Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Public School Teachers Choose Private Schools...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 09:05 AM
Original message
Public School Teachers Choose Private Schools...
... for their own children.

More than 25 percent of public school teachers in Washington and Baltimore send their children to private schools, a new study reports.

Nationwide, public school teachers are almost twice as likely as other parents to choose private schools for their own children, the study by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute found. More than 1 in 5 public school teachers said their children attend private schools.

In Washington (28 percent), Baltimore (35 percent) and 16 other major cities, the figure is more than 1 in 4. In some cities, nearly half of the children of public school teachers have abandoned public schools...


snip

Michael Pons, spokesman for the National Education Association, the 2.7-million-member public school union, declined a request for comment on the study's findings. The American Federation of Teachers also declined to comment.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040922-122847-5968r.htm

Can someone explain to this long time Democrat and mother of 3 why public schools are good enough for those who cannot afford to send their children to private, yet not quite good enough for those who insist that public education is the answer?

Flame away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
UpsideDownFlag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
1. that's because they know that the public school system is failing. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Public education isn't failing...it's being choked to death...
...by RWingers who want to make a PROFIT on teaching our children fundamentalist dogma.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UpsideDownFlag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. ...ok. so its failing to teach properly. I didn't say it was its own
fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. No it isn't. Most public schools do a good job.
Test scores and parent satisfaction surveys bear that out.

Why are DUers piling on with the right wing to bash our public schools and PS teachers who do a valiant job for lousy pay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Because public schools ARE FAILING OUR KIDS!
The blame cannot be placed solely at the feet of our public schools, but the fact that so many public school teachers prefer to send their own children to private schools is telling.

Why MUST the answer be public schools with public tax dollars? Does it matter where the money is spent, as long as it is spent on a quality education?

I personally feel that the African American community is being taken advantage of to a degree by the Democratic Party. We are expected to show fealty and vote Democrat each election, but one of the biggest issues affecting our community is our childrens education. Our at risk children need a quality education, regardless of whether it is public or private. But apparently, we AA's don't show the financial support that the teachers unions do, so as far as quality educationm for our kids go, our concerns fall upon deaf ears. But we are expected to vote Democrat.

The fact is, many of us cannot afford to send our kids to a private school, but WOULD find a way if we could utilize the funds spent to send our children to failing public schools. Many of our churches and community organizations would provide matching funds to help those in need.

It isn't about jumping on with the right wing. It is about educating our at risk children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dorian Gray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Public Schools.
Hey, I would send my kids to public schools in the area where I grew up! Suburban, good schools, and great teachers. (For the most part!)

However, I now live in New York City. Unless my kids got into one of the "testing" schools (ie Stuyvesant), they are going to private schools. It's not fair, but it's a reality. I can afford decent schools, and I will not send my kids to the Public School System. (I live in Park Slope, Brooklyn. John Jay High School here has one of the highest drop-out rates in the country, and one of the lowest rates for kids who go on to higher education.)

Does that make me a bad person that I want better for my children? I don't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. And you just aptly summed up the problem with public education
The problem isn't that public education, by and large, is failing. The problem is that it is failing those who have fewer advantages (or more disadvantages, depending on how you look at it) to start with.

This isn't the fault of the teachers -- it's primarily the fault of middle-to-upper class suburban parents who refuse to allow their tax dollars to subsidize public education in inner-city districts, and the politicians who have either cultivated this attitude of selfishness or have been too cowardly to go against it.

I know about these kinds of people because I live all around them, in Westchester County, NY.

WRT teachers, with the way that public schools are funded (and salaries paid out), inner-city schools inevitably get only teachers from two ends of the spectrum. They get those who are dedicated and stay there because they want to make a difference, and they get those who shouldn't be in a classroom and are essentially dumped on the lower-paying systems.

When my wife taught in The Bronx her first two years, it nearly killed her desire to teach. She got absolutely no support from the administration, and has told me about how other teachers would literally end up in tears on an almost daily basis. Then, she took a job in an affluent part of Rockland County (NYC suburbs) in which she got a nearly $15,000 annual raise along with an infinitely more positive working environment. Given these basic inequities just WRT how teachers are compensated, is it any wonder why the schools who desperately need the BEST teachers are currently getting the WORST?

It's not tragic -- it's criminal. It's a crime against future generations that a country with as much wealth as ours can so blithely write off entire demographics just because they aren't willing to spend the money required to give them the opportunities that kids in the suburbs take for granted.

Now, I can understand the initial poster's frustration and tendency to look at the problem from her point of view. Hell, if I were in her shoes, I'd probably be looking at it from her point of view as well. But the fact is that the teachers in question are NOT necessarily the enemy here. They're just parents looking for the best option for their kids, as any other parents would be. The real problem is the complete lack of political will to truly deal with these discrepancies. I wish I had an easy answer for how to fix it, but unfortunately I don't. The problem won't be fixed until a wealthy parent in Scarsdale, NY views the investment in his neighbor's children's education as being no more nor less valuable than the investment in education for a child in the South Bronx or Harlem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pstokely Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. apathetic parents is another problem with inner city schools
and in many suburban schools
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudestchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. yes
involved parents can alter a school's performance in drastic ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redleg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #25
39. Excellent commentary.
Thanks for taking the time to write that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #22
52. It doesn't make you bad...
...until you start trying to de-fund public schools with voucher scams.

You want private school? YOU pay for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #17
50. Nonsense.
People of color in poor communities pay much less in property taxes (if anything) than their wealthy counterparts - so why should you complain about them being poorly served, unless you are a wealthy person who doesn't like his tax burden?

Making this about blacks is yet another right-wing scam job - and you obviously know that.

Just as vouchers are a right-wing scam to de-fund the public schools. No poor person can afford private school with a voucher, so it works out to be a present for rich people who can already afford it.

Anway, here's some pizza for you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2Design Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. exactly and it wants the public to believe getting rid of unions is
best for schools so they can pay teachers 7-10 dollars an hour and have some top people make all the money like every where esle in our society
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democratreformed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #5
16. The top people already make all the money
Administrator salaries are generally 2-3x the highest possible teacher salary. At least it was in the district I worked in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
callous taoboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #3
14. Thank you, Q!
As teacher I can vouch for what you are saying. We have 980 students in our school, and only a tiny percentage of the parent surveys come back to us with negative comments. We are doing the best that we can with the tools we have to work with. I will never teach at a private school because I still believe in public education.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #14
69. Yes!
I teach at an inner city school, and the teachers with kids at my school actually request aplace for their own children at the school!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
15. Absolutely! Bush is killing the schools

He is putting the final nail in the coffin.
Millions of children are left behind!

