even allowing for the rent of a classroom, the cost of food and transportation, etc... teachers should be able to live quite nicely. And at that rate of pay, I would expect that we would have a better quality of teachers.

Hell has frozen over. I agree with Ray.

My son was in third grade and my daughter in kindergarten in the public school near which we had deliberately moved; It was a five minute walk.

I enjoyed every one of them.

Now this was the late 80's so one still bought encyclopedia sets as books; You know, printed on paper.

I bought my kids a new Britannica.

The elementary school principal said it had "too much information."

My daughter immediately went to St Andrew's and my son to Kirby Hall and my ex and I drove the same cars for a long, long time.
They were BMW 2002's; They were up to the task.

Daughter has a BA, son has a magna cum laude BS and a 4.0 GPA MS and they both are independent and debt-free.

I agree with Ray.

#57 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2010-03-10 07:58 PM

Do I have your permission to archive this post?

The elementary school principal said it had "too much information."

I didn't know why we moved to other side of town in the fall of '63 until many years later. My 2nd grade teacher complained to my parents that I "read too much". So they packed up and moved to the other side of town where I would be in another school district that worry so much about kids reading too much

#59 | Posted by goatman at 2010-03-10 08:05 PM | Reply | Flag: bingo

Kudos to your folks.

My son went to Sewanee but got his BS at Texas State (One of them government schools) which has the finest undergrad Geographical Information Systems going then he went to U of Denver, "The oldest and largest private university in the Rocky Mountain region."

That's one of them private kind of schools.

There is no such things as "too much information" or "read to much."

No Child Left Behind was breathtakingly stupid when Bush brought it up and when Kennedy pushed it in the Senate. Nature does not work that way.

There are many problems with public education, but they must be solved or we are doomed as a civilization.

Right now I'm still getting over the 5% voter turnout in the Texas primary when Iraqi voters turn out in the 60% bracket despite bombings.

To echo someone else, Dylanfan put it really well. Nicely done, sir.

Yes, fire bad teachers. But first build a system whereby we can judge what bad teaching looks like. And it can't be based on standardized tests, for reasons that have been enumerated in study after study after study. There was an article linked here (I think) a few weeks ago about systems of pedagogical training and analyis. There was some REALLY good stuff in there that this teacher and union leader can get behind.

As for privatizing schools, there's so much wrong with that, again enumerated and explained by people smarter than I, with data and research analysis. Look stuff up, free marketeers, before you go off with the usual "market solves all" approach. Schools are not businesses. The model does not transfer. Students are not widgets. The model does not transfer.

There is no such things => There are no such things

Still looking for some positive data, I recall a poll quoted on the TV news that the majority thought teachers should have the most say about what is in textbooks.

Oh well.

Yes, fire the teachers, but where are the replacements?

I say, start with firing the Dept of Ed, the state ed bureaucrats, all the Ed Schools that are responsible for training and certifying the bad teachers, and most of the administrators, which fail to properly motivate, improve, or fire the bad teachers.

Finally, get rid of all teacher certification and simply require a BS in the area you're teaching....

Allow full vouchers so that everyone can go to any school they like, provided there is room.

Then, see if there are any problems left in the education system that WEREN'T caused by govvernment meddling, and fix them locally.

As for privatizing schools, there's so much wrong with that, again enumerated and explained by people smarter than I, with data and research analysis. Look stuff up, free marketeers, before you go off with the usual "market solves all" approach.

I have. Such studies are conducted to justify government school monopolies.
Monopolies under-perform and are overpriced.

Another point needs to be made. The education of children rightfully belongs to parents, not the state. A state curriculum will conform to the interests of the state, not the interests of parents. It's like sending your children to a religious school.

"Yes, fire the teachers, but where are the replacements?"

Jon, who will judge your quality of teaching? Will you get fired?

"... Ed Schools that are responsible for training and certifying the bad teachers,"

Did you see that article I mentioned? I thought it was here. I'll try to find it at home and repost in the next couple of days--very interesting, and I think it addresses some of the complaints you have (that we've fought about before).

"and most of the administrators, which fail to properly motivate, improve, or fire the bad teachers."

Interesting. I like the idea of holding admin accountable.

"Finally, get rid of all teacher certification and simply require a BS in the area you're teaching...."

Nonsense. I don't think BS in Ed is important, but I for one needed training. I would NOT have been ready to just walk in and teach. And I've known plenty of brilliant writers who can't teach writing, etc. Being good at something does NOT mean you can teach it. But thanks for offering your usual list.

"Allow full vouchers so that everyone can go to any school they like, provided there is room. "

Faugh. Again, there's the competition argument. No one has ever explained to me why this makes sense in education. Not well. And what if you can't get your kid to that "better school" somewhere down the road? That _might_ make sense in big cities, but it sure doesn't make sense in rural America, which is most of our school systems. NCLB presents the same solution--might work in Chicago (Secretary Duncan), but in rural New England, not so much.

"Then, see if there are any problems left in the education system that WEREN'T caused by govvernment meddling, and fix them locally."

And how will you fix them locally? It's a nice idea, but local decision-makers, at least in my part of the world, don't have any better ideas than nat'l decision-makers do. If they bought into NCLB, they're just as dumb as those who mandated it. To name just one issue.

+++++

"I have. Such studies are conducted to justify government school monopolies.
Monopolies under-perform and are overpriced."

And there's your usual argument, Ray--free market solves all. Blah blah blah. Not all studies are conducted by public school adherents. Again, market solutions don't work for schools. For any number of reasons. But you can't see past your worldview. Give me reasons and data, not philosophy, and we'll talk.

I can, however, agree that money is not the solution to poorly performing schools. Targeted improvement plans are. Teachers and admin who are held accountable by fair, objective standards. Testing (as in standardized) is _part_ of this accountability system. Oh, and hold students accountable, and families too (to at least get the kids to school); follow truancy laws; have admin who have testicular fortitude to stand up to parents and citizens, and who will support good teachers who hold students to high standards. There is a whole lot more to "fixing education" than "give 'em vouchers and make competition the rule."

Congrats, DR. - a thread that didn't quickly devolve into "tastes great-less filling, you asshole" - and with some remarkably logical positions.

Dylan - you're from Columbia Heights, correct? Congrats on your education, challenges and successes.

And Zat? Not a complete curmudgeon? Sending off Kudos?

Always interesting when people debate w/ passion.

"The education of children rightfully belongs to parents, not the state."

But this is like your "capitalism is the product (result?) of a moral society" idea--just not realistic. First, who has the time? Seriously, do you know any families where one parent can stay home (not work) and teach the kids? (Bully for those who can. I know some amazing homeschooled kids. I'm not anti-homeschool, but it's not a model we can all follow.) Second, parents need to work with schools; the two need to support one another. Third, how many parents do you know who are qualified to teach their kids high-end science or math, or persuasive writing, or...?

Happy-
Yes and no. I was born there and lived there until I was 13, and then moved. I have fond memories of the school system, but I also had parents who were very involved in my education and I ended up in some upper end programs. After that, it was rural Wisconsin, and other opportunities. I do miss Tastee's Pizza, though.

Prag,

Let me take a crack at this, again. You said it wouldn't work in rural areas, but I don't know if that is correct. Here's the thing, if you allowed each parent with a voucher to spend it where they chose, that would include home-schooling.

So, a parent with 2 kids could have a job, or teach their kids and use the almost 10K each. Have 1 child, then find a neighbor that wants to teach, or you stay home and teach and have neighbors bring their children. Getting an certified to teach shouldn't be THAT difficult (no mental problems, no history of violence or drugs, safe environment for the children).

Rent an office space in a private building in town, etc. Rent a room at the church or the local school...

If someone wants to PAY you to teach a child, then teach. For people in rural WI, AR, OK, etc. 4 kids (40K) would probably be more than they make at another job. I would much rather have kids taught in that type of environment, especially in their younger years.

For higher level math or science, what about a traveling expert? Someone that travels around as an expert? Rural areas do the same thing with traveling doctors and such.

Now, for my attempt to push liberals over the edge. How about we allow walmart to compete with public schools? Anyone wanna bet the kids would get a better education, better understanding of money and the real world, at a better price?

"Never actually heard a strong case for school vouchers that didn't violate the United States Constitution"

The Dept of Education violates the Constitution.

How's that? Please quote the section you're supposing makes the Dept. of Education "unconstitutional".

"Getting an certified to teach shouldn't be THAT difficult (no mental problems, no history of violence or drugs, safe environment for the children)."

The disdain you show for the teaching profession in this statement colors the rest of your argument. "Seriously...you can't need THAT much education to be a teacher!"

At any rate, I'm guessing you live in an urban area if you're making statements like that.

First off, do you really think that most people's neighbors are qualified to teach children?

Second, do you really think that $10,000/child is ALL spent on salary? Your model completely fails to take into account textbooks, supplies, office space, insurance, hiring the traveling expert, food, equipment, etc., etc., etc.

