"i was actally with Rand up until that "richest" nd "competition" part. otherwise i am totally with his support, albeit belated, for Public Education."

Ha! That's where I am, too.

"Well there we have it folks two votes for business as usual, because it's working so well."

There we have it! Paneocon is still pretending that I'm not in favor of reform! If you ever want a real conversation, PA, you just let me know. But read the archives first. Suggested topics: reform, accountability, administration, parenting.

It's just that you lose me on competition. Public education is not about competition. It has to be about availability to all. Most competition I see involves options that are unrealistic for many the "reformer" claims to want to help. Example: I live in a rural area. How does it help poor folks who have to be at work at odd hours to have a private school (voucher-funded) 20 miles from their house in the opposite direction from work? Not that vouchers are necessarily a terrible idea, but people who proclaim their greatness generally ignore serious questions like the one I just offered.

" I want a rebuild that is child centric and not NEA centric."

Me too. What do you think "reform" means? (Oh, and it's not "NEA centric" now.)

"Why do I keep posting education articles. Most of the articles on here dealing with education come from me. I'm all about the conversation."

No, you're not. You're all about posting and saying, SEE? That's not a conversation. When I bring up real awareness from the trenches, you usually poo-poo or ignore.

"So who do we need to motivate:
Students
Teachers
Administrators
Parents
Community"

Agreed. Now you're starting to converse. And I know what motivation is; don't insult me.

"warehouse the rest."

Scary.

"It is unacceptable that teachers who do preform at a high level earn at the same level as those who fail in their job."

Agreed.

"This is a Union issue and a compensation issue."

And an administrative issue. Prove that they're bad, give them a chance to get better (making marked progress within the semester or school year), and get rid of 'em if they can't perform. Every contract I've seen provides for firing based on incompetence or malfeasance. But the admin has to build a case.

"The reason teachers don't want charter schools is they are not interested in competition and the job analysis that it brings. Charter schools do an end run on the unions and allow teachers to be compensated based on merit and results."

Nonsense. 1. Some are unionized. 2. Many have been proven to be no better. I have recently done some research, and I'll give you this: A well-run (from mission to implementation) charter school can be an amazing thing. But when you speak of them with this very broad brush, you look ignorant and biased. Please note that I don't talk about regular public schools in this way.

"This holds true for Administrators who have no vested interested in spending dollars effectively. Administrators should function more like managements, compensated for getting the most out of the facility and resources available to them."

Mostly agreed. How do you measure that? Guess what? Standardized tests aren't the only way; they're just the most easily understood (by non-educators) and the easiest to implement. That takes away from instruction time, but who cares about that? And standardized tests as a measure of performance are problematic in many ways. I've written about this extensively here; check the archives if you care.

"Parents will be motivated by being involved in the purchase of education for their children. The decision making process alone will involve them in their children's education and the quality or the experience. It is proven over and over that people are more involved in purchases they pay for directly than those that are out of their control. This will reduce education inflation and help transition into their future decisions on trade and secondary education."

That's amazingly idealistic, and it will leave many out of the process of education. And it neatly ignores the many issues I've brought up in the past (including the one I brought up upthread).

"It's time to get rid of lefty "feel good" programs and move back to basics of education along with instilling discipline in our school systems and backing administrators/teachers that was lost through the PC movements of the 60s and 70s."

I don't know if it's the fault of "PC movements," but I COMPLETELY agree about discipline. Parents have to back us, though (as you seem to imply). What "lefty feel good programs" are you talking about? Be specific.

29: Great post, Hag!

""Given that charter/private schools supply the same fair but inadequate education,""

This is an awful sweeping statement. Charter: numerous studies show no better performance than in comparable private schools, but some charters do great work, so there's something here but your broad brush is awful. Private: I would suggest that lots of private schools have graduates who are very accomplished, but why is that? By and large, they get to pick and choose. By and large, their kids come from homes in which education is valued, whether rich or poor.