I have been an educator and it is shameful what has happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicvortex20 Donating Member (253 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
74. Actually, public education spending hasnt been higher...
At least according to government stats... Im not a fan of bush, but theirs no denying there has been a spike in spending in recent years. This is why a lot of conservatives are pissed at bush.

http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/index.html

Especially telling is #4


The federal share of K-12 spending has risen very quickly, particularly in recent years.

In 1990-91, the federal share of total K-12 spending was just 5.7 percent. Since that time, it has risen by more than one-third to 8.2 percent. Further, the historic federal funding increases since 2001 are only now reaching the classroom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. No it isn't.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
2. Inner-city school discipline - if you can afford you try for better- but
public will NOT pay taxes that would equal private school tuition (vouchers pay only a small percentage of tuition - so they are gift to those who can already afford private - the "more rich" than average in the area) - so schools can not afford structure that provides more safety and must rely on kids family to backup - and lead - on discipline.

This often doesn't happen.

The amusing thing from the report you posted is that they do not give actual numbers - just percentage of group - as they try to hide the fact that vouchers are yet one more give away to the rich.

School choice WITHIN the public school system makes a lot of sense.

Include private schools, and we give a token to Catholic folks, and a bundle to the rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TN al Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
6. Consider this...
...If a public school teacher were to send their child to the same district in which they teach they wcould be forced into a position where they have to advocate for their child by demanding from their boss or co-workers. They may just want to avoid that potential conflict. This conflict happened to me where in the course of advocating for my child his principal called my principal to complain about my behavior in the meetings. It continued until I complained to the union. After that he never came to any more meetings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
7. Have you ever spent time in an inner-city public school?
If you were a parent who knew first-hand than the schools in which you teach were overcrowded, dilapidated structures -- would you want to send your kids there? If you were a parent who knew first-hand that the schools in which you teach don't have enough textbooks to give one to each student -- and the ones that you do have are 15-20 years old -- would you want to send your kids there? If you were a parent who knew first-hand that the schools in which you teach don't even have lab facilities for high school science classes, would you want to send your kids there?

You're misplacing your blame in this instance (as it quite often is) toward the teachers. The problem lies not in what an individual teacher decides to do in their role as parent. The problem lies in the fact that politicians and citizens have decided repeatedly over the past 4-5 decades to refuse to provide poorer districts -- especially those serving inner-city, minority populations -- with anywhere close to the same resources that more affluent, suburban, largely white school districts are given.

I'm studying to switch over to teaching, and my wife is a teacher. If I happened to teach in NYC public schools, I can readily say that I would NOT want to send my kids there. I don't say that because I don't believe in public education -- rather, I say that simply because I would recognize, as a parent, that the resources simply are not provided in the NYC public school system for a child to get a public education anywhere near the same level as a child lucky enough to grow up in Chappaqua or Scarsdale.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. My Wife's A Teacher Too, And. . .
. . .when i was in college, i did some teaching assitance in an inner city school. It was a catholic university, and in lieu of religion classes we could take philosophy, as long as one year we did community service as outreach.

I spent 2 hours, 2 days a week in an inner city school. Mostly, i took the smart kids out in the hall and kept them interested playing chess, or teaching them some new math tricks, or playing youth Jeopardy. Stuff like that. Then, the teacher could focus on the bulk of the students and really help those that were falling behind, without boring the more clever children. But, the building was a mess. The books were outdated, as you said.

My wife teaches at-risk kids in specific fields that are pulled out of various 4th and 5th grade classrooms. (One kid may be 2 years below grade level in reading, but is fine in math and science. So, she just works on reading and spelling with kids like that.) Her facilities are not inner-city bad, but there "old school building" bad and it is overcrowded. The books are at least close to current as well.

But, if we had school age kids, we would make whatever sacrifice we had to make to send our kids to private school. I still wouldn't support vouchers, but i would spend my OWN money on private school. The gov't really doesn't care about these kids. Even local governments.
The Professor

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. No kidding. DC is NOT a typical area.
I was, however, shocked to read that an even higher percentage of PS teacher here in San Francisco send their kids to private schools. Shocked, because most of the schools here are actually pretty decent.

My guess is that they are conservative and don't want their kids exposed to the "indoctrination" that's done in SF schools (tolerance for gays, education about HIV, recycling, etc. is all emphasized more than in most communities) I can't figure any other reason, since the schools are prretty good.

I'm perfectly happy with my kids being "indoctrinated", personally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
55. My wife and I are former
public school teachers.

We send our kid to private school.

The reasons why have nothing to do with the age or dilapability standards of the buildings, or the age of the textbooks. Those things never even entered into the equation.

It's what's going in in the classrooms, not when the classrooms were last painted that matters to us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #55
61. so, what's going on in those classrooms
and why?

I see things going on in classrooms every day - I have to implement things in my *own* classroom every day - that I find sorely lacking. I do it, we all do it, because we have to.

Want vouchers? When public money starts being spent in earnest on private education, there will be the same oversight by the same people who make me implement the same lame programs in my public school classroom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zing Zing Zingbah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #55
62. Exactly
I taught in an inner city school last year. I would do anything possible to avoid sending my child to a school like that. The building was old. The books were old too and there weren't enough of them, but that's not why I wouldn't send my son there. The worst part was that most of the students were very poorly behaved. It was absolutely astonishing how badly behaved these kids were. I had never witnessed such behavior from any person in my life before, and I attended public school from kindergarten up to 12th grade. Many of the kids in my classes of 30+ students had spent some time in a juvenile detention facility. Most of the girls had a kid already. Some more than one. The girls all seemed to think having baby made them women. However, some of them behaved very badly in class. Their behavior was similar to that of a mischievous toddler. They were incredibly disrespectful and rude. There was no real way to actually teach and also maintain order. The administration was so overwhelmed with dealing with these bad kids, that often the kids would face no real consequences for their misbehavior.

These kids were about six years behind were they should be in their education. I felt very badly for the few students who wanted to be challenged and wanted to learn because their peers weren't going to allow that to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. ok, then.
I felt very badly for the few students who wanted to be challenged and wanted to learn because their peers weren't going to allow that to happen.