Third, do you REALLY think that a traveling expert that students would see...what...once a week would adequately replace a teacher they see every day?

I am in agreement with moving to having a certain percentage of teachers gain a degree in the subject that they will be teaching; but there will still need to be a certain amount of general education specialists...
Second, I think where 'tenure' is still a perk, that it should be immediately deleted...
Third, I think that we should also focus more on the analyis of testing to not mainstream children who will not perfom well in general academics, but would lean more toward a 'trades' type career..
Fourth, I have actually been involved in case analysis of 'charter schools' and have been very impressed by the results...should be a higher consideration of these..
I think too, unfortunately, with the family unit crises in America going to the dogs and limitations put on teachers in the classroom (extreme paperwork loads, for one..among others) that there is an extreme pressure today to keep young educators in the classroom...they are not being able to teach in a lot of cases, nor provided all of the tools to do their work..
OK..you will love this..we are attacking the education problem as the healthcare; not going toward or targeting the real problems, just trying to 'wholesale' a solution for the wrong reasons.. also, as DYLANFAN puts it, there are too many 'overlooked' ingredients to the situation and why would we want to just put people in place to teach who are not close to qualified.. we need a REAL focus on these problems, not cosmetic issues.. being a teacher today is a very stressful and 'thankless' profession in a lot of places and too many kids are being turned over to teachers for 'parenting' where hands are tied..
we need immediate solutions to certain problems, but too many politics involved.. the voucher program is really not a solution and meaningless at the end of the day...
no, I am not a teacher, but have interviewed many and have many as friends...

But this is like your "capitalism is the product (result?) of a moral society" idea--just not realistic.
#69 | Posted by pragmatist

Let me explain this to you again. As an ideal, standard of a moral society, free market capitalism requires a high degree of social cooperation, which necessitates freedom from aggression. Just because such a society is not possible, doesn't mean we should not uphold such a standard of values. Just we are morally opposed to murder, robbery and fraud, doen't mean we expect it to be eradicated from society. Such standards are universal. When we make exceptions for government, then we endorse the violence and oppression for which government is uniquely equipped.

First, who has the time? Seriously, do you know any families where one parent can stay home (not work) and teach the kids? (Bully for those who can. I know some amazing homeschooled kids. I'm not anti-homeschool, but it's not a model we can all follow.) Second, parents need to work with schools; the two need to support one another. Third, how many parents do you know who are qualified to teach their kids high-end science or math, or persuasive writing, or...?

I said education is a parent's responsibility, not the state's. Home schooling is an outgrowth of the poor quality of the government education. You're not part of the solution. You're part of the problem.

Third, I think that we should also focus more on the analyis of testing to not mainstream children who will not perfom well in general academics, but would lean more toward a 'trades' type career..

I have been saying that for years. We are wasting an inordinate amount of resources on the kids most likely to flip burgers and very little time on the one most likely to be a heart surgeon and save your life because you ate too many of the flipped burgers. No child left behind has made it even worse.

In our district teachers are afraid to give out higher than a 3 or lower than a 2 which means my 3rd grader who can do algebra (very basic) and has read 2 of the harry potter books is getting the same grade as the nose picker who still has to take off his shoes to count to 20 (and even then might not get it right)

No child left behind has become no child gets ahead either.

Pragmatist,

A teacher council should run the schools...the administrators should really serve the needs of the faculty council...business manager, accountant...that sort of focus...administrators now are, as a rule, not qualified to evaluate teachers...I know I have never known an administrator who knew enough physics to evaluate me...so, I always get great recommendations...if I sucked, I'd get the same ones, because they don't have a clue.

Even with your education degree, you were not in the least prepared...in fact, you probably started improving when you forgot the crap they shovelled at you and began learning from your students about what was effective and what was not. All teacher certification does is eliminate all the 50+ year-olds with a load of practical life experience who could much more effectively teach kids with their added perspective and would probably do it for a lot less....not using engineers with 30 years of practical experience to teach high school physics while instead having some bored and clueless math teacher with no practical experience do it borders on criminal...it also explains why we import all our scientists and most of our mathemeticians...we teach it terribly and turn people off systematically...

The key to any systemic improvement is to allow people to go to school where they want...removal of monopoly would force better performance, as judged by the only people that matter...the local taxpayers....

I think national minimum core content standards would be about the only use for government intervention at all.....

As I see it, the education problems we have are self-inflicted....remove the overhead, let the system function naturally, according to what the taxpayers want, and then see what, if anything needs to be done...my guess is...not much, and you'd get much better education for much less money....

Okay, speaking of hell freezing over, I am in agreement with DrSoul. Whoa. (#75)

And Ray, I'm so sad. I'm part of the problem. Yeah, from someone who has shown again and again that he doesn't know what schools do and how they do it, that means a lot. But keep holding on to your litlte philosophy; don't let reality intrude. More seriously, either you missed my point or I missed yours RE "not the state's." You seem to have dodged my comment about the reality of "responsibility of parents" and ignored my point about working with schools. So what do you mean, Education is the parent's responsibility? What model are you then suggesting, or are you just philosophizing? You're clearly not stupid, Ray. Why aren't you willing to suggest models or solutions rather than just criticizing?

And I understand your point about the moral society--I disagree, but I understand. Again, my point is that it's not realistic. It doesn't mean we can't talk about it and use it in various ways (as we DO), but it does mean it's not a model (in my experience and my understanding of history) that works in actual practice. That's my interpretation, which is different from yours. Please don't condescend and assume that I don't understand you. Even though I'm a teacher and part of the problem, I'm not an idiot. (And I should take this time to acknowledge that there's no way either of us will ever convince the other to change to the opposing point of view. However, if you have serious suggestions that point at or help comprise a solution, I'm happy to hear them and consider them seriously.)

Tao makes some good points, btw, as usual. And he has kids in the system, so he has direct and current experience, unlike many who criticize education most vociferously.

1Lib, I have to think on yours more. I have wasted enough of my lunch period. : )

You assume that "voucher" would be enough to enroll their child in a private school.
Would the private schools be subject to the same tests as private schools?
Would the private schools have the right to reject students who don't meet their standards and thereby have an advantage over the public school who has to accept everyone??

#30 | Posted by danni at

regardless of how much it PAINS ME...lol...these are all good questions..
as I have said on occasion...in the public school you have to take whoever walks in the door and private school dont as of now anyway....so how in the world is it a fair comparison to compare results from the two groups then?

But you can't be surprised when professional educators bristle when words like accountability are tied to ridiculous ideas like test scores.

#53 | Posted by dylanfan at 2010-03-10 07:45 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

I agree...well said ..but as I AGAIN...saying

people want to run schools like business and you just cant compare those apples and oranges..
if I make widgets and I get a bad supply of material, I THROW IT AWAY or use for scraps...when "bad material' comes in to a public school, you cant do that...you have to work with it and make it better when that is many times a herculian event.

How's that? Please quote the section you're supposing makes the Dept. of Education "unconstitutional".

#73 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

another easy answer...the tenth amendment to the constitution.

AFKABL2,

It's not about what's fair for schools. It's about what's best for the citizens. Why should someone too poor to live in the desirable area of town be FORCED, BY LAW, to attend a failing school, which is not allowed to fail because of the people who are FORCED to attend it? Worry about giving everyone the fair chance to attend a good school, and then worry about the mythical rights of bad schools. If a school is bad, it serves no purpose, but to waste money and ruin kids. Oh, yes, and make money for all the leeches plugged into that system...but, as far as fairness to citizens, bad schools should not be protected.

Testing should simply be the ACT, SAT, or an equivalent for a 2-year school. Other state tests are cooked and utterly worthless...they should be scrapped...then, people in bad schools and good can focus on the end product, preparation for the next level, and parents can choose the schools they think best fits their child's future...that's as fair as it gets. Not all parents will choose good schools...but it is their right to choose...or should be..as of now, they can't...

Schools are under too much pressure to provide statistics, rather than resolving the underlying problems that really prevent them from getting the statistics.. progress can be underscored by the progress in individual classrooms if the administrators did not spend so much time politicking and paperwork... I agree that overall test scores have SOME indication, but cannot be expected to really analyze the issues, as we now have too many extreme MIXES in a classroom..
with proper administration, individual teachers can be monitored and progress graded in their individual classes.. we have also gotten to be a lazy society... unfortunately, when an administrator reaches their position (a vast majority former teachers), they are tired of the detail and just want to enjoy the 'perks of the position'...this is where the real accountability should begin in a school...

