Dollie Llama putting the smack down on China?????

[archenemy]

Ah, so we can pay to educate your kids, but you won't kick in to keep other people's kids healthy enough to go to school?

 

Funny, I paid taxes which educated "other people's" kids before I had kids in school, and will be paying for "other people's" kids in just a few years. Ditto for medical care of others. And I'm sure I've kicked in more than my fair share over the years, since I've always paid income and payroll deduction taxes.

 

And I'm coughing up at least $1000 a month for insurance, but hey, keep pretending that YOU pay for MY kids.

 

 

I assure you that I pay significantly more taxes than you do. But that is beside the point. Why would it seem like I am "pretending" that I pay for your kids, but you feel justified in saying that they will support me when I am old? Can you see the problem there?

[archenemy]

The problem is that overall public schools are not doing a good job, even though they could be if they were fixed. This will never happen due to political realities, greed, and our wonderful teacher unions.

I am curious how teachers fighting for more pay makes the school system worse or un-good? I work for an increase every year, and I do not see a connection between that and the organization I work for needing to be "fixed".

[ivan]

The problem is that overall public schools are not doing a good job, even though they could be if they were fixed. This will never happen due to political realities, greed, and our wonderful teacher unions.

I am curious how teachers fighting for more pay makes the school system worse or un-good? I work for an increase every year, and I do not see a connection between that and the organization I work for needing to be "fixed".

i would also ask, given that i'm in a union you dislike, despite its stated top priority being the welfare of students, how exactly do you think my organization is an absolute roadblock to your solutions?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

The problem is that overall public schools are not doing a good job, even though they could be if they were fixed. This will never happen due to political realities, greed, and our wonderful teacher unions.

I am curious how teachers fighting for more pay makes the school system worse or un-good? I work for an increase every year, and I do not see a connection between that and the organization I work for needing to be "fixed".

 

Archie: please get back to work so you can help pay for my kid's school. The teachers need a pay increase next year, so if you could do some overtime, or moonlight, that would be great. Thanks.

 

[archenemy]

You are right, I do need to get back to work. After I pay for your kids' schooling, I gotta get me some counseling. And a good spell-check thingy.

 

I do think teachers are underpaid, treated like shit, and don't get the respect they deserve. It is despicable the way parents treat them and embarrassing the way they are viewed.

 

Okay, I am going to go be productive. Thanks for the good chat!

[tomtom]

i would also ask, given that i'm in a union you dislike, despite its stated top priority being the welfare of students, how exactly do you think my organization is an absolute roadblock to your solutions?

What does the union do to evaluate the quality of teaching in the classroom and remediate or eliminate those who are not able to provide for the 'welfare of their students'?

[tomtom]

I assure you that I pay significantly more taxes than you do. But that is beside the point.

 

But yet you highlighted this.

 

Your modesty is modest.

 

[JayB]

I bitch about the mortgage interest deduction because you can't justify it on economic or social grounds.

 

In Canada, and Australia - for example, the rate of private home-ownership is just as high as in the US, yet they do so without any subsidization of private mortgage debt. People would still be able to buy homes for themselves without a mortgage subsidy - they'd just be either smaller and/or less expensive, since the subsidies wouldn't be capitalized into the price of homes. And there's the fact that the subsidy, and the capital gains exclusion, contribute to a massive misallocation. Justifiable as an economic policy? Nope.

 

Then there's the fact that the cost of the subsidy is second only to the tax-deductions for employer sponsored health-care, and the benefits increase in direct proportion to the size of the mortgage. It's also several times more than expenditures on low income housing. It's expensive, and the less you need it, the greater the dollar value of the benefit you are likely to accrue from it. Justifiable as a social policy? Nope.

 

You simply can't pretend that the arguments for public expenditures on public education are anything like those for private mortgage debt. One creates a public good that simply wouldn't exist without public expenditures, and the other uses public money to unnecessarily subsidize a private good in a manner that's both economically destructive and morally unjustifiable. Big difference.

[ivan]

This kind of field trip is taken seriously by very few.

uh, hate to rock your world, but for kids this is true of everything that happens in school, excepting lunch and the dismissal bell

 

If you want to expose children to view points of world leaders - it had better be appropriate for their age (jr. high, maybe, sr. high, yes), and could be done far more effectively by showing video tapings of the leader's speeches followed by discussion. Even so, this is pretty fluffy stuff, especially considering that few of our kids could point out where Tibet is on a map, or give even one fact about the region's history. If we really care about educating children about our world leaders, we need to beef up our history and geography curricula, with a healthy dose of studying current events.

 

you should come on in and teach a lesson to my class dude, you seem like you got it all figured out! if you hang around for the test to proudly measure your ROI you might be a wee bit suprised too. having spent a ton of time on all the things you mention in that last line, i'd still guarentee you a large # of my kids could not point out tibet, tell you who the DL is, or anything sensible about buddhism. and yes, i fail them for it. and yes, the rich parents go right on buying them bmws. the dirty truth is, you can lead a horse to water...