How is that going to change in a private school?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zing Zing Zingbah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. I'm not advocating private schools...
I'm saying I can relate to why some teachers would not want to send there kids to a public inner city school. Sometimes private schools can just as bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zing Zing Zingbah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. BTW: talking to the parents was a very ineffective resolution.
None of those kids seemed to listen to their parents in the first place. Parental involvement in the school was very low.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. sounds like my school now.
Again, what changes in a private school setting?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Star Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #66
71. What changes in a private school setting?
Well, for one thing, the private schools can kick out any kid who doesn't live up to their expectations. A kid misbehaves too many times in class? They're gone. A kid doesn't finish their assignments? They're gone. A kid is falling behind academically? They're gone. Because of this, parents of students attending private schools are more likely to be involved in holding their child accountable. Those parents are also paying their own money for their child to attend the school, so they put even more pressure on the kid to perform.

Public school districts want their "statistics" to look good. That means low referrals, low drop-out rates, high retention. Because of this need to keep the numbers good, the schools refuse to get rid of misbehaving students. In many classes, no one is learning because the teacher is constantly trying to deal with students who are not held accountable for anything. Teachers are not considered "good teachers" if they are writing too many referrals for misbehaviour in their classrooms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #71
73. Precisely.
Well, for one thing, the private schools can kick out any kid who doesn't live up to their expectations.

Yup. Why don't we just ditch the idea of educating every American child and have done with it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
recidivist Donating Member (963 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #73
90. Why don't we bring back the idea ....
... that public schools can discipline effectively and suspend or expel chronic bad actors? If that leads to remedial institutions with intensive discipline for the problem kids, that's ok.

How about bringing back ability grouping? Or perhaps we shouldn't be mainstreaming learning disabled, behaviorally challenged, and/or outright retarded kids as much as we do now?

How about more vocational tracks and an early-out certificate at 16 for kids headed to the trades. Don't misunderstand me -- I'm all for a liberal education and challenging all students to pursue an academic curriculum as far as their talents and interests carry them. But the reality is that a lot of kids have dropped out intellectually by middle school.

Most private schools are NOT academically selective. The neighborhood parochial school my daughter attends certainly is not. For the most part, private and parochial schools look a lot like the small town, southern Indiana public schools I attended 45 years ago. The public schools moved off in new directions while the little Catholic school down the street just kept on doing the same old thing.

Guess what? The same old thing works. But the public schools in too many places seem institutionally incapable of restoring the tried and true standards and practices. It's not money -- on average, public schools are better funded than private ones. Basing the comparison on the Sidwell Friends of the world is a dodge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #90
91. thoughts.
that public schools can discipline effectively and suspend or expel chronic bad actors? If that leads to remedial institutions with intensive discipline for the problem kids, that's ok.

I guess that depends, largely, on what you have in mind for effective discipline. Corporal punishment again? The kids I have get roughed up all the time at home, and it doesn't seem to have done a lot of them much good in terms of discipline.

re: remedial institutions with intensive discipline - you're essentially throwing out three decades worth of data and reforms concerning special ed children. It's a fast track to prison for many.

How about bringing back ability grouping? Or perhaps we shouldn't be mainstreaming learning disabled, behaviorally challenged, and/or outright retarded kids as much as we do now?

Federal law requires that children with special needs be educated in the "least restrictive environment", which basically means that they have to be in general ed as long as they are able to learn there without *significantly* disrupting the learning of other students. What this means these days isn't so much mainstreaming as what's called "inclusion", in which a special ed teacher will often go with a child or group of children into a general ed classroom to assist. It's a difficult model to put into practice, but a worthwhile one I think.

My kids also attend music, art, etc. classes in general education, as do our mildly and (I think) moderately intellectually disabled kids. Least restrictive environment.

But the reality is that a lot of kids have dropped out intellectually by middle school.

That's usually because we've given up on them and resorted to shouting. Or to exiling them to the damp corner of the basement.

Most private schools are NOT academically selective.

Horse hockey. I taught in private schools in Atlanta for five years and subbed in quite a few more. Maybe parochial schools are different, but *every* private school, religious and secular, with which I have had any contact is selective. Some more than others (and the ones that were less so were desperate for students and tuition money...and completely unprepared to deal with children with special needs), but they all are.

Guess what? The same old thing works.

For whom? We used to put the kids I see now in special ed in institutions (if they were lucky) where they were abused and taught nothing. I suppose that "worked", in its way.

By the by, you know who set the ball rolling to change that? Jack Kennedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #71
76. I must concur...
I am of the belief that there is a certain percentage of parents who care MORE about their childs success than others. (I see it every day in our neighborhood) It is those parents who want to send their money (and their kids) to private schools.

Is that to say that public school parents don't care about their kids educational success? NO. However, if a parent is concerned enough about their kids educational success that they will jump through various hoops (becoming more involved, out-of-pocket tuition, etc.) to see it through, why shouldn't their tax dollars be utilized to ensure that end?

There IS a larger percentage of parents who give a shit (more involved financially and personally) in private schools than public.

I don't have the money. And I care as much about my kids as do the Clintons for their daughter. Their daughter went to some spendy Quaker prep school. Mine don't. Yet they extol the virtues of public schooling.

Hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 03:29 AM
Response to Reply #76
84. You've got a nerve, calling anyone hypocrite...
...coming in here, posing as a democrat...

but what the hell, I'll play along, in spite of your gratuitous Clinton-bashing.

I have NO money, and i do my damndest to help my kid in public school with his homework, etc, and I pay for his Japanese school on Saturdays. But there is no way that my wife and I could, on meager wages in an expensive city like San Francisco, afford to be as "involved:" in our kids' education as a Nob Hill mom with a maid, day car for the smaller kids, and time to spare. My wife and I are constantly racing the clock, just to do the bare minimum - but sanctimonious posts like yours would imply that we are "less concerned: about our kids' education.

Well, I'll tell you, I wouldn't put my kids into private school unless I absolutely had to because I want them exposed to all kinds - all walks of life, not just white Christian kids.

Besides, if you look at the stats, test scores for private school students are only ever so slightly higher than those of public school kids, and that's including the fact that all poor kids are excluded from the private school stats.

This quote of yours is especially offensive:

"There IS a larger percentage of parents who give a shit (more involved financially and personally) in private schools than public."

Like you would know. That's as ignorant as the Bush quote when he said "Just because someone is poor doesn't mean he's a killer."

But I'm sure YOU wouldn't understand how someone would take offense at that...



For you...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murielm99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 04:32 AM
Response to Reply #76
88. "Yet they extol the virtues of public schooling"
If you had half a brain you would know why they sent Chelsea to the Sidwell Friends School.