DRSOUL,

I agree that the administrators are the weak link, but I think that is by design. You have, essentially, a factory structure, without the quality incentive provided by the marketplace. That is a recipe for leeches, bureaucracy, waste, and fraud, which has been the rule where I've taught. The system must be replaced and run by teachers, and there much be much more competition for teacher positions by eliminating certification and replacing it with an apprenticeship model...then, the teachers running the schools would have to perform, unencumbered by demands other than effectively educating, and with a much larger pool of talent, there would always be potential teachers right behind them to keep them focused. This takes less money, puts the market back into the system, which forces quality up and cost down....that is what is needed...don't expect the teachers unions, education bureacrats, and administrators, who make nice livings not adding value with no accountability, to take that one lying down, though!

jon...good and vailid points all,...cant deny them but my point is that ...well for instance..I HATE it when a board or town puts some business mogle on an education committee because you cant treat education like a business....well not COMPLETELY of course..
and I am unlike most teachers I know...I was NEVER afraid of competition...which is why texas music programs are so good...and YES...we are linked with football but that isnt necessarily bad when you use competition to help foster education...it can and IS done quite successfully here and I also have said for a long time..
treat the classroom teachers like you do the coach
PAY THEM more and FIRE them if they fail..
BUT you HAVE to also give that classroom teacher the same leeway the coach is given...AS IN most administrators dont tell the coach what offense to run

Schools are under too much pressure to provide statistics

DR

BINGO...when dept of ed first got up and running, the small district I was in had to hire ONE more administrator...his job....deal with federal govt forms and shit....in a larger district multiply that several times
AND The worst thing a district can have is a lot of administrators in offices with no windows..they can only sit there and come up with BULLSHIT to prove they deserve thier salary.

jon...good and vailid points all,...cant deny them but my point is that ...well for instance..I HATE it when a board or town puts some business mogle on an education committee because you cant treat education like a business....well not COMPLETELY of course..
and I am unlike most teachers I know...I was NEVER afraid of competition...which is why texas music programs are so good...and YES...we are linked with football but that isnt necessarily bad when you use competition to help foster education...it can and IS done quite successfully here and I also have said for a long time..
treat the classroom teachers like you do the coach
PAY THEM more and FIRE them if they fail..
BUT you HAVE to also give that classroom teacher the same leeway the coach is given...AS IN most administrators dont tell the coach what offense to run

I agree. Good teachers should never fear competition. It's why I want teacher councils running schools, elimination of the ed bureaucracy and most administrator positions, and an elimination of teacher certification, to assure that the teachers running the schools can readily be replaced....

"Testing should simply be the ACT, SAT, or an equivalent for a 2-year school. Other state tests are cooked and utterly worthless...they should be scrapped...then, people in bad schools and good can focus on the end product, preparation for the next level, and parents can choose the schools they think best fits their child's future...that's as fair as it gets. Not all parents will choose good schools...but it is their right to choose...or should be..as of now, they can't..."

Disagree. Standardized testing should be scrapped. Or rather minimized. It's _part_ of an overall set of measures that MUST include other sorts of assessments that tie more clearly to the settings and requirements of the real world.

As for your comments on choosing, I hear your point about the poor and location, but the other reality is what I've said time and again: What good do vouchers do if the parents can't _get_ their kid to another school. It's like much of NCLB--i.e., the parent choice part--which might work in some large urban areas but seldom works in rural areas. In my area, there is one high school maybe every 20 miles. The three towns that feed students to my HS have choice--if parents can get the kids there, they can choose from three different high schools. But NCLB's parent choice--and vouchers--just wouldn't work for a huge number of families. How would you get your kids there and still get to work?

+++++

And hell has frozen over yet again. Afk and I agree: the "raw material" commentary.

Not only that, but--holy god--I'm finding some agreement with JonRyker (whom I must thank for not coming at me even though I tweaked him a bit).

"A teacher council should run the schools..."

I have been saying this for several years now. The principal can take care of legal issues and financial issues like building the budget; the teacher team can address assessment of students and of teachers, curriculum, instruction, etc. ...

And then we start to disagree.

"Even with your education degree, you were not in the least prepared..."

Did you mean me specifically, or the general "you"? 'Cause I didn't have an ed degree when I started. I had a BA in my field and _training_ in methods. I was a product of a yearlong practicum program, which worked very well for me. I know lots of smart people, great in their field, who couldn't teach worth a damn. I find that common assumption bizarre. At the same time, they do exist, and some great teachers never did an ed degree or training. Just as with students, one size does not fit all.

"in fact, you probably started improving when you forgot the crap they shovelled at you and began learning from your students about what was effective and what was not."

This, however, is true. But improving, not learning the basics. I got basics, and I get better every year because I look at my own work, I look at results, I ask the kids for input... And I change lessons and assignments around. Every teacher should do at least this much, and I should probably do more.

More to come...

"All teacher certification does is eliminate all the 50+ year-olds with a load of practical life experience who could much more effectively teach kids with their added perspective and would probably do it for a lot less...."

I don't understand that.

"not using engineers with 30 years of practical experience to teach high school physics while instead having some bored and clueless math teacher with no practical experience do it borders on criminal..."

You're assuming that's true of all teachers who don't have that experience but teach the course? Our physics teacher is amazing, and she never was a "practical scientist." You're also assuming that these wonderful physicists can walk in and teach a group of HS kids. I'm sure some can; I'm equally sure that large numbers can't. Being smart, knowledgeable, and experienced is not the same as being a good teacher.

"...The key to any systemic improvement is to allow people to go to school where they want...removal of monopoly would force better performance, as judged by the only people that matter...the local taxpayers...."

I don't agree for reasons I've gone over again and again. There is a point--or three--worth considering in what you say, but I don't think it's key. There isn't a magic "choice button" that means we'll all improve.

"I think national minimum core content standards would be about the only use for government intervention at all....."

I might be able to agree with that.

"As I see it, the education problems we have are self-inflicted....remove the overhead, let the system function naturally, according to what the taxpayers want, and then see what, if anything needs to be done...my guess is...not much, and you'd get much better education for much less money...."

Except that taxpayers often want huge reductions in teacher pay. And how will you get these brilliant real-life-experience teachers when you pay them less than the peanuts already being paid in a great many places? What scientist working for a corporation, making, oh, 80,000 a year is going to leave that job and work for under 40K in rural New England? Okay, I'm pulling some of those numbers out of my ass. But it's a real question that people with your suggestion tend to ignore. After several years and a master's degree (yes, I got a degree in the interim), I'm still making barely 40K. And when I was using my degree to work in a corporate field, I was making more than that almost a decade ago. It took time and further education to come back only to (or approaching) that level...

"treat the classroom teachers like you do the coach
PAY THEM more and FIRE them if they fail.."

Which appears to contradict your earlier point about raw material. Coaches can control for that. And do you judge a coach as a failure if he wins for three years in a row, his seniors graduate, and he has to start over, ending up with a losing record that year? Or maybe the numbers don't add up to that in big enough schools?

Jon, how is teacher certification tied to continuing employment? Beyond "You must have your license by the first day of school?" That's not really a killer when recertification is fairly simple--yes, time-consuming, but one generally has at least a few years to do it. Do professional development and coursework over time, and you're fine. Really. I have maintained two licenses in two states for several years. Not a problem. I know two people who let their licenses lapse, and from what I could tell it was deliberate or unconsciously desired.

and an elimination of teacher certification, to 11 11:58 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

speaking as one who went through college education classes...could hardly agree more...
most of it was busy work that I never used in 29 years of teaching..HOWEVER...as in most things like that...I did get out what I put in...
for instance..I bitched about having to pass off media aids shit...like projectors saying that why did I have to waste time doing that

FIRST INTERVIEW after graduation...guy said..hey put this tape in the projector of last years marching while I get us some coffee..now I could do that of course, but the irony did NOT escape me.

AND I didnt know how studying things like pavlov's dogs would help until I realized..
well a bell goes off and students and teachers move almost instinctively ...and sometimes YES I started salivating...lol especaillay in those classes where the big titted flute players were in....

And hell has frozen over yet again. Afk and I agree: the "raw material" commentary.

#89 | Posted by pragmatist

AND I thought that CHILL wind I felt was the door opening...

hey prag

what political group is the one who tells us over and over how bad competition is for the "self esteem' of the youngsters..
such as soccer leagues where EVERYBODY gets a trophy..I dont believe its any of MY political associates....

Pragmatists,

SAT's and ACT's are EXCELLENT predictors of college performace and are therefor essential int he real world.

Vouchers would help a lot in urban settings, where the schools are worst...in rural setting, you'd need the additional help of ready access to teachers...which is why you remove certification, so that the retired mining engineer can teach physics and such....

The key is to let schools set up as non-profits, so you would have a better chance of small schools popping up to compete with bad rural public schools that otherwise have a natural monopoly....

As far as certification goes, it does nothing to spot good teachers, as evidenced by the many bad teachers working now...it does a lot to eliminate the choice of hiring experienced retirees...thus, it lowers the talent pool, restricts access for people who would happily and effectively do it as a retirement job, and therefore raises salaries while lowering quality.....it is most obvious in the maths and sciences, which is why the US churns out so few of their own, but it is true across all disciplines.....honestly, who is in a better position to impart knowledge to students? 23 year olds, or 60 year olds? systemically, the certification method we now have limits talent and maximizes salary....bad...