Btw, charters should do admissions solely by lottery, at least in the early grades. I was reading about a charter system recently where elementary and middle students are solely by lottery, and to attend their high schools, students must have succeeded in the system's middle schools. That makes very good sense to me--they come up in the culture and with the pedagogy. I'm not totally against charters or privates, and I'm not against vouchers so much either. But comparisons have to be fair and access has to be not just for the rich and geographically proximate. As for vouchers, I need to see the specifics: how much of one's taxes does one get to take to another school, for instance? And the proponents of these options must stop talking about them as panaceas (hear me, PA?).

"A modest proposal to be sure."

Indeed, but aren't we hungry for education?

"Or do you prefer the Karl Marx version of compensation since you're upholding socialism today?"

That's just silly. The teacher salary grid is predicated on years of service and education level. This is the education system's version of career longevity and expertise, a fair corollary with the private sector. Many white-collar jobs take exactly those two things into account when deciding what to offer or what to negotiate up to.

"My issue with teachers unions is their protection of bad teachers and their insistence on defined benefit packages."

That's two issues, but okay. 1. Protection of bad teachers? Yeah, when admin doesn't make a case. All workers should be so protected. 2. That's a huge argument. I don't care to have it with you, except to say this: Let me have the amount you take from my paycheck for the pension and I'll invest it myself. Oh, and pay me better. : )

"For every example of this you find me I'll find you at least two that have better results."

Okay, we'll wait for your review of all the studies done and all the results of testing in the charter schools across America over the last two decades.

"call that a unconvincing conversation"

Call what an unconvincing conversation? I was pointing out that you don't engage seriously with someone who brings real questions based on real experience. That's not geographically determinant. It's called engagement.

"I accept your issues with standardized testing but it would be nice if you would concede that until we have a better method it is the only way to have some idea of quality of education being delivered?"

Oh, okay, so you'll concede that ACA is the only way to control the insurance issues in this country? Of course, you won't! The testing argument is fundamental. You can't say "we need to pay effective teachers better" then dismiss the seriousness of the measures we use to determine effectiveness.

49: And still you ignore my real and serious criticisms.

51: You need to read it again. He brings up serious points and is bold enough to say them. And "doom them"? This from the guy who said "warehouse the rest"? Consistency, PA?

"Teach likes to do the grammar and spelling corrections."

You have no idea how many times in the last five minutes I have bitten my virtual tongue, held back the virtual colored pen.

"You should get your contribution and the contribution of the school district and it should be invested in a 401K and you will be at the whims and risks of the market like the rest of us. This is a really big deal with republicans."

No, really? A big deal? Huh, who knew? As I said, fine.

"I disagree. I just spent 30 minutes replying to you. We keep coming back to this and I can only summize that you just don't like what I have to say, sorry."

You have never taken me up seriously on my reform ideas, on my criticism of and questions about vouchers, on my acknowledgment of public failings, on my comments about panaceas... And if that took you 30 minutes, you need to find ways to tighten your thinking. : )

"What is not acceptable is some one saying the kiddies are getting a good education because we say so."

Did I ever say that? Quite the opposite, man. I've been saying for the whole time I've been on the DR that public ed needs a serious overhaul. You seem to continually miss my points. Is it willful or do you just not get it? I NEVER said to wait. I said we need to look at other ways of assessing kids and teachers. In fact, the last time this balance idea came up, I said exactly that: testing is fine as PART OF a larger system of measures.

"I don't see you have a better suggestion for dealing with parents? Bring them to the parent teacher meeting by gun point? If little johnnie's parent don't make a decision on where little johnnie should go to school then the next visit should be from child protective services. If that doesn't get their attention maybe johnnie needs a foster home"

Huh? One more time, PA: Lots of parents simply can't avail themselves of the kinds of choices you're talking about. Time, distance, and necessary engagement in survival get in the way. You still haven't acknowledged even that I made the point. Look around, man. For many of us, choice is irrelevant. We need local schools that work. Until you start to acknowledge that there are serious criticisms that undercut your idealistic solutions, we will get nowhere. I am NOT saying you need to agree with me on every point. I'm saying you need to look at what's being said and recognize that there is some merit to it. If I have to work 60 hours a week to survive, and I drive south to my job (which I can't quit 'cause I need to feed my kids), how is it helpful to get a voucher to a school 30 miles to the north of me? I'm making up the scenario, but think about it. I love idealism, but recognize that you're being idealistic. It's not as simple as you paint it.