"I understood the disappointment felt by advocates of public education when we chose Sidwell Friends, a private Quaker school, particularly after Chelsea had attended public schools in Arkansas. But the decision for Bill and me rested on one fact: Private schools were private property, hence off-limits to the news media. Public schools are not. The last thing we wanted was the television cameras and news reporters following our daughter throughout the school day, as they had when President Carter's daughter Amy, attended public school."

From Living History, by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

I am in a good mood so far. But if I see any more hypocritical, gratuitious Clinton-bashing, I will alert on your bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
recidivist Donating Member (963 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #88
92. Re: Chelsea and Sidwell. You'd better take Hillary with a grain of salt.
I entirely approve of Bill and Hillary Clinton sending Chelsea to Sidwell Friends. Sidwell is outstanding. I wish we could afford it for our kids (assuming they could test into it). It is among the most academically selective of the DC area private schools as well as one of the pricier ones, and Chelsea was the kind of bright young kid who could derive maximum benefit from the high powered prep school thing. Bill and Hillary did the best thing for their child, and I would not second guess them for a moment.

But it is nonsense for Hillary to try to diffuse criticism by saying they did it because they didn't want Peter Jennings hanging around the hallways. Public schools are not open access. In DC, they're practically fortified (against the students, which is a primary reason Bill and Hillary didn't want Chelsea there). Reporters wanting to come in would have to make arrangements in the office, just as they would at a private school. The press might have done an occasional feature on the novelty of a big-time pol's kid in a public school -- the Clintons are hardly alone in having gone private; NONE of our elite figures patronize DC public schools -- but Chelsea would have been left alone.

The Clintons avoided DC public schools because they're an academic disaster area, and unsafe to boot. These are exactly the same reason the middle class has abandoned them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pax Argent Donating Member (350 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #71
78. I've never understood this talking point
"Those parents are also paying their own money for their child to attend the school, so they put even more pressure on the kid to perform."

Are you saying that people will get involved where money is concerned because the love for their children is just not enough to motivate them? While I am not one of the dedicated educators currently posting on this thread (and I thank you all for your service), I make it a point to go over my sons homework and routinely chase him around behind his school performance BECAUSE I LOVE HIM!

The thought of money dictating this behaviour is just sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #62
70. When we were visiting each private school in town,
we would meet some administrator.

Every time there was a changing of the periods (bells, buzzers, or noiceless), I would excuse myself and stand in the hall.

One school was eliminated within a minute as the kids came running down the halls hooting and hollering. That was how the public school was where I taught. That's not the atmosphere I wanted for my kid.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
9. That's not all that high considering...
That DC has some pretty bad schools and a very high crime rate.

I wouldn't consider that as an indictment of public schools at all. That 75% choose public schools in an area like that is not that bad at all.

Surveys consistently show that the majority of people thing that "public schools are failing."

The same surveys show that the VAST MAJORITY of parents are VERY SATISFIED with their OWN child'd public school.

In other words, the public schools are still mostly doing a very good job, but the right-wing propaganda attacks on public schooling has been very efffective in brainwashing people.

So why are you carrying the right's water?

You are free to put your kid in private school, so what are you here complaining about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
12. The "Washington Times"--as in Rev. Moon's Washington Times?
My sister-in-law teaches in a private school. Her children attended public schools. They've both completed college now; one went on for her Master's, the other is considering it.

Anybody who wants to send their kids to a private school is quite welcome to do so. However, this long time Democrat & non-mother would prefer my taxes go to support the public schools--not vouchers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. So you support failure... as long as it supports public schools?
I support a quality education, regardless of who teaches my children. I don't care if little green men teach my kids, quite honestly.

As I wrote in an earlier post, it is the feeling of this African American woman that the Democratic Party is playing favorites with the teachers unions, while they fully expect the AA community to show continued fealty at the voting booth.

I cannot afford to send my children to private schools. My financial situation dictates that I send them to public schools. This Democrat wants to know why many public school teachers and Democratic Party leaders do not put their most precious possessions in public schools the way I am forced to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrWeird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Private schools really aren't any better.
They only appear better on paper because they don't count the poor performing students. The undesirables are kicked out. In the past few years the "charter schools" have performed more poorly on standardized exams then public schools. Anybody who's not a complete twit knows this charter school crap is a scam along the lines of "No Child Left Behind."

Democrats aren't "expecting African Americans to show fealty." They are the Democratic party. They vote 90%+ democrating because, like "J.C. Watt's" father said, "an African American voting Republican is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders."

Why do your posts come off sounding like something direct from Rush Limbaugh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. So, what do they say at the School Board meetings....
When you go to protest? And what about the other members of the PTO (it was the PTA in my day)?

What's your school district, by the way? And are you against all unions?

Where are the real statistics about public school teachers sending their kids to private schools--from something better than the moonie times?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GettysbergII Donating Member (664 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #18
82. I'm a public school teacher and my child goes to a public school
I'm a white male and I've taught for 17 years at the same 90% poverty rate 100% African American public school on Chicago's southside. (Since this is the sole experience I have as an educator this is all I can speak of with any authority. Whats right or wrong with the rest of the public education system is beyond my ken.) The predominately African-American principal and staff at my school bust our butts to teach the children there and while our test scores don't keep us off the NCLB hit list, the learning atmosphere there is a good as any public school you'll find. The surrounding community knows this and many of our students come from other attendence areas and in fact Chicago Public Schools has told us several times that our school has the highest attendence pressure in the area. Certainly none of us there is a perfect teacher and we need to strive to do better but the simple fact of the matter is that by the time we get many of our children they are already behind the eight ball. For instance when I was a classroom teacher (I'm currently the computer lab teacher and tech coordinator) my attendance book would often have the Department of Family Services listed at the Parent/Guardian for near half my students. And that's the bottom line here, the biggest single indicator of a child's success is the quality of his parents. If you don't believe that because you buy the 'talking points' of 20 years of right-wing propaganda (see the link below) against public education that has effectively poisoned the well then just ask yourself this simple question, "Has my child become who he/she is at this moment more because of my nurturing or because of the nurturing of my child's teachers?". In general good parents will find a way to take whatever lemons are tossed at their children and make lemonade out of them. And the solid parents of children at our school (and there are alot of solid parents there) do have a lot of lemons to deal with both at school and in the community at large. I do believe that the roots of this dilemma predate the civil war but its been aggravated by 140 years of patronizing abuse from the white establishment, some times well intentioned but more often not. I believe the only way out of this dilemma for these 'lost children' is for Joe Taxpayer to reach into his pocket and for one whole generation:

1) Foot the bill for world class all day preschool and all day kindergarten for these children at risk with a wide variety of field trips.