Taxpayers wouldn't mind paying teachers they saw as effective....the problem is, they have to pay teachers they damn well know aren't effective, as evidenced by the performance of the schools they're yelling at....

Even if I take your argument that vouchers wouldn't help everywhere, you can't argue they're not more just and wouldn't help in urban settings, where city buses can get people anywhere...

Have you bought my book yet? I'd be interested in your input before I launch nationally.
www.educatingnotbabysitting.co
m

As before, I think that 'standardized testing' is a waste of time and misleading... unless a school has segregated students into classes by extreme analysis of progress reports and learning abilities, there is still too much of a 'mix' to have ANY meaningful standardize test reporting to be used for accountability factors or to grade an entire school...

I think that teachers should be certified as to the ability to teach.. actually, very few real professionals could really relate to classrooms.. that is why even a lot of colleges have backed up letting pros in the classroom... yes, there are certainly exceptions, but not in the majority.. I know a couple of professionals who actually conduct seminars and classrooms for 'teachers' well after graduation to reinforce and also to teach new 'teaching' techniques.. I think that there is much more to a classroom than just knowing your subject, thus certification is still a very 'must' requirement ...

It is a fact that we rely on low pay for teachers, who ironically are preparing our youth for the future of our nation and world.. which brings me to another issue.. year-round schools.. with intermitting breaks.. takes too much time to regroup and get students up to snuff after a long summer recess... yes, this might also cause some parent issues in the intermitting break times, but they will find ways to adjust.. there needs to be a pay structure adjustment..teachers do not work on a 'clock' sytem; meaning just the classroom time at school...there are many hours of prep and grading and other issues that require many, many hours.. besides commitment, there needs to be incentive to be the best at their position..

I have to disagree about the TOTAL teacher run schools..I think there is cause for a different kind of administration..yes, there needs to be positions for answering the 'day to day business running of the school', but again, I think if administrators were properly used, they would be monitoring the day-to-day progress of individual teachers and classroom progress..much more effective than any testing...

"Vouchers would help a lot in urban settings, where the schools are worst..."

Yeah, they would help make the remaining public schools even worse.

The magnet schools within the public school system we have here are outstanding. They're opening up more and more of them. Graduates of the high schools have their picks of top universities.

Danni,

Not for long...the worst public schools would go out of business...but even if I take your point, who decided who the lucky kids are who get to stay behind and prop up the failing schools? Oh, that's right, we just screw the poor kids so that the education bureaucracies in those hell holes can continue to make enough money to send their kids to good schools....I get it....

The voucher system only bypasses the real solutions needed and the ability and incnetive to correct and enforce them..

"what political group is the one who tells us over and over how bad competition is for the "self esteem' of the youngsters..
such as soccer leagues where EVERYBODY gets a trophy..I dont believe its any of MY political associates...."

I don't know any political group who says that. Every teacher I know thinks that's stupid. So I don't know what you're getting at.

Prag
And I understand your point about the moral society--I disagree, but I understand. Again, my point is that it's not realistic.

Again, I already said that it is not realistic to expect a moral society. But it is realistic to uphold moral standards as a standard of value.

You seem to have dodged my comment about the reality of "responsibility of parents" and ignored my point about working with schools.

The question is pointless when dealing with a failed school system. When my kids were growing up, I worked through them on an education they can't get in school.

So what do you mean, Education is the parent's responsibility? What model are you then suggesting, or are you just philosophizing?

You have me repeating myself. The question is whether schools should compete in a market environment or should they retain monopolistic rights. School systems today lack the discipline that would be forced on them when they have to market themselve to the values of parents. Government monopolies have all the flaw of market monopolies.

You're clearly not stupid, Ray. Why aren't you willing to suggest models or solutions rather than just criticizing?

I've already said that the government school system should be privatized. It's failed because it's created an electorate that promotes the expansion of a system of government that is an enemy of liberty. You are a product of that system.

What I think is not going go change the course of history. Our government has gotten dangerously too powerful. The school system did what it was designed to do, desensitize the massess to it.

DRSoul,

By standardized tests, I mean ACT and SAT, not the state ones, which are only designed to cover up the lack of academic achievement in a state....I know...I grade them professionally in the summer. The ACT and SAT are essential for college-bound students if for no other reason than college entrace personnel rely on them heavily....as it turns out, they are statistically effective predictors of college performance, so if your high schools did nothing but assure respectable ACT and SAT scores, they'd be working a lot more effectively than they do now, where they aren't providing even minimally effective training for college or work...

Our teachers are not low paid. This is a myth...I taught in Kentucky, which is one of the worst-paid, and performing school systems in the country...still, teacher's pay is better than average pay except in the urban areas, where it's about average. Still, the average teacher I know is isolated from the real world and is pretty poorly equipped to connect young, clueless students to it so they can make wise choices...Also, teacher pay has risen sharply in the last 40 years and achievement has dropped...I think 40 years is long enough to experiment with throwing money at the teacher quality problem...instead, ease access and get more talent...that's the solution....

Administrators either 1. hated teaching or 2. coudn't teach or 3. left teaching for more money...in any case, they're out of touch with the daily goings-on in the classroom even if the were good....No, they are the last people able to judge effective teaching...the systemic results show this...if the system bred good administrators, the system would be working...it attracts leaches.....the facts are plain.

WOW this is a great thread with lots of great ideas.

Just some additional input. The administrators, I prommise all you teachers us parents hate them as much as you do if not more.

Story time: My daughter (the one in 3rd grade doing algebra and reading at a 6th grade lvl (or higher they only test up to 6th grade lvl in third grade)) has a speach impediment not a bad one but noticible we tried to get her in speach therapy in school and the administrator said no she was performing above grade level so no need. The teacher asked the administrator "If she can perform this well with an impediment how well could she perform without it" Pointing out that she does not ask questions in class because she is afraid of speaking up and being made fun of. The administrator didn't care because the schools rating is not harmed since she is above grade level anyway. Pissed us the heck off.

I think a teacher council to run the schools is a great idea, spliting students off so we were not trying to teach calculus to a guy who's only future is burger fliper is another idea. Peer promotion is another one that gets me, although now that my daughter is in highschool I'm kinda glad there aren't a bunch of 18 year olds in her freshman class. Oh and teachers who's only qualification to teach is a general ED degree trying to teach 8th grade algebra thats another one that gets me. I had to teach my daughter at home because I knew more math than the head of the math department (which is how a 3rd grader learned algebra while I was teaching her older sister)

Anyway continue the civil discusion maybe we need to copy this whole thread and send it to the Dept. Of Education, Obama, Reid and Pelosi.

Ray, you're still offering blanket solutions that are very unspecific and awfully close to talking points (i.e., meaningless). But okay. There we are. As noted earlier, neither of us will ever convince the other. Privatizing is just wrong. Schools are not businesses and can't be expected to run as such. But you don't see that. And oh well, differences of opinion make the world go round. But "the discussion is pointless" response is not engaging in debate, sir. It's avoiding the question. If you're suggesting a failing school can't be turned around, well, do you apply that to businesses that are failing? Since you appear to think schools can be run like businesses, do you use the same criteria and solutions in approaching each?

To solve the school problem:

1. Stop basing funding on outcome. By this I mean stop taking away money from failing schools as those are the schools that need the most money.

2. End vouchers. Do not take good students out of failing schools, bring up the schools.

3. Build more schools with stimulus money- class size has gotten to the point where most teachers are doing more crowd-control than educating. The size also intimidates most students into not asking questions. Reduce the size and increase the education.

"The school system did what it was designed to do, desensitize the massess to it."

And nonsense. Do you really think that was Dewey's and Mann's intention? And do you really think that a country of 300 million-plus can be run like a country of a few million was (colonial era)? Politically and educationally, you seem to.

The voucher system only bypasses the real solutions needed and the ability and incnetive to correct and enforce them..

DrSoul...

You're smarter than this....vouchers aren't a solution...they are a financial structure for allowing solutions to evolve locally by allowing taxpayers to attend any school they wish....

The alternative is Orwellian....Big Brother demands you attend a certain school, even if you know your children will emerge from it ignorant, angry, and unemployable....

With vouchers, I have a vote...without them, I do not....of course, bureacrats never prefer people having a vote, but the citizens are ALWAYS better off when they do.

Remember schools are for the convenience of the taxpayer, not for the convenience of the pigs at the trough.....

...I taught in Kentucky

One of my friends did too funny thing is most parents would be horified to know him out of school the way I did but he was a DAMN good teacher and they all loved him in the school setting. I wish I could get him posting on this thread he would enjoy it.

.they are a financial structure for allowing solutions to evolve locally by allowing taxpayers to attend any school they wish

That would only be true if 100% of students got vouchers.