"I suspect I do, I can't do my work and the DR and proof read and spell check at the same time. Sometimes I may post some the the stuff I'm doing the the local RNC which has been looked over. Besides it is your fault because you never got me that sentence diagramming book I ask you about. :-)"

Heh. I remember something about that book. And I don't care about your writing skills most of the time. Once in while, I poke someone for fun, but most of the time, if I get the meaning (irate), I let it go. There are much better (more fun) things to argue about.

"I have taken your concerns into consideration."

I haven't seen it.

"The problem is vouchers is a black and white situation. Either you use a voucher program or not."

And my point is not that we shouldn't use them, but that they aren't a cure-all. Jesus, would you read what I write, please?

"I do understand that they are often at the expense of public school and I do understand that not all charter or private schools are good programs but I do have faith in a parent or parents who would use a voucher to monitor the progress and make changes according. This is not the case with a government funded public program where parents can and do check out."

Parents can and do check out of private schools and charter schools, too. Again, your idealism is just as strong as those who believe socialism should be fully embraced.

"Lots of parents simply can't avail themselves of the kinds of choices you're talking about. Time, distance, and necessary engagement in survival get in the way
#59 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST
Condoms will fix that. Really if you want children they are not an accessory for Christmas. You accept responsibilities with children and education is one of the big ones and I know I'm playing to the choir, sorry."

Huh? You missed my entire point. There are responsible, good parents who simply cannot avail themselves of the kinds of choices you're talking about. They deserve good schools that are local.

"We need local schools that work.
#59 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST
Yes but wishing it so has and will not fix things"

Then burn them all down and start over, I guess. Which is funny 'cause just last week you said you didn't want to disassemble the public school system.

PA, there are reforms that could work, IF all stakeholders would talk seriously. Your answer appears to be to offer other options, not to look at ways to fix the existing schools. Funny from a guy who wants to be on the school board.

"I don't see injecting parental responsibility, teacher accountability and school competition as idealistic I see it as the only alternative we have."

Your idea that just giving them choice will fix things is idealistic. Your idea that parents who get to choose will suddenly be more engaged is idealistic. There are plenty of parents who simply hand their kids off to private schools and to high-achieving public schools, just as to low-achieving public schools.

"We are entering a era of not increasing funding for education but decreasing funding and it will only be out of the box think that saves education and America in the process."

Duh. Okay, so there will be less funds? How then will vouchers be effective? Consistency?

"Thanks as always for the conversation Prag"

Sure. I have many opinions about public schools and schooling in general, buttressed by real-life experience as an adult working inside the system and trying to foment change. With serious will, we could in fact fix public schools. Unions, teachers, administrators, citizens, parents, and politicians (including school boards)--oh, and institutes of higher ed--all need to be ready and willing to talk about change. Nay, eager to do so. Your idea that simply offering choice will create the necessary groundswell of change--well, I just don't see it. Sure, some parents will bite (we do, but we have some money, we already raise our kids to care about education, AND we have a locally available private option, which one of our children attends, at least this year), but many will not be able to. I didn't say are too lazy to; I said won't be able to.

"Start with eliminating tenure;"

Please define tenure in the public K-12 setting.

"get rid of grade classifications..ie, first, second, etc and implement progressive programs"

Really? That's an awesome idea. I know it as competency-based education, and it's what I'd probably go for in the school I found and run. : )

"bring vocational education into the mainstream public education as a curriculum..."

It is in many places, but in other places, it's been relegated to nothing. There are schools around the country that are closing wood shop, for instance.

"But, no matter Head Start, Private schools, public schools or charter schools...most of it reverts back to what the child is exposed to in the form of role models at home when he or she is not in the classroom... if the support is not there, a very, very low percentage will survive on their own.. look in ALL of the lower income communities and digest what a majority of these kids see when out of class...!!!"

Absolutely! And not just low-income. Also, there are some serious reforms, small-scale, going on in urban areas. But who funds them? Some charter schools do very well, but one wonders where the money comes from. Check out Achievement First. Very interesting (despite my feelings about standardized testing). I'm going to have to go visit one and see if they're half as good as their rhetoric.