2) Cut the class size down drastically for children at risk at least throughout the primary grades.

3) Rebuild the 20% of public school that the government reports need to be rebuilt and the majority of which are in poverty areas.

4) Provide whatever resources and incentives are necessay to give intensive parental training to the parents/guardians of children at risk.

5) A personal laptop computer for every kid at risk beginning in the primary grades.

Do this for a good quarter of a century straight and there might be something resembling a level playing field. You can think of this proposal as a charter school initiative or a public school initiative or a combination of both. You can think of this proposal as just reparations or just as the right thing to do. But anyway you cut it the fact is that until this problem is addressed and solved our nation will never truly be healthy and whole. Certainly if we can afford to budget for 40% of the world's entire military spending for defense we can afford this much more modest proposal. Of course the main reason this will never happen is because there's just too damn much money to be made off of poverty.

http://www.teacherprofessionalism.com/UnderstandingtheOpposition.html#Who%20is%20

My child goes to the local public school in the stable successfully integrated middleclass neighborhood I live in. While the neighborhood is over 50 % white the ethnic make up of my daughters school is 17% white, 80 percent African-American, and the remaining 3% Latino, Asian and 'Other'. The poverty rate is 25% as it draws from outside neighborhoods. The achievement there is well above the national norms and my daughter year in and year out consistently scores on the ITBS and IGAP tests above the 95 percentile ranking in both reading and math. The question is of course why are the majority of the white families in my neighborhood not enrolling their children in our local public school. (By the way I don't think the majority of these families are teachers. At least all the teachers with children on our block are sending their kids to public school.)

Incidentally I have no problem with teacher accountability but only in conjunction with taxpayer accountability, parent accountability, politician accountability and ivory tower/think tank accountability of which I hear very little talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
20. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. DC? I'm not from Washington DC
I'm from Minneapolis, and our public schools are completely shit. My kids are condemned to atttend Minneapolis North if I am unable to find employment outside the Twin Cities.

Is it so hard for some Democrats to think outside of the usual box when it comes to education? The vast majority of parents (AA) in my Minneapolis neighborhood want vouchers for our kids. Sitting back and hoping for change is not helping my kids get their education. Yet "well meaning" government school advocates show up religiously at board meetings to express their support for our kids, but then keep stabbing us in the back when we demand vouchers or other programs to get our kids out of these horrid schools.

Rhetoric isn't helping us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #32
37. Vouchers. Do you really think that will work?
I mean, look at it this way:

You have 3 kids. What are the odds that your three kids are all going to get vouchers. Why should your kids get vouchers when other's children do not? With all due respect, what makes your kids so special?

Besides, what do vouchers really solve?

They take a few kids and put them in private schools. Good for them, bad for everyone else.

And its not like the kids whose parents pay to send them to a private school aren't going to know who is there on vouchers. I am guessing that kids on vouchers will probably be social outcasts, and will the the subject of endless harassment and ridicule.

If there is one thing the rich are good at, it is finding distinctions in class and how they are "better". And once they have been made aware of it, it will not go away.

The reason that these advocates are "stabbing you in the back" is because they know that vouchers will hurt society more than it can help.

Here are a few reasons that private schools do better than public schools:

Private schools are selective. That means they can take in whoever they want. So, why be surprised that private schools have better average test scores than public schools?

Private schools have very high graduation rates and college acceptance rates. This, again, is due to selectivity. First off, you aren't going to let your kids just drop out of high school if you are paying 5,000 a year. Second, most private school students know they will have access to a college education, and are focused on this goal. This is not to say that public school students with college plans are not focused. All it means is that many people who go to public schools are lacking either the means, the desire, or both, to go to college.

Public schools don't have such high average test scores because they admit everyone and everyone takes the tests.

And, pay attention because this is where the issue of vouchers comes in:

Private schools have a very low, very idealized teacher-student ratio. That means that there is no concern of overcrowding, and each student can get all the individual attention they need.

However, once people start getting vouchers to go to private schools, overcrowding will become an issue there.


The very idea of vouchers is so Republican and so Bush that I am surprised that a "democrat" such as yourself would have so willingly bought into it. Sure, vouchers sound like a nice idea in the short term (like most of Smirk's policies) but they are essentially poorly researched, poorly funded, poorly planned ideas that use lies and exaggerations to fill in the holes in policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #32
86. Condemned to attend Minneapolis North?
Uh, there is complete public school choice in Minnesota.

You could apply to get your child into the International Baccalaureate Program at South, for example, and give them an education equal to that found in European PUBLIC schools.

And YOU need to go to the board meetings yourself, not rely on "community leaders."

By the way, did YOU vote in the school board primary last week? I did, even though I don't have any children and was scheduled to leave for Japan the next day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrWeird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. LOL.
I wonder her opinion on what should be done with mentally handicapped children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hong Kong Cavalier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #27
40. I noticed that, too
And my first thought when I read the original post was "geez, not this shit again!"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #21
36. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #36
42. Well said
LOL.

But seriously. That is the biggest problem with vouchers. Its a Republican, "Me first, and to hell with everyone else" approach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
24. I don't know if DC and Baltimore are the best examples
To be quite honest if you can afford to send your kids to a private school and you send them to a DC public school, Social Services should pay you a visit. (Of course, in DC, Social Services is just as bad as the schools, but what are you gonna do?) It's not so much the lack of learning as the danger you would be exposing them to in the wrong school.

This is really a short-term/long-term discussion. In the short-term, public schools in most inner cities are a disaster. Why should anyone expose their kids to it if they don't have to? But, in the long-term, it's in everyone's best interest to fix the schools.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Wally Donating Member (974 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
31. The worst of it is.....
The DC government has a higher per pupil speanding than the VA and MD suburbs. You need to clean house beginning with the criminals who are in charge of school construction and maintenance in DC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeahMira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #24
43. But why are DC schools so bad?
To be quite honest if you can afford to send your kids to a private school and you send them to a DC public school, Social Services should pay you a visit.

Isn't that the point? There shouldn't be pockets of poverty where no child can get a good education. No matter where a child lives with his family, the school he attends should be of the same quality as any other school in the nation.

Part of the problem does come from parents... and from teachers... because they aren't badgering their representatives for more money to be spent on their schools.

Part of it also comes from the size of the schools themselves. Private schools have ten or fifteen students in each classroom, and maybe 400 students in the entire school. In order to consolidate and not duplicate resources, the public schools have become huge learning factories where teachers only know their own thirty students and the students don't even know one another all that well. Kids get lost and slip through the cracks in these huge places, whether they want to or not.