 

field trips are inevitable "fluffy" as you say - montesorri schools though, which are private and enjoy incredibly high reputations as effective schools, base their entire curriculum on the constructivism school of learning, whihc stresses real world, "experiential" learning, which is exactly what you get from field trips

 

a field trip can be a incredibly useful teachign tool - as w/ any tool, it all boils down to how it's wielded - if you have shitty teachers, you get shitty product. duh.

[JayB]

The problem is that overall public schools are not doing a good job, even though they could be if they were fixed. This will never happen due to political realities, greed, and our wonderful teacher unions.

I am curious how teachers fighting for more pay makes the school system worse or un-good? I work for an increase every year, and I do not see a connection between that and the organization I work for needing to be "fixed".

i would also ask, given that i'm in a union you dislike, despite its stated top priority being the welfare of students, how exactly do you think my organization is an absolute roadblock to your solutions?

 

Opposition to public education vouchers?

[JayB]

This kind of field trip is taken seriously by very few.

uh, hate to rock your world, but for kids this is true of everything that happens in school, excepting lunch and the dismissal bell

 

If you want to expose children to view points of world leaders - it had better be appropriate for their age (jr. high, maybe, sr. high, yes), and could be done far more effectively by showing video tapings of the leader's speeches followed by discussion. Even so, this is pretty fluffy stuff, especially considering that few of our kids could point out where Tibet is on a map, or give even one fact about the region's history. If we really care about educating children about our world leaders, we need to beef up our history and geography curricula, with a healthy dose of studying current events.

 

you should come on in and teach a lesson to my class dude, you seem like you got it all figured out! if you hang around for the test to proudly measure your ROI you might be a wee bit suprised too. having spent a ton of time on all the things you mention in that last line, i'd still guarentee you a large # of my kids could not point out tibet, tell you who the DL is, or anything sensible about buddhism. and yes, i fail them for it. and yes, the rich parents go right on buying them bmws. the dirty truth is, you can lead a horse to water...

 

field trips are inevitable "fluffy" as you say - montesorri schools though, which are private and enjoy incredibly high reputations as effective schools, base their entire curriculum on the constructivism school of learning, whihc stresses real world, "experiential" learning, which is exactly what you get from field trips

 

a field trip can be a incredibly useful teachign tool - as w/ any tool, it all boils down to how it's wielded - if you have shitty teachers, you get shitty product. duh.

 

I have to agree that a huge percentage of the problems associated with public schools have their origin outside of the classroom, and considering the quality of the input - the quality of the output from public schools can be pretty remarkable.

 

 

[ivan]

What does the union do to evaluate the quality of teaching in the classroom and remediate or eliminate those who are not able to provide for the 'welfare of their students'?

the union doesn't send folks around to watch me teach for certain, but they do work w/ the state to establish qualifications to get/maintain a teaching license

 

the union does work to offer/make us aware of professional development opportunities and agitates with the state to get us funding for it

 

the union really only seeks to eliminate those who are grossly damaging their students (say by abusing them)

 

ultimately, my union is a very remote and rarely-glimpsed organization to me, and is mostly important only when our contract is being renegotiated

 

the bottom line is, neither the union nor state can have much of a culling effect on teachers. personally, i'm embarrassed by a # of social studies teachers i work with - they don't know what the fuck they're talking about, have no inate interest in the subject, don't read anything (that i can tell) and teach in a way that is utterly boring and off-putting. great - so we fire them. i won't complain, though what the process going to look like and how will it be fair? and anyway, now who's gonna take the job? there's not exactly a stampede of qualified applicants eager to do a better job. getting an education degree isn't necessarily easy and unfortunately there seem to be an awful lot of folks who look to get one not b/c they love learning, but because they don't know what to do. my last school had a us history job unfilled for more than a month. the job doesn't pay well, lend much prestige and it sure doesn't get you laid (well, ethically anyhow ) you can fire a baseball player who bats .200 and makes 3 errors a game b/c the major leagues, whihc offers a powerful wealth incentive, produces tons of guys who can do better. the current supply pool for schools is more like the little leagues though.

 

another thing to remember - teaching/education is far more an art than a science, especially at the level of a classroom teacher - it doesn't submit well to the tyranny of metrics. i don't mind standardized tests, and in fact i was incredibly succesful in getting kids to pass them in my last state, but the results don't necessarily mean what you think. the defintion of "the welfare of students" is therefore itself rather fuzzy.

[ivan]

Opposition to public education vouchers?

my objection to vouchers is much more based on 1st amendment church n' state concerns than on union ones (but then i am a radical christian-hater). assuming the total pool of money invested will be the same though, its really hard to see how a public school is going to get any better when its funding is cut.

[JayB]

I'd also be opposed to direct funding, but when you leave the matter in the parent's hands, things get a bit fuzzier.

 

How do you feel about Pell grants for students that get educated at Georgetown or Notre Dame? How about the tax deductions for the interest on the loans that they took out to attend private universities with a denominational bent?

 

The public schools may not get any better - they may have to consolidate or close down entirely, but in the end I think that the welfare of individual students outweighs the well-being of the institution. For me the thorniest issue has been what happens to the people with the most disadvantages under a voucher system. Seems like that's a problem that'd have to be addressed before the idea of transferring control of the funding mechanism from the state to individual parents.