"Vouchers equal competition, competition equals increased effectiveness, increased effectiveness equals cost savings."

Idealism again. You might be right; you might not. Again, I've said I'm not entirely against vouchers (like 17 times now). Again, my point is that they're not a cure-all, and you and many proponents often speak as if they are. I like your dual-trajectory idea.

"Do I get brownie points for not abusing you for putting one of your children in private school? :-) "

What are these "brownie points"? : ) We discussed this before, I thought. It's about the needs of the particular child, not about the quality of the local public school. Our older son is in the local public school and absolutely thriving (in the standardized tests of which you so approve, he is nearly off the charts, scoring nearly three times the average of his district and well above the state level).

I don't have time to read the links right now. Students just filed in! I don't know what the per-pupil cost is in Philly...

"Interesting that a basically liberal person (Prag) is accusing a conservative (me) of being an idealist. :-)"

That's my point. I'm trying to talk about practical matters; you're going all idealistic. It's funny. And ignoring serious, real criticisms in a discussion of this nature is illogical at best.

"Prag, it works, The free market will set you free, I promise."

No, you want it to work. You cannot know that it will work. And there is not and never has been a free market in this country.

I read the 53000 seats article. It's a follow-up to something. I didn't get it. Why are there excess seats? Who is closing schools? Where are the students going? Don't throw rhetoric at me. Give me factual foundation, please.

There are a whole lot of interesting topics buried in your second linked article: importance of neighborhood schools, decision-making power, student voice, to name only a few.

Interestingly, my (tiny) district is facing pretty serious cuts for next year: about 1/10 of the initially proposed budget (if we kept things as they were), something like 20% of the faculty. And the board and admin aren't thinking past passing the budget. I haven't asked directly, but: "So you're making these cuts. What will the school look like then? How will you attract tuition students? [We are a school of choice for the area. Kids get to elect where to go, and the tax dollars follow them. Traditionally, a bit under 50% of the HS has been tuition students.] How will you serve our neediest students?" The leadership has given NO indication of answers to these questions. ... The other side of the coin (ha! pun not intended) was pointed out to me by our cafeteria manager the other day: "At what point will the town decide it's cheaper to tuition out all of our HS kids?" The town would save millions with such a move. Of course, they'd give up 150 or so years of tradition and the center of their little town.

"Philly schools like many are seeing a decrease in enrollment. There are, by school board numbers, 53,000 in extra capacity."

What do you mean? Because of decline in enrollment, there are so many empty rooms that it adds up to 53K empty chairs throughout the city?

"The parents and union are angry about closing schools, the parents because or transportation"

And quite possibly because of what neighborhood schools mean emotionally and even practically.

"and the union because of jobs"

Well, yes. It's what unions do: protect jobs. But also, teachers are possibly upset because of what they believe is best for kids. I'd have to see numbers per school, but decline in enrollment doesn't always mean decline in necessary teachers. It depends on how the decline is distributed in a particular school. That said, I believe that decline in enrollment is the only good reason to cut positions.

"and the administration (Black/Liberal/Democrat) if that matters, is crying poverty."

The administration? You mean principals or the superintendent(s)? Crying poverty, as in we can't afford to keep schools open? Or to keep teachers employed?

"Interesting that the media is blaming it on the White/Republican Governor who really doesn't directly have a dog in the fight."

He doesn't? Hm. Governors often do. The governor of the state in which I teach is pushing a particular agenda for sure, and some of it will result in schools closing if he gets his way. (I don't know that such is his intent, but it will be a consequence, intended or otherwise.)

"Good fun but a old story."

Not good fun for those who are losing jobs or their school...

"What do you mean? Because of decline in enrollment, there are so many empty rooms that it adds up to 53K empty chairs throughout the city?
#78 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST
Yup"

I need to see some stats on how that works. Did you see my comment about decline in enrollment or are you engaging in your usual choice to ignore relevant questions? Of course, if 53,000 empty chairs exist, the system has to contract (resulting in closings and job loss). This had to have been a long time coming. (This is part of what's happening in my district. Enrollment is way down, and staffing hasn't changed much. So we need to reduce staff. My problem in my district is not the reality of needing to cut but the lack of vision in what we do next. One possible scenario is that the school closes in the next five years. And that would be an awful blow to the community, even if it's the wisest financial decision. See post #73.)