Finally, study after study has come up with the same results. Students is private schools do not achieve any better than students in public schools. In fact, they come up almost identical... in behavior as well as academics... except for one factor. Parent satisfaction. Private school parents are more satisfied with the education their children are getting... even though objectively it is no different from the education the public school offers.

My own conclusion is that someone out there has latched on to an issue and is playing one group of parents against another and playing every group of parents for fools.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #43
54. I don't think money is the issue in DC
Edited on Thu Sep-23-04 04:15 PM by theboss
You could spend a million dollars a student in certain parts of DC and he or she is still going to come from a one-parent or no-parent home and have a disgustingly high chance of either getting killed, arrested, or having a child before he or she is 18.

It also doesn't help matters that DC Public Schools is where Marion Barry sent the majority of his lackeys during his reign here so it is filled to the brim with overpaid, uncaring administrators who are generally unqualified or remarkably corrupt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #43
56. Private schools have 10-15 kids per class?
My kid's gone for four years now to the most expensive private school in town. We also visited each of the other three.

We've never seen anything close to 10-15 kids per class. I can't imagine what one of those schools would cost. Luckily there are none like that in my town, because we' probably be paying for it if there was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
recidivist Donating Member (963 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #56
93. Me too, boss.
Edited on Fri Sep-24-04 08:09 PM by recidivist
There are 25 kids in my daughter's first grade class in the local parochial school. The student-teacher ratio in DC public schools was 12-1 the last time I saw the number. DC public schools also have superior physical facilities, at least as compared to the universally old and cramped Catholic schools, though maintenance is a problem in some places. DC public schools are also much better funded on a per-student basis.

Of course, in the Catholic school, discipline is firm. Most of the kids have two parents at home. (We do have a couple of divorced parents and even some gay parents.) The curriculum is traditional. It reminds me of the public schools I grew up with, except as a late boomer, I had about 35 kids in my classes. DC public schools could do the same, but they won't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zing Zing Zingbah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #24
68. I agree.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democratreformed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
29. Just one point... some people send their children to private schools for
Edited on Thu Sep-23-04 01:50 PM by democratreformed
reasons other than the quality of education. Some ppl. do it for religious reasons. Some do it for safety reasons. There are a variety of reasons.

Myself - I send my son to a very tiny private school for educational reasons - and I am lucky enough to be able to afford the $120/month tuition. It is very tiny. Nineteen students total (K - 12). He gets lots of one on one help - which he needs. He has ADHD and is likely dyslexic as well.

He has been there four years (this is the fourth). We did public school first and he failed kindergarten - couldn't even write his own name at the end of the year. We sent him back to public school for his second year of kindergarten - only to have him placed in a classroom of 30 with a first year teacher. After three days, we decided to try the private school and it has been great.

He has never mentioned wanting to go back to public school until this year. He says he wants to go back so he can see his cousin every day (even though he's 4 years older). I told him that if he works really hard and improves his reading, we'll talk about it.

I knew this decision would have to be faced some day, but I sure was hoping for a couple more years.

Edited for spelling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudestchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
34. Kansas City Missouri
I live in a district which was under court ordered deseg control for more years than I can recall...Out of 50+ schools (district run & charters) only 8 made our state's Annual Yearly Progress in 2003-2004. My three young children attend one of those 8 schools.

The difference between my kids' school and so many others?
Parent Involvement.

Plain and simple, if parents don't (or can't)read to their children, help with homework, volunteer at the school, attend parent/teacher conferences, what kind of chance do those children stand?

I don't know what the solution is...I guess parents are going to be more involved if they have to fork over $1800-$4500 per year/ per child for private schools.

Public schools aren't just about getting the "best" for your own, but getting the best for all...under-educated people are more likely to become a drain on society...want to reduce welfare? provide a better future for the next generation thru education.

Sorry about the rant...I overheard a woman at the grocery talking about the "poor children being forced to attend public school"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chemteacher Donating Member (94 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #34
77. Parent involvement is essential..
I am EASILY the busiest teacher in my school on Back to School Night or at Parent/Teacher conferences. Why? Because I teach AP Chemistry and Honors Physics. My wife teaches kids with moderate learning disabilities. She spends most of those nights pretty much without seeing a lot of parents, even after hours on the phone extending invitations.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redleg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
38. I support the U.S.having the best damned public schools in the world.
We could and we should have the best public schools. Problem is, the wingers and christian fanatics want to undermine public education so that they can supplant it with their bible schools (notice I implied the private schools would be christian rather than muslim or jewish).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hong Kong Cavalier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
41. Your link goes to the Washington Times
And the study was done by a PRO-voucher "education institute"
I think your information is crap, personally. Of COURSE they're going to support vouchers with a "study" like this.
And the institute that did the study links to the American Enterprise Inst. and the Cato Inst. Nice try, but no dice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. The link in my signiture line goes to a pro-voucher web site
What difference does it make? I am for vouchers for at risk, low income students. Am am for ANYTHING that would increase the quality of education for these students. Who could be opposed to a quality education, regardless of who does the teaching?

The numbers on a simple study such as this could be easily verified by the NEA or the AFT. Why no comment from them? The Washington Times just reported the study. They didn't write it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hong Kong Cavalier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. No, the link to the study you posted goes to the Moonie Times.
Edited on Thu Sep-23-04 03:14 PM by DemXCGI
And the reason the NEA and the AFT didn't comment on it is if they did that, they would be giving credibility to a bunk study by an "institution" whose sole purpose is to dismantle the public school system.
THAT'S why they didn't respond.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO)
See my post #48, below, for a quick synopsis of their major funders (primarily Bradley and Olin Foundations).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #49
75. Quite honestly...
I don't care who funds the BAEO.

The public schools are a dismal failure in many, if not all major inner city areas. Wishing it away doesn't help. Throwing money at it doesn't help. (God knows!) Baseing the arguement agaisn't vouchers on the premise that "vouchers might not work" sells out the hopes of countless parents who want their kids to succeed.

I am pro-education. I am not pro-teachers union, anti-teachers union or teacher anything. I couldn't give a rip about public or private. I am PRO TEACHEE. Whatever works... and public schooling in our inner cities DOES NOT WORK.

This is something that the Democratic Party needs to come to grips with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Do you think that the WT solicited the NEA or AFT for comment?
Please.

The Washington Times is notoriously right-wing. It's owned by Rev. Sung Hyung Moon. The editorial page is edited by Tony Blankley.