Pragmatist,

Dewey's and Mann's intentions are irrelevant...they're dead, and can't express them. The "educational professionals" have now assumed the role of arbiters of what Mann and Dewey and the other Gods of Educational Fad meant.....and they never interpret is as anything other than matching their own intent....

Kanrei,

100% of the students should get vouchers. The teachers unions and public school monopolies have limited them so far, but in the end it will, and should come to 100%.

"Our teachers are not low paid. This is a myth...I taught in Kentucky, which is one of the worst-paid, and performing school systems in the country...still, teacher's pay is better than average pay except in the urban areas, where it's about average. Still, the average teacher I know is isolated from the real world and is pretty poorly equipped to connect young, clueless students to it so they can make wise choices...Also, teacher pay has risen sharply in the last 40 years and achievement has dropped...I think 40 years is long enough to experiment with throwing money at the teacher quality problem...instead, ease access and get more talent...that's the solution...."

Again, you haven't addressed my point about these professionals' leaving their higher-paying jobs to enter the teaching field.

As for your opening sally, nonsense. We ARE low-paid for our level of education (never mind importance and workload). You have to compare apples to apples. Yes, compared to average citizen salary where I live, I'm doing just fine, better than average. But compared with other jobs that require a similar educational level, I am not. (Never mind debt incurred to get here.)

That said, I agree that throwing money around isn't working. I heard some fascinating statistics in some meetings last night, about adding adult employees to school systems (not teachers) even as student enrollment has declined. So there's something to the money part of the discussion, but it's not the something you seem to be pointing at. Do you feel fairly paid for what you do? I don't, not when I also feel too often disrespected, not when others with less education than I and less value to the society get paid more, often a great deal more.

I'll respond to your longer posts later.

JONRYKER...I think that a lot of the 'dropping achievement' has been due to leaving the bad teachers in the system due to tenure..!!! this has been the most systemic cancer to education.. as to teachers being isolated from the real world and poorly equipped to connect, I am not sure where you are meeting these teachers???? most that I have met and worked with over the last 30+ years are pretty knowledgeable and into the world around them.. they are participants in other organizations and community and well read... the ones who truly commit to their profession and want to be a good teacher will balance their time to have a life outside school...
and, I have also met and worked with administrators who do take an interest outside their paperwork to monitor individual classroom progress and to work with teachers on a 'one-to-one' basis, so that is still a possibility; a lot are like you say, but there again is in the selection of these seats..there are former teachers who really do know the problems and commit themselves to make a difference..

1. Stop basing funding on outcome. By this I mean stop taking away money from failing schools as those are the schools that need the most money.

2. End vouchers. Do not take good students out of failing schools, bring up the schools.

3. Build more schools with stimulus money- class size has gotten to the point where most teachers are doing more crowd-control than educating. The size also intimidates most students into not asking questions. Reduce the size and increase the education.

Kanrei,

In my professional experience, the failing schools get much more money per student than the successful public schools do and WAY more than the Catholic schools do....

If you are against vouchers, then you must be against magnet schools too, which take good students out of the regular schools in order to have a showplace for the politicians to visit.

Building schools with stimulus money is stupid...it's a one-time shot...how do you pay for them later?

Vouchers would help a lot in urban settings, where the schools are worst..."

Yeah, they would help make the remaining public schools even worse.

#99 | Posted by danni at

OUCH

THAT FLYING PIG just hit the window....

seriously...thats why a voucher program can work but it has to somehow be linked together to insure that what you say here doesnt happen which is a distinct possibility..

BUT Isnt it ironic that the MAN responsible for DENYING a better education to black youngsters in DC was our first black president..
IRONIC or just more of the same

"100% of the students should get vouchers. The teachers unions and public school monopolies have limited them so far, but in the end it will, and should come to 100%."

I think it would be fascinating to survey local taxpayers in districts across the country. One of the huge arguments in some states comes to this: I don't want my money going to some other town. (Funding formulas by the state often result in taxes being collected and money being redistributed.)

Which brings me to one of my pet peeves: how we fund schools. I haven't seen a clear path to better models, but income taxes to fund schools is pretty fucked up to begin with. Of course, I believe in a social contract that includes public schooling. It's a philosophical stance, and I think we can fix the problems. Citizens and governments (politicians) and taxpayers, unions and students and teachers, need to open their minds. This doesn't mean any need to be abolished or outlawed from playing a role.

"BUT Isnt it ironic that the MAN responsible for DENYING a better education to black youngsters in DC was our first black president..
IRONIC or just more of the same"

HUH?

don't know any political group who says that. Every teacher I know thinks that's stupid. So I don't know what you're getting at.

#103 | Posted by pragmatist at 2010

its a liberal point of view.
such as nonsense of
NO RED MARKS ON PAPER....what total crap.

main point...a students self esteem has become such a protected thing that they suffer in the long run.

JONRYKER...I think that a lot of the 'dropping achievement' has been due to leaving the bad teachers in the system due to tenure..!!! this has been the most systemic cancer to education.. as to teachers being isolated from the real world and poorly equipped to connect, I am not sure where a life outside school...
possibility; a lot are like you say, but there again is in the selection of these seats..there are former teachers who really do know the problems and commit themselves to make a difference..

Dr Soul,

I have worked mostly in bad schools as a vocational choice, so it may explain why I see so many bad and isolated teachers and administrators.

As far as administrators...while there are, of course, exceptions, the system produces and rewards leaches...and they don't and can't effectively work with teachers...that's how we've gotten where we are as a whole, in spite of some excellent districts, which function well for the reasons you outline.

prag...voucher program in DC was ended by president barak obama

Dr. Soul,

Tenure is kind of a problem, but was really instated to combat sysematically bad administrators. There would be less occurrence of tenure and less need for it if teaching talent were more readily available and the power of administrators was drastically reduced or even eliminated...

IT's been fun. I have to go. Thanks for the lively discussion. Buy my book!

have worked mostly in bad schools as a vocational choice, so it may explain why I see so many bad and isolated teachers and administrators.

#122 | Posted by jonryker at 20

good for you.
it always made me wonder but now I dont...one problem with public schools...

whaT teacher gets the best students who walk in?
the best and most experinced teacher

and what teacher gets ther remedial and worst behaving students...young and inexperinced

that never seemed quite like the right way to go about that

whaT teacher gets the best students who walk in?
the best and most experinced teacher

and what teacher gets ther remedial and worst behaving students...young and inexperinced

that never seemed quite like the right way to go about that

Yeah but the best students are the ones who's parents are involved try putting them with the inexperianced teacher and the parents will be storming the school with pitchforks. Yeah were selfish when it comes to our kids ya wanna make something of it?

I think tenure is an incentive for lazy teachers and also for ones who lose steam to hold on to a decent retirement without regard to educating the students... across the board..!!!!

In my professional experience, the failing schools get much more money per student than the successful public schools do and WAY more than the Catholic schools do....

If you are against vouchers, then you must be against magnet schools too, which take good students out of the regular schools in order to have a showplace for the politicians to visit.

Building schools with stimulus money is stupid...it's a one-time shot...how do you pay for them later?

1. Not in Florida. A failing school gets less.

2. Yes, I oppose magnet schools with the exception of art schools.

3. Use it to build the schools, not to fund them.

DAMN WHAT A GOOD DISCUSSION

are you sure some of you are who the screenname SAYS you are..lol

of course I love a good and LOUD FIGHT AS WELL...especailly now that OBAMA HAS THAT MOJO thing going...as in VA and NEW jersey and MASS..

ah but one thing about this subject...its like football "EXPERTS" who played on a middle school B team 25 years ago and think they can "COACH" a pro team now
just because you WENT to school doesnt mean you know what you are talking about but just in same..just because you are a college trained teacher doesnt always mean you know whats best for other peoples children...its a narrow walk between the two

HASTA LA PASTA

Prag
But "the discussion is pointless" response is not engaging in debate, sir. It's avoiding the question.

I answered your question by explaining, that as a parent, I worked through my children. The results turned out as I hoped. Both manage their lives as independent of government as practical.

If you're suggesting a failing school can't be turned around, well, do you apply that to businesses that are failing? Since you appear to think schools can be run like businesses, do you use the same criteria and solutions in approaching each?

In business, if your customers don't think they are getting value for what they are paying, they'll take their business somewhere else. You have the self-serving conceit that educators know what is best. It's no coincidence that both business and government hate dealing with consumers. They are fiercely disloyal and stingy about getting the most value for their money.

You have the common syndrome I see on this site: a fear of being free. The idea of expecting government to protect you from the uncertainties of a free society only move the problem to a different level: a government beholden to no one. There is no safety when their is no freedom.

Prag,

The business model is appropriate....as a non-profit business. A profit initiative has no place in education, as eventually, the system would pressure management to sacrifice education for profits. By the same token, monopoly has been a disaster because the pressure from management is to maximize attendence, for which they get paid, and minimize failures, for which they are nuked...the result is a lot of attendance and graduations with no mechanism for ensuring a quality learning experience....nonprofits are the solution....if they are ineffective, they'll fail, and if they are effective, they'll have plenty of customers....