"So teachers are displaced and the union is unhappy so the tax payers should just pay the bill so these people have a job and union dues?"

Please show me where I said that. I simply pointed out that unions protecting jobs (logically or not) is what they're designed to do.

"We have a recurring issue here PRAG. You seem to not be able to accept the ballance of work and capital that permeates the private sector."

I don't accept that public schools should be run like the private sector, no. But again, read what I wrote. Nowhere did I say that all these schools should be left open.

"Lean and mean, produce or parish."

What does church have to do with it? : )

"If you want the private sector to pay for education you have to at least give lip service to the rules of the private sector."

Education should not be run like a business. It should, however, be run more wisely than it often is.

And that's some interesting twisting of concepts ya got up there. By and large, the people pay for education. So you might as well say that the military is funded by the private sector.

"The local government. Mayor Nutter"

Great name. That's not what "administration" means when talking about schools, unless somehow the mayor serves as superintendent.

"Not good fun for those who are losing jobs or their school...
#78 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST
I haven't had much fun losing 90% of my income from business over the past 5 years either."

I didn't say anyone has fun losing work. I was just pointing out your unfortunate (intended as playful?) choice of words.

"Nice attitude, Prag. I really don't have "666" tattooed on my body. It is because of drops in enrollment"

Are you ever man enough to acknowledge when an interlocutor usually on the opposite side of the fence agrees with you on something?

"Yes Charter schools are part of the reason. Strange parents wanting to get their kids out of the crime ridden, inner city schools?"

Now you're just pushing buttons. And charter schools might have a role. But at least in the Northeast, we're experiencing the results of a baby bust as well.

"The people paying the bills get to choose how things are run."

So they need to F'ing SPEAK UP. ENGAGE with the school system. I'm all for it. I've been going to board meetings regularly for TEN YEARS. I have seen more than one citizen at maybe three of those meetings. Sitting back and complaining and voting down budgets is not choosing how things are run. It's being a negative jerk.

"It's a different metric now, people are not a sleep and they are at the end of their taxing ability."

In THREE posts in this single thread, I have acknowledged and discussed this. This is another example of what I mean when I say you don't engage in real conversation.

"Change is coming and I would like to see that the kiddies are not the victims in this."

Right on! I've been working on helping children for quite a while now.

"No it should be unaccountable for waste and fraud and offer no choice or guarantee of results just like government."

And where did I say that the school system should be unaccountable? Ye gods. I'm making a point about treating kids like widgets, and you're railing about things on which I agree. I have written often about waste and inefficiency. Fraud is a much bigger accusation. I know of very few actual, legal actions of fraud in the school system. I think maybe you mean something less legalistic when you use that word in this context?

83: I see your little smiley face there, but I don't need any lessons in market principles. And enrollment is down also because there are fewer kids. But yes, some people are dissatisfied, and there are many reasons for that, not all because of quality. As for crime in the schools, whose fault is that? Who should control that? Who should we hold accountable? Certainly not unions and teachers (not that you named names, but I have to ask).

Ah, home on a snow day. I guess you'll tell me that that's another sign of the differences between the private and public sector? (I believe that in dangerously snowy areas, many private businesses should offer snow days to employees, just as schools do. No job is worth dying for.)

"The military is just as accountable to the taxpayers."

You need to work on what words mean. "Taxpayers" and "private sector" are not synonymous.

Most teachers I know self-identify as Democrats and/or liberals. According to the NEA stats, about 60% of members self-identify as such. That does not, however mean they're lovers of GUBMINT.

And rhetorical ranting is not a good way to get me to read a link, especially when you cut and paste and lose the link. ; ) (Never mind that it's from dailycaller, and every link I've read from there has been absurdly biased and filled will silly rhetoric, as are many HuffPo pieces, btw; I don't like that site either.)