The Washington Times may have just reported the study, but they also chose what to include in the article and what to reject.

As for your advocacy for a quality education, I don't think that anyone differing with you on this thread would say they DON'T believe that all kids should have a quality education. The problem lies in a short-term fix that makes the overall situation WORSE.

For instance, let's assume that vouchers become available for at-risk kids. Now, you have a flood of at-risk kids going to private schools. With the funding formulas touted for vouchers, that would mean that a fixed $-per-student would be taken from the public schools and funneled to the private schools for every child switching over.

Problem is, there are fixed school expenses that aren't subject to "per pupil" spending -- i.e. maintenance, electricity, heat, etc. So, since the funding per pupil will then decrease for the public schools, the students left in them will have even WORSE of an educational environment than they do now.

Furthermore, many people who put their kids in private schools do it so they can be away from all of the "dangers" that they think go along with sending their kids to the same schools as "at risk" kids. So, when all of these "at risk" kids are suddenly showing up in their private schools, what do you think these kids' parents are going to do? They're going to pull their kids out of the schools, further decreasing the funding base, and within a decade or less you'll be right back to where you started with regards to discrepancies in quality of education.

Except now, the schools are no longer under popular control to any degree. Now, they're under PRIVATE control. They're not subject to the same "standards" as public schools. They can do just about whatever they damned well please, without any real regard to the future of the children. And you can forget about sending your kids to a better private school at that time, because they will be priced out of the reach of vouchers.

IOW, you will probably end up with a much WORSE scenario through vouchers than you currently have, as unbelievable as it may seem right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hong Kong Cavalier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Thank you, IC
Couldn't have said it better myself.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #44
48. Funder's list for BAEO (link in your signature line)
http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?recipientID=2559

Bradley Foundation

Olin Foundation, which has significant links to:
- Heritage Foundation
- American Enterprise Institute
- Manhattan Institute
- Hoover Institute
(All in all, a "who's who" among RW think tanks!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #44
63. do you really think
that vouchers will cover the cost of private school education for all all-risk, poor kids in America? Even if they magically did, do you really think that the only thing missing in the education of at-risk children is a profit motive?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maestro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
51. As a teacher yet again
Edited on Thu Sep-23-04 03:46 PM by Maestro
I am here to say that, perhaps, in certain areas schools are failing because of inept management by school boards and ludricrous decisions made by superintendents and assistant superintendents, but all in all schools are doing well and teachers are to thank. No one else. We have dedicated our lives to teaching and improving the plight of many children. I work in an area with many inner-city kids even though it is a suburb of Dallas. Many of our children do not speak English when they enter school, but we prevail and they learn. We take what they have and we learn together.




If you're in an area with with poor schools, vouchers are not the answer. It is pipe-dream perpetuated by the right that privatization will fix all. Wrong!!!!!!

Here is a great editorial that gives a new perspective on why and it uses what is going on in Iraq as an example. It's great!

http://www.susanohanian.org/show_atrocities.html?id=3027

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
53. The "Thomas B. Fordham Institute" is just another Reich-Wing ...
Edited on Thu Sep-23-04 04:13 PM by TahitiNut
... disinformation mill. It's allied with AEI (American Enterprise Institute), the Hudson Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and other pseudo-"think-tanks" and part of the Conservative Union's collection of propaganda peddlers.

Chester E. Finn, Jr. is the head of both the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation ...

The well-traveled Chester Finn is one of the education policy gurus of the conservative movement. He currently (3/2000) is president of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, where he works in tandem with longtime collaborator Brunno V. Manno. The Thomas B. Fordham web site also states that Finn works at the law firm of Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur, which has offices in Dayton, Ohio and Hilton Head, South Carolina.

Finn is a also currently a John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute (he was formerly with the Hudson Institute 1998). Finn is a former Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education and a former legislative director for Senator Daniel P. Moynihan. He was also a founding partner and senior scholar with the Edison Project, the private company setup to operate public schools on a for-profit basis. Hudson and Bradley are both major proponents of "school choice," which would allow public education money to be funneled to groups like Edison. For a time, Edison was being considered for a possible contract with the Milwaukee Public Schools system.
http://www.mediatransparency.org/people/chester_finn.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Book Lover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #53
60. The report's authors are
"These results do not surprise most practicing teachers to whom we speak," say report authors Denis P. Doyle, founder of a school improvement company, SchoolNet Inc.; Brian Diepold, an economics graduate student at American University; and David A. DeSchryver, editor of the Doyle Report, an online education policy and technology journal.

So, let's see what they say about themselves:
SchoolNet’s co-founder and Chief Academic Officer is Denis P. Doyle, a nationally recognized leader in school reform research, writing and consulting. A prolific author, Doyle has co-authored three school reform books with CEOs including Winning the Brain Race with Xerox CEO David Kearns and Reinventing Education with IBM CEO Lou Gerstner and his most recent book is Raising the Standard, an action guide for school districts to set and meet challenging academic standards.

and from The Doyle Report's About Us page:
Denis Philip Doyle, founder and Chief Academic Officer of SchoolNet, is a nationally and internationally known education writer, lecturer and consultant. After earning his BA (‘62) and MA (‘64) in political theory at the University of California at Berkeley, he worked for the California Legislature where he was the architect of major education bills, including the Ryan Act, the major teacher licensing reform of the 1970s. Moving to Washington DC in 1972, he became Assistant Director of the US Office of Economic Opportunity, then assistant director of the National Institute of Education where he ran the nation’s two largest education demonstration projects, Education Voucher and Experimental Schools.

He has been associated with “think tanks” since 1980 -- Brookings, AEI, Heritage and Hudson Institute, where he is presently a non-resident Fellow. He has written numerous scholarly and popular articles including The Atlantic, The Public Interest, Change, Education Week and The Phi Delta Kappan. He has also published more than 150 “op eds” in the nation’s most prestigious newspapers: The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, and the Baltimore Sun.


OK, and what about this DeSchryver fellow?
David is the managing editor of www.thedoylereport.com (TDR) where he writes about education policy and the impact of technology in our schools. He received his J.D. from the George Washington National Law Center in 2003. David joined TDR after directing research at The Center for Education Reform. When he is not working, he’s training to qualify for the Hawaii Ironman Triathlon.


OK, whatever. And the economic student?
Well, a google on him turns up not much other than pages associated with this story. Guess that's the breaks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
57. 2/3 majority of public school teachers choose public schools
for their kids. That's another way to state those numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moonbeam_Starlight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
58. Who better than a teacher who is in the schools every day
to see how they are?