Right now, the schools, even the disastrous ones, have plenty of customers becaue people are unjustly forced based on income discrimination to attend them....unjust, and inefficient....

The Kansas City School Board is taking the lead.

The Kansas City Missouri School Board voted Wednesday night to shutter nearly half of its schools in an effort to avoid going broke.

The action closes 28 of 58 campuses and eliminates about 700 of the district's 3,300 jobs, including 285 teachers.

"None of us like doing this but it was necessary, it had to be done," said board member Arthur Benson after a tense five to four vote that was interrupted several times by upset parents.

The plan comes as school districts around the country, battered by the recession and budget cutbacks, are closing facilities to save money. Detroit ...

A profit initiative has no place in education, as eventually, the system would pressure management to sacrifice education for profits.

That only explains why a free competetive system is so important. If a business sacrifices quality, it risks losing customers. If it is too profitable, it attracts competition. It is when government protects business do they get away sacrificing education for profits. That's the model government education works under. Since government schools are not-for-profit, profits reflect in bloated overhead and high salaries and benefits.

Ray,

They're not not-for-profits...they're not businesses at all...they are accountable only to the endless streams of taxpayer dollars, which can't be diverted due to their enforced monopolies...remove the monopoly, give the people choice, and the schools will improve.

Just look at the Catholic schools, which are extremely cost efficient and extremely effective at educating....they can't make profits, though.

Profits, in the educational context, would be a waste of taxpayer money, if they got taxpayer dollars. Now, if somebody wants to set up a for-profit school, that's fine by me, but I think that unless they had a special niche, they'd be at a competitive disadvantage to the nonprofit model, which still has to perform to get customers, but doesn't have to take money from the educational effort to give to owners or shareholders.

The purpose of a school is not to make money, but to educate....

Profits, in the educational context, would be a waste of taxpayer money, if they got taxpayer dollars.

I'm talking about a private school system with no attachments to government. Government in of itself, is technically a non-profit institution and it wastes enormous sums of money.

Just look at the Catholic schools, which are extremely cost efficient and extremely effective at educating....they can't make profits, though.

They are subsidized by the church.

Now, if somebody wants to set up a for-profit school, that's fine by me, but I think that unless they had a special niche, they'd be at a competitive disadvantage to the nonprofit model, which still has to perform to get customers, but doesn't have to take money from the educational effort to give to owners or shareholders.

Parents who send their children to a private school system, still have to pay government school taxes. About a hundred years ago, that's how they put the private school system out of business.

The purpose of a school is not to make money, but to educate....

The purpose of a profit and loss system is to provide incentive to provide value to parents. Government schools are too insulated from that discipline. In many cases, they get more subsidies by failing.

"prag...voucher program in DC was ended by president barak obama"

Thanks for clarifying. He did that singlehandedly? (And it's your interpretation that that's denying black kids a quality education.)

Jon, thanks for clarifying nonprofit. That's not, I think, what people think of when they say "business model." They usually appear to be talking about manufacture and quality control. Different. Worth thinking about.

And Ray, it seems there is little value to our discussing this. Judging from your last direct comment to me, you are judging my politics and my beliefs incorrectly, or at least inexactly. (Though yes, to a large degree, I think educators do know best. I know better how to teach English than any student or parent does. That said, I take feedback and use it all the time. See my earlier comment to that effect, in which I wished more teachers did it, and stated that I should probably do it more.) As long as you do that, you are not honoring my engagement in a discussion that means something to you. And if you can't listen to someone who is on the inside and actually wants change, what is the point? Seriously.

Funny enough, Jon, with whom I have nearly come to virtual blows in regard to this topic before, is managing to dial back, present his points, recognize where we have some common ideas, and capitalize on those to make points about where we differ. A nice change, Jon, form the last time we discussed this. Dunno why it happened, but I like it. We have fundamental disagreements (Jon), but I now understand some of your points better. Thanks. And I will try to consider "out loud" some of your other points later tonight, if I have time after spending some time with my own children and engaging in a marathon grading session.

Later, gators. Gotta pack up and head home to my family.

Ray,

As a parent I am not sure I could support a for profit school, for many of the reasons already mentioned.

If I am going to shell out 8k a year I want that 8k to go to educating my kid not a CEO's pocket. If the school was able to prove (graduation rates 4 year college grad rates SAT scores etc.) that they surpased any other school then I probably would be willing to shell out the profit but how are they going to get enough students in the first place to show those numbers? There are a lot of problems with a for profit model of education. Just wondering, if I can't afford to shell out 24k a year for my 3 kids education are they just screwed? Seems like a great way to promote a permanent underclass. Also having gone to a private school myself I will tell you just cause the parents are rich does not mean that their kids are the best or the brightest. Some are but some are just as dumb as public school kids. So are we going to have the rich educated their dumb kids while they poor kid who one day might cure cancer gets stuck working as a short order cook at 14 because his parents were broke? Just how do you envision this for profit school system working? Will it really be good for all of society or just the rich 1/3?

This discussion only matches what I see on this site every day, an over-dependence on government entitlements through systematic confiscation (taxes). Or more simply, rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul. Our government operates with the unscrupulousness of a crime syndicate. No more of an unstable system could have been designed. They don't teach this stuff in school.

If I am going to shell out 8k a year I want that 8k to go to educating my kid not a CEO's pocket.

In my state, NJ, cost per student is over of $15,000 a year. CEO or no CEO, those are monopoly prices. You've gotten so used to the high cost of government education that you think a private education would be as expensive. Private schools once thrived in this country until the state put them out business by enforcing school taxes.

And Ray, it seems there is little value to our discussing this. Judging from your last direct comment to me, you are judging my politics and my beliefs incorrectly, or at least inexactly. (Though yes, to a large degree, I think educators do know best. I know better how to teach English than any student or parent does.

??? I haven't criticized teachers; they have to teach what they are given to teach. This is not a pedagogic issue; it's a political issue. If children had their education in a religious school, it is self-evident that they would get a healthy dose of religious indoctrination. The same principle applies to government schools. That is why every government in the world, including communist, controls their respective school system.

Ray,

Government is not a nonprofit institution....nonprofits must meet budgets or shut down...government agencies do not have to and usually do not....thus, the terrible school system

The degree of subsidy of the Catholic schools is pretty low...a large portion of their students aren't Catholics or parish members
One can argue that parents of private school kids still benefit from everybody else going to public schools and turning out productive citizens...at least one could if the public schools were doing that....the logic of my kids aren't in the schools isn't logical, as the majority of the population in any place doesn't have kids in the school at any one time....there is public good that all benefit from, or at least would be if the schools were effective.

Any school with competition has incentive to provide value. No school without competition does. Profit does nothing but take part of the piece of the pie and devote it to something other than improving the product offered...in this case, an education to future voters. I want competition to ensure quality, but I don't want profit siphoned off in the general case, although there may well be niches where it would make sense....

It is important to recognize the product of an education system is not merely a foundation for a career, although that is important to the individual. It is also ensuring an informed voter base, which we clearly lack now, and a mutual understanding of the basic tennets of this society, so that we can all agree at least on a core set of priciples...we don't have that now, but these last two are public benefits to everyone, and are too often discounted by those trying to apply profit motive to basic education....

"In my state, NJ, cost per student is over of $15,000 a year. CEO or no CEO, those are monopoly prices. You've gotten so used to the high cost of government education that you think a private education would be as expensive. Private schools once thrived in this country until the state put them out business by enforcing school taxes."

You might have a valid point in there somewhere, but private schools, by and large, are much more expensive than public schools (per-pupil cost compared with tuition). I looked up some local school costs and posted them here the last time we engaged in this argument. You and several others summarily ignored the facts I presented.

"??? I haven't criticized teachers; they have to teach what they are given to teach. This is not a pedagogic issue; it's a political issue. If children had their education in a religious school, it is self-evident that they would get a healthy dose of religious indoctrination. The same principle applies to government schools. That is why every government in the world, including communist, controls their respective school system."

I did not accuse you of criticizing teachers. Do you even read my posts, or do you skim them looking for things to attack based on our difference in worldviews? Weird, man. Weird. You said, "You have the self-serving conceit that educators know what is best." I was responding, briefly and parenthetically, to that concept.

Needless to say, I don't agree with the rest of what you said in the graf (publishing industry spelling) I quoted above.

Jon, our intents are very much the same. It's fascinating that we reach such very different conclusions. : )

Pragmatist,

Buy my book, and read it. There are no solutions offered, as I believe locally developed solutions are the most likely to work.

Buy? Buy? You want my professional opinion, you gotta pay _me_. : )

All right, so if there are no solutions offered, what is in it? An extended versions of the arguments you've presented here? You said earlier you'd like my input, or something like that. Are you doing a new edition? What might you want from your DR opponent and colleague?