And the type of speaking up you're doing is exactly the kind that I'm saying accomplishes nothing. The taxpayers, the citizens, the parents need to engage with their local school boards and schools. They too often don't. If they want say, SPEAK UP. Directly. In a forum in which a difference might be achieved. It's not that hard. Board meetings are at night, generally, and are open to the public. Some boards don't want to listen, but many do. And it's the public's right to demand to be heard. We live in America. Exercise your rights!

"Your district is not like ours. We have parents and community involved. I attend two or three meeting a year."

Good. But that's not true in lots of places. You say people paying get to make decisions. Well, the flip side is that they must stand up for themselves.

"Prag, it seems I don't have the ability to communicate with you with out making you angry, it's not my intention. There is not going to be an epiphany on either of our parts on this and I don't expect one. That doesn't mean I'm not listening or that I don't appreciate the view point."

You really don't understand my posts then. I'm seldom angry but often passionate. I'm not looking for epiphany or even agreement, unless it actually happens (which it has sometimes and you've generally ignored); I'm looking for conversation. Look again at what happened there. You said x, indicating that I hadn't already addressed or agreed with you on a specific point. I got frustrated (not angry--who has time for that, and on anonymous board?), and pointed out where you got it wrong. The adult thing to do would be to go "Oh, you're right. I'm sorry" rather than weaseling around about mind-changing. Man up, PA!

I never expect anyone on this board to change his/her mind. I do expect that when someone appears to be mostly serious, as you do, he will acknowledge common ground when it happens, not ignore salient points, you know, engage in conversation. (I used to expect this of Jest, but then he made it clear that he often, if not most often, is out to tweak.) So if you are as serious as you seem mostly to be, engage with seriousness. If you're not, admit it and I won't bother anymore. (And yes, if you continue to ignore salient points and assign to me positions I don't hold, then I probably will experience some anger. I don't make stuff up about you and your positions, so you should respect me equally. But again, if you're gaming not really talking, that's fine. I can ignore or join in that brand of fun.)

As for viewpoints, I get something from your thoughts, too, when you offer them seriously, or I wouldn't bother to engage. I don't come here to mock or joust for no reason. I come here because I get some viewpoints I don't otherwise experience and because there are some posters here with something to offer.

""school-age population has increased while enrollment drops" is interesting "

Indeed it is. I didn't read the link. I was just talking about stats with which I am already familiar. If the school-age population in a given place has gone up but public school enrollment has declined, that certainly says that those children are being educated somewhere other than the local schools (or there are lots of parents breaking the law : ) ). The reasons for that are myriad, of course. As noted earlier, our younger son is in a private school but not because we think the local school is terrible.

"Well, hell, Prag, gotta be false from Daily Caller!"

Do you always put words in people's mouths?

"Here, you loooove NBC, right?"

No. Making stuff up again, huh?

When you did you become a total ass? Read the language: "every link I've read." I've probably read more daily caller pieces than HuffPo pieces, actually. I don't like either one; that was one of my points. But you know, you just read what you want to read, rather than looking at the actual text.

And as you and I have discussed before, I've never read anything by Krugman. Not a single word.

And no, nothing hypocritical from me, thanks for noticing. I suppose I am capable of partisanship. Will you now admit that you are, too?

As for the Texas burqa thing, I posted on that thread. I find it weird that TEXAS has adopted that particular curriculum/programming. I haven't read it, so I have no opinion on the specific programming. I think that if we're going to discuss politics with our youngsters, we need to be ready to take on lots of different issues and recognize that in fact not all people of a given region believe x or beave in x fashion. I don't teach in Texas, as you may have noticed. And I don't believe in a state instituting ANY curriculum/programming statewide. I believe mostly in local control for education, though I do subscribe to the Common Core concept. But you're just F'ing with me 'cause you're not so stupid or forgetful as to not know all of this.

101: What is rampant? Barack Obama songs? Wrong. And I'm focused on the big picture, just in a different way than you are. And I'm actually doing something about it: working and agitating from within. What are you doing, other than whining on a blogging site?

Hag, thanks for the reality check. You know, sometimes I can't stop myself. I suppose meds might help, but wine is cheaper.

"On average New Jersey charter school students receive the equivalent of 2 months additional learning time for reading and three months additional learning time for math – figures much higher than the national average, the study found."

So why do you think that is, KBM?