 

 

[ivan]

how do you consolidate schools in the sticks? or even really give them a private school option when there's not enough customers to warrant entering the market? what happens to neighborhood schools, especially for little kids, when you consolidate? private schools generally pay much less to teachers - are you really expecting that will improve their quality? are there examples in otehr industries of workers taking pay cuts and responding positively?

 

the kids who are getting the worst schools are suffering not so much b/c the schools suck, but because they're living in demilitarized zones w/ awful economics. take the d.c. example - they've just finished a big experiment w/ vouchers and it didn't do a damn thing towards improving kk's vaunted ROI

[rbw1966]

the kids who are getting the worst schools are suffering not so much b/c the schools suck, but because they're living in demilitarized zones w/ awful economics.

 

Part of that metric is the fact that public schools in good neighborhoods have wealthier "foundations" that lend support. Just compare my alma mater (Roosevelt High School in what would qualify at the time as Portlands ghetto) to a high school in a wealthier neighborhood (Lincoln) and they are worlds apart in curriculum, quality of environment, equipment, etc. Are these schools even "public" anymore? More like publicly subsidized private schools.

 

By the way, has there ever been a time when people haven't bitched about schools?

[ivan]

Article regarding GAO Report on D.C. Voucher System

[ivan]

By the way, has there ever been a time when people haven't bitched about schools?

or better, didn't call for this kinda thing to be done to their awful teachers (for making them question god too there, kk!)?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

By the way, has there ever been a time when people haven't bitched about schools?

 

we spend more capita on students with worse results compared to most of the industrialized nations of the world. there's something real to complain about here.

 

 

 

 

[JayB]

how do you consolidate schools in the sticks? or even really give them a private school option when there's not enough customers to warrant entering the market? what happens to neighborhood schools, especially for little kids, when you consolidate? private schools generally pay much less to teachers - are you really expecting that will improve their quality? are there examples in otehr industries of workers taking pay cuts and responding positively?

 

the kids who are getting the worst schools are suffering not so much b/c the schools suck, but because they're living in demilitarized zones w/ awful economics. take the d.c. example - they've just finished a big experiment w/ vouchers and it didn't do a damn thing towards improving kk's vaunted ROI

 

Seems like most of the data suggests that the schools that perform the worst aren't schools in the sticks, but schools in highly urbanized areas catering to kids with low incomes, and parents that are unable or unwilling to make a personal contribution to their children's education at best - and who are active detriments at worst. Rural and suburban schools, and urban schools in area's that are relatively prosperous seem to be doing a fairly good job, so I suspect that the factors that you cite won't consign many kids outside of urban war-zones to a life spent trapped in the underclass.

 

I don't think that limitations on the voucher model in the sticks is really and effective argument for prohibiting it in those places where it could do some good. I didn't read the study mentioned in the link, but if this is the most damning finding:

 

"A voucher program designed to send low-income children in the District to better-performing private schools has allowed some students to take classes in unsuitable learning environments and from teachers without bachelor's degrees, according to a government report."

 

Then I suspect that the students and there families are prepared to brave such hazards to their well being, when you consider the alternative awaiting them elsewhere. Looks like the parents generally agree:

 

"The report also says that the fund had high turnover and weak internal controls for handling the federal grant money. It attributed those issues to a rapid three-year expansion because of high parent demand.

 

Cork said yesterday that the nonprofit program has improved operations. One example cited was shifting from paper invoices to an electronic system.

 

A report in May from the Georgetown University Public Policy Institute showed that of 100 parents and students surveyed, most were satisfied with the program, and about 90 percent said they would remain at least another year."

 

Here's more on the DC schools from the same paper:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/interactives/dcschools/

 

I don't think that any system will be a panacea, but trapping the poorest kids in the worst schools looks just doesn't seem fair.

 

"

[sexual_chocolate]

By the way, has there ever been a time when people haven't bitched about schools?

 

we spend more capita on students with worse results compared to most of the industrialized nations of the world. there's something real to complain about here.

 

 

 

and "most of the industrialized nations of the world" pay their teachers less, along with having a private school system?

 

hey, it's another sunny day and the birds are singing!

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

hey, it's another sunny day and the birds are singing!

 

how can you tell... with your head so far up your...

 

[sexual_chocolate]

sheesh, you are a bitter one! i thought russkies were morose, but not aggressive?

[Mal_Con]

It is a mistake to say that private schools pay their teachers much less than public. This may have been true with Catholic schools long ago when they used nuns and volunteers. The elite private schools in the Seattle area in fact pay much more that public schools and have higher standards.

[ivan]

The elite private schools in the Seattle area in fact pay much more that public schools and have higher standards.

hey, there you go - higher standards -> higher pay. but most private schools aren't elite, and they pay less.

 

uh, SC - did you sleep through your russian history classes? when they weren't busy fucking their lifestock or killing their children, they were busy making war on all their neighbors - the vikings and mongols were excellent teachers.