(I'm not gonna count, but it seems to me that most of the posts here are from Jon, Ray, Tao, and me. With some Dylanfan moments. Come to think of it, Rcade, if you're still with us on this thread, I'd like to ask you: Do you have stats on how many people are registered members of DR and how the contributors stack up? That is, are 78% of the posts from 12% of the members, or something like that? Do you have a way of figuring such things?)

Kids dont get drivers licences unless they pass high school with a B average

Teachers are fired if any students fail the grade for the year

watch them go visit the homes at night

My friend used to say:

If you are mechanical, be an engineer, if you are smart, be a doctor, if you are a crook, be a lawyer if you can't do anything, teach.

The teachers should, by a written note, be able to expel any lazy obnoxious student for the day with a written ticket.

The kid then goes to jail for the day.

(That is where they are going to be anyway later in life)

Next day they will be nicer.

You said, "You have the self-serving conceit that educators know what is best." I was responding, briefly and parenthetically, to that concept.

Here's what I said: In business, if your customers don't think they are getting value for what they are paying, they'll take their business somewhere else. You have the self-serving conceit that educators know what is best. It's no coincidence that both business and government hate dealing with consumers. They are fiercely disloyal and stingy about getting the most value for their money.

We speak two different languages. To succeed, businesses have to know their market. Government school monopolies don't have to. They teach whatever they want.

Throughout this conversation, I've been critical of the political indoctrination kids are getting. More so, they are not taught how to think for themselves, they are taught what to think. No offense intended, but you are blind to it because you are a product of that system.

"Kids dont get drivers licences unless they pass high school with a B average"

So they don't get licenses until they're 18/19 years old? Good luck changing that aspect of society!

"Teachers are fired if any students fail the grade for the year"

WHAT?!? If a kid doesn't do shit in my class, I get fired? That's insane! That's like firing a doctor because his unhealthy patient chose not to take medicine.

"watch them go visit the homes at night"

In no particular order: Why should I have to sacrifice my life in this way? How many parents are going to welcome teachers into their homes?

"My friend used to say:

If you are mechanical, be an engineer, if you are smart, be a doctor, if you ar" a crook, be a lawyer if you can't do anything, teach."

Your friend was an asshole. Or is. Good teachers have serious skills, serious instinct, and serious knowledge.

This conversation was mostly rational (though occasionally heated) up to this point.

You might have a valid point in there somewhere, but private schools, by and large, are much more expensive than public schools (per-pupil cost compared with tuition). I looked up some local school costs and posted them here the last time we engaged in this argument. You and several others summarily ignored the facts I presented.
#143 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST

Those schools appeal to the wealthy. Believe it or not, there was a time when education was affordable. But that was before government muscled out the private school system about a hundred years ago. Similarly, there was a time when health care was affordable. That too was before government got involved.

#147-
I'd be commenting more, Prag, but you are doing a much better job of stating my opinions than I would. So I guess I second everything Prag said. I've been following the thread all day but never feel like I have anything to add that hasn't been said already.

Come to think of it, that's how it is on most threads I read.

"Throughout this conversation, I've been critical of the political indoctrination kids are getting. More so, they are not taught how to think for themselves, they are taught what to think. No offense intended, but you are blind to it because you are a product of that system."

Bullshit. I teach my kids to think for themselves, as best I can in this limiting society. I try anyway. And I know many teachers who do. Where do you think your identity comes from? No one forms his identity in a vacuum. Or hers. And by the by, I'm a product of many different things, not just a school system. Again, different worldviews--difference is, you present yours as Truth; I present mine as my beliefs.

"As an English teacher, you might find this useful. www.generalsemantics.org"

I just might do that. If I can find time between bouts of politically indoctrinating children, I'll take a look. Less snarkily, yes, I'll store the address and take a look one day fairly soon. As I say, I'm happy to take different ideas into my philosophy (worldview) and my practice, and see what happens. Thank you for giving me a specific lead (heretofore you had tossed names at me).

"I've gone as far as I can go with this."

Me too--the part with you, Ray. Some of this was very frustrating. I hope you'll take a look back and see where some of what you wrote was offensive to someone like me (and to me specifically), though most recently you said you didn't mean any offense.

"I'd be commenting more, Prag, but you are doing a much better job of stating my opinions than I would. So I guess I second everything Prag said. I've been following the thread all day but never feel like I have anything to add that hasn't been said already."

Funny enough, I think that when you did speak up, you nailed some things that I didn't. Let's call ourselves complementary (not complimentary--you reading this, Afk? spelling matters! : ) ). You work in a high school, right, Dyl? I have been thinking that we need input here from elementary teachers too--do we have any on the list? I think you and I and Ryker are all HS teachers. I have been thinking about elementary ed since about my third post, and I have to get back to that later. There's an entire piece we're missing that needs to be addressed. (Tao, you still with us? it ties back to some things you observed in your kids' educations.... My own lads are in K and preschool, so I haven't seen what you've seen... yet.)

Thanks, Ray. If I find anything that inspires me, I'll let you know. : )

Prag,

Still here.

Not much to be said so far and was hoping to hear Ray's response to my education question, not just quibbling about numbers. Around here BTW private school runs 8-11k not counting the endless fundraisers. I was not just pulling numbers out my rear My oldest was in private school until third grade when our schools were ranked 3rd in the nation and or base school was also a magnet school so we were like why are we paying 5k a year?

I would love to get some input from elementary teachers. We (my wife) are very active in PTA, helping our children, and interacting directly with the teachers and so our perspective is probably very different than many parents and probably many that the teachers have to deal with. We also have some experience with middle school my daughter having just spent 3 years there. We are trying to be a bit more hands off now that she is in H.S. but we may have to take a more active roll since she brought home her first F and nothing better than a C. This interim though was all A's and B's so maybe the threat of us getting involved was enough for her. So you know much more than I do about the HS environment. I of course was safe from indoctrination going to a private school and had a completely different experience (regardless of the indoctrination issue).

Fire bad teachers. YES.

But reward extraordinary ones. BIGGER YES.

Take the money from the military who specialize in securing america's dominance through military force, and give it to schools who specialize in making america and economic competitor.

Let's get our priorities straight people.

Buy? Buy? You want my professional opinion, you gotta pay _me_. : )

Prag,

All right, so if there are no solutions offered, what is in it? An extended versions of the arguments you've presented here? You said earlier you'd like my input, or something like that. Are you doing a new edition? What might you want from your DR opponent and colleague?

The book is called Educating, Not Babysitting. It is an in-the-trenches look at the effects on student motivation that taxpayers, parents, other students, teachers, and administrators can have, both in effective districts and ineffective ones...

It's a binary comparison of how effective districts do things and how ineffective ones do things...with this understanding as a starting point, these constituent groups can come together at the local level and construct a situation that works better, with those principles in mind.

There is nothing in there about my opinions on solutions...the point being that these groups must routinely cooperate to solve problems rather than listening to gurus....

I still own the rights, and control what's in it, so I can change it later if I sell the rights to a traditional publisher...to do that, I'd need input.

www.educatingnotbabysitting.co
m

BTW my GF is a second grade school teacher in compton, ca.

A few years ago, her school had a great principal who made their inner city school the highest rated in her district. But that principal didnt have the proper credentials, and the other schools in the district who were being embarassed by their failing scores got that principal fired. Under the new principal, who is friends of the superintendant, the scores have been consistently slipping.

Teachers arent the biggest problem. Leadership is. Principals, even if they are removed, are often just shifted to other schools in the district. MORE ACCOUNTABILITY AMONG PRINCIPALS AND SUPERINTENDANTS might be the key.

Thanks, Jon. Sounds interesting. I'll take a look (in my spare time : ) ).

Wow. 163 posts and only two lunatics so far. I should have known I could count on TheMan to double the percentage.

"Here's a few more to bookmark."

Here's the only one you need to bookmark:

'Within the United States, the achievement gap between white students and poor and minority students stubbornly persists --'

There's your problem there. Setting the bar to the least common denominator. Let's thank school boards for setting the achievement level to black, single mom, no baby daddy expectations and expect our motivated and intelligent cohesive family children to lag behind the rest of the western world....

Our Florida public schools are a shithole of mixed racial, illegal Mexican and South American degenerates clogging the channels for the white, decent taxpayer's children. Glad I'll be moving real soon. I'll take the flag with me when I leave.

Call me racist if you will. My ancestors came here less than a hundred years ago, and I'm a minority.

Armyvet,

Achievement gap is the classic bureacratic way to shift attention from lack of achievement to disparities in achievement, while turning up the emotional temperature by injecting race....it is a red herring....so far, people are buying it, though. In the end, economic necessity will ensure it is jettisoned along with the public school system itself....

race....it is a red herring.

American MSM discusses race a lot.

Mostly because they won't discuss class.

In American politics Class is a four letter word.

Be Well.

I was going to say I know plenty of Poor White Trash that brings has about the same level of acheivement as "blacks" which are in quotes since one of my daughters best friends is a straight A black girl.

Our Florida public schools are a shithole of mixed racial, illegal Mexican and South American degenerates clogging the channels for the white, decent taxpayer's children. Glad I'll be moving real soon. I'll take the flag with me when I leave.

Call me racist if you will. My ancestors came here less than a hundred years ago, and I'm a minority.

#167 | Posted by ArmyVet

sorry to hear that ArmyVet.

I don't say that you are a racist, but more like someone who doesn't want another culture forced onto him.

In American politics Class is a four letter word.

Be Well.

#169 | Posted by dethspud

Are you including Canada in that when you say "American"?

I don't say that you are a racist, but more like someone who doesn't want another culture forced onto him.

Umm seems a bit like another definition of racist to me but whatever I guess I say potato you say potatoe.

I can remember my 4th grade teacher as my greatest influence in school. He used a black leather executive chair, probably pilfered from an admin, as a prize to the highest reading scores on the practice Iowa tests of the 60s. Whoever scored the highest won the chair for a week! We loved the competetion.

Try that today and the parents would be up in arms!
Can't reward positive behavior...no no.

Umm seems a bit like another definition of racist to me but whatever I guess I say potato you say potatoe.

#173 | Posted by TaoWarrior

I would say Xenophobia, but I have a problem with that word too. If a different culture moves into your neighborhood and doesn't assimulate and you have a problem with it, I won't be calling you a racist, either.

Try that today and the parents would be up in arms!
Can't reward positive behavior...no no.

#174 | Posted by ArmyVet

That explains a lot. Teachers seem to be confused when I talk to them these days. They seem to start to say something and then either hold back, choose their words, or change in mid-sentence.

*assimilate

Eddie,

If a different culture moves into your neighborhood and doesn't assimulate and you have a problem with it, I won't be calling you a racist, either.

I live in the ghetto we have black and latinos who make no effort to "assimilate" About the only thing we are lacking is asians. Our block parties are loud obnoxious and full of strange foods. We deal.

That explains a lot. Teachers seem to be confused when I talk to them these days. They seem to start to say something and then either hold back, choose their words, or change in mid-sentence.

Teachers do seem a bit afraid of parents these days one of the problems. Kids control their parents parents control the teacher who controls the kid? I blame lawyers for that problem in our educational system.

You should try it being poor and latino (my wife is 1/2 spanish 1/2 rusian and no one around here can tell the difference between her and a mexican). The teachers are much more willing to say whats on their mind about the kids, they also talk slowly and loudly like she can't understand. Then I get there after parking the car still in my suit from work and their jaws about drop. We get some good info that way but the one time it pissed me off was when they were trying to explain to my wife why they were demoting my daughter from advanced math to regular math and then I showed up. Turns out the teacher didn't know the subject she was teaching my daughter needed catch up work and the teacher couldn't give it too her and obviously thought my wife couldn't. I got there and suddenly as I explained that with 3 years of college calculus I felt confident in my ability to fill any gaps my daughter had myself. Oh well then it was ok. (BTW I would call that racisim)

Eddie: That explains a lot. Teachers seem to be confused when I talk to them these days. They seem to start to say something and then either hold back, choose their words, or change in mid-sentence.

Tao: Teachers do seem a bit afraid of parents these days one of the problems. Kids control their parents parents control the teacher who controls the kid? I blame lawyers for that problem in our educational system.

I'm with you, Tao. Many--the vast majority?--of our discipline problems exist and continue because too many parents back kids over teachers every time. And I'm talking about when the kid was clearly wrong. (Yes, there are teachers who ratchet up behavior problems or create them through poor treatment of kids. Of course, parents should hold those teachers accountable.) Seems to me that when I was a kid, most or at least many parents would hold the kid accountable; even if they wanted both sides of the story, they'd start by saying to the kid, "So what did you do?" Now we often see it the other way round. (Granted, my memory of "back then" is from the kid perspective. I haven't been teaching long enough to say, "These kids today..."

But back to Eddie, do you mean to suggest that teachers shouldn't choose their words carefully? If so, I don't get that. Anyone talking in a professional setting should choose his or her words carefully. But at the same time, we shouldn't be afraid to speak the truth. And many of us (teachers) are.

Prag,

Just wondering and try to answer honestly it's a tough question. Would you talk to and treat a poor latino looking woman and her kids diferently than a rich looking white guy and his kids?

I just wonder how much covert racisim and classism (did I just make that word up?) plays a part in schools and performance. My kids all look white but my wife doesn't and we can definatly see a diference in how she is treated vs. me. At least till the teachers get to know her. I just worry that it could effect how they treat my kids. We already have a system worked out where she will start and if she is getting a racist vibe she will call me in. It doesn't happen often but a couple times I fear that my children got better treatment because they had a white dad.

"Just wondering and try to answer honestly it's a tough question. Would you talk to and treat a poor latino looking woman and her kids diferently than a rich looking white guy and his kids?"

Hell, no. That's absurd. Okay, in fairness and honesty, I suppose the answer should be "not overtly" or "not consciously." We all have some fear of or discomfort with people different from us. So I acknowledge that such exists. I like to think I don't let that affect how I behave with anyone, however. In my world, I deal with more people of different classes than people of difference ethnicities. There are very few "non-whites" in northern New England. But we do have a range--depending on the town--of rich, poor, and middle-class. So I deal with a range of classes and educational levels. (And no, you didn't make up the word "classism.")

And this takes me back to what Eddie said earlier, sort of. In talking to parents, one does have to tailor one's delivery and tone, just as one has to do with students, just as public speakers have to do with audiences. Know your audience; know your purpose. From what little I know or understand from your story, your wife is being subjected to at least unconscious racism--assumptions about her abilities and engagement with her children's education based on how she looks or maybe how she sounds. And that is unacceptable. One can have assumptions or beliefs about others and yet act to overcome them.

That said, we need to meet parents and students where they are, when we wish to share important information or plan what to do together. So yes, we need to choose words and tailor delivery and check for understanding. (And someone will fail to understand what I'm getting at, then attack me for whatever they _think_ I'm guilty of. But since it is you who asked, do you see what I mean, Tao?)

If everybody agreed what the academic goals were and shared the assumption that, with effort, most students can reach them, then there'd be a lot less to be confused about.

Thanks for clarifying. He did that singlehandedly? (And it's your interpretation that that's denying black kids a quality education.)

#137 | Posted by pragmatist at 2010

he along with arne duncan,..the secretary of the UNCONSTITUTIONAL dept of education

By what mechanism, Afk, did the president decide what a school system can and cannot do? Serious question. Ya got a link? (I don't have much to say for Arne either, and I'll take this opportunity to remind readers yet again that the NEA and the Obama administration are hardly in accord on these things.)

As for unconstitutional, I know the argument. Why don't you pull a Newdow and initiate a suit? Or join a group that will do so? I'd love to see how that one played out. And you'd have some teachers who would go right along. Not sure what the NEA would do with that. I haven't been to national events where such issues have arisen.

"If everybody agreed what the academic goals were and shared the assumption that, with effort, most students can reach them, then there'd be a lot less to be confused about."

Most teachers I know believe in the idea that with effort most students can achieve. Most teachers I know feel that more than two levels of honor roll is stupid and that we should not socially promote. Seems to me that particular issues derive in some large part from administrators who are scared of parents and want to be friends with everyone. Gr. Grow a fucking spine, I say. (And while I will choose my words carefully, per my earlier comments, I will tell students and parents when they're failing to perform/try, and in very clear terms. I'm about to deny credit to a graduating senior, which could mean, if the school does not override my decision in some way or provide a "creative solution," that that student will not graduate. And said kid CAN do the work, at least enough to get credit.)

Prag,

The confusion arises from a system that rewards the district for attendance and penalizes a district for failures and cares not a lick for actual learning, logical consistency, or, indeed, any benefits to the students or taxpayers at all. It is self-perpetuating. It is not functional. While some can swim against the tide and do, and some districts do things right, in general, the system produces attendance and graduations....period...

How much different would it be if schools were paid by ACT or SAT results or some equivalent for those going to 2-year schools or straight to work?

prag

been looking through some archives and time allows only this post..but the principals request was denied....
you can make a point that arne duncan did it on his own, but thats like saying that holder does shit on his own as well....

This puts Stewart and others testifying yesterday at stark odds with the father of Sidwell Friends' two most famous students, Sasha and Malia Obama.

Their father decided earlier this month to allow students enrolled in the Opportunity Scholarship Program to continue with their private schooling, but to kill the program for others.

Prag,

Yes there is def. some unconsious racisim and in the south thats pretty rampant. Like when she was pulled over for speading and the cop walks up and says "do you speak english good?" My wife had to do everything in her power to not say "Aparently better than you"

The tailor the delivery is neccesary I do understand however I wish the teachers would get to know people before they make assumptions and tailor their delivery incorectly. That is a pretty minor thing though compared to all the other problems in education.