Plus, it is still an individual decision in this country. There is no law or rule that states that public school teachers HAVE to send their kids to public schools.

I am a public school teacher and my daughter goes to public schools, but I'm not about to tell my peers where they have to send their kids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
59. public schools that serve poor areas
sometimes *aren't* good enough for those kids. That's a failure of our political will to fund those schools sufficiently and support their neighborhoods.

News flash: vouchers *will not* provide enough funds to send poor kids to private schools. What they *will* do is suck even more money from the public schools that those kids still have to attend. End of story. Vouchers never.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
camero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-23-04 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
72. Meanwhile
75% of teachers have their kids in public schools. The rest don't want their kids around the little people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pax Argent Donating Member (350 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
79. OK, low-count poster quoting Moonie-Times aside
Edited on Fri Sep-24-04 12:04 AM by leftbehind
vouchers and for-profit schooling are a horrible idea. Free public education lifted this country (and by extension, large tracts of the free world) through the industrial revolution and into the information age.

Private schools ensure segregation of haves and have-nots. It ensures that lower income kids will get the equivalant of 7-11 educations while more affluent kids will get government-subsidized trips to the private schools of their choice.

Also, how long does anyone think it will be before we wind up with the equivalent of state-funded Fundamentalist Madrassas? That whole division of church and state in the schools is a great idea for keeping America one country and standardizing the knowledge base. Theoretically a common education should provide reinforcement of this idea. One history, one science, etc.

Another thing that occured to me as I was reading someone else's response was how about the kids with issues? Do these kids deserve to be bounced down and out of the system because they couldn't make the grade? Regardless of where people think it should be occuring, shools are where kids learn about how to fit into society.

School is also where a lot of us older folks got to meet and befriend folks of different races and nationalities. It would be a shame to see that go away.

Also, what kind of hell are we thinking of consigning these kids and the teachers who have to try to teach them to? It reminds me of a story my mom told me when I was a kid about a professor who used to toss aggresive little mice out the window from his colony of good little mice. Ultimately he wound up with a colony of docile, good little mice while the bad little mice ran rampant on the campus.

Finally, I mistrust most anything done for profit because the bottom-line goal is.......profit! Not educated new citizens; profits. There will be instances of kids being dropped because their performance is affecting the bottom line. There will be corruption where the school accepts the check but does not perform the education.

The problems in our schools come from many places: parents not having the time to spend with their kids or not taking a firmer place in the proceedings, underfunding of the actual classroom environments, the anti-intellectual atmsophere of our country, and the general lack of value we place on the whole educational process while demanding miracles on the back end of the process.

Cutting the rich off from having to pay for the poor will not change this, and will only make it worse.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GettysbergII Donating Member (664 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 12:20 AM
Response to Original message
80. The Black Commentator Label BAEO one of Bush's Black Attack Dogs
http://blackcommentator.com/103/103_cover_black_attack_dogs.html

Cover Story

Bush’s Black Attack Dogs

Goal is Low African American Turnout



Printer Friendly Version

Note: The size of the type may be changed by clicking on view at the top of your browser and selecting "text size". The document will print in the size you select.
The sham of GOP Black voter outreach is over and the true Republican mission has begun: suppress the African American vote, by any means possible. To that end, the Bush men have enlisted the mercenary services of Black front groups invented by rightwing foundations in the Nineties to push for school vouchers and other elements of the Republican agenda. These bought-and-paid-for servants of the Hard Right took to the airwaves in August calling themselves People of Color United and spending a rich white Republican man’s money to attack Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry as “rich, white and wishy-washy.”

Virginia Walden-Ford, the operative who placed the attack ads on Black-oriented radio stations in the “battlefield” states of Pennsylvania, Missouri, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin, is for all practical purposes a paid agent of the Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. She is a founding board member of the Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO), the pro-school vouchers group conceived, birthed and jump-started with at least $2 million in 1999 by the far-right Bradley and Walton Family Foundations (Wal-Mart). Since George Bush assumed office, BAEO and a host of its vouchers/privatization siblings – each the incestuous spawn of the Right’s foundation funding network – have collected over $77 million dollars in grants from Secretary Rod Paige’s Education Department. In effect, Virginia Walden-Ford’s BAEO – which received $1.3 million in federal funds – has been “graduated” to a Bush administration functionary, while continuing to be subsidized by the Walton family, Bradley, and other far-right moneybags. These Black attack dogs are well fed.

Wallowing in the same sty

Walden-Ford’s personal fiefdom, DC Parents for School Choice, which shares a phone line with BAEO, receives money directly from the Bradley Foundation – $125,000 in 1999-2001, according to journalist Barbara Miner. Writing in Shepherd Express in Milwaukee – an attack ad target city – Miner reported that Walden-Ford admitted also sharing Washington office space with Alan Keyes, the loony, perennial Black Republican candidate for office currently running against Barack Obama for U.S. Senator from Illinois. Unleashed, Walden-Ford is rabid. Miner writes:

As part of last year's debate over a federal voucher plan for Washington, D.C., her DC Parents group ran an ad comparing Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) to Bull Connor, who set dogs against civil rights protesters. Another ad compared Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) to arch-segregationist George Wallace.
Walden-Ford’s previous boss, Robert L. Woodson, Sr., founder of the Washington-based National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise (NCNE), served as an advisor to Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1996. Woodson’s NCNE has received millions of dollars from rightwing foundations over the years, including Bradley. This year, the Bush men gave NCNE a half million dollar Compassion Fund grant to identify and develop faith-based organizations to bring into the administration’s orbit. The Bradley Foundation invented the faith-based concept for the Republicans, as a strategy to bribe Black preachers into switching parties. Walden-Ford and her mentor, Woodson, are both deeply embedded in the Bradley-Bush matrix. As we said, this is an incestuous bunch.

The massive foundation – and now federal – funding to a tiny gaggle of Black hustlers, and the tens of millions now being distributed to the Black clergy through faith-based initiatives, is intended to create an alternative, conservative Black leadership, or the illusion of one. It is a project in which the corporate media eagerly collaborate. However, the political triumph of this subsidized, corporate-selected, phony Black leadership cabal is predicated on Republican rule. Therefore, their immediate assignment: suppress the Black vote.

The Walden-Ford ads, which mimicked President Bush’s charge at the July National Urban League convention, that the Democrats take African Americans “for granted,” are the “reverse of what the Democrats try to do,” said Washington Post political writer Thomas B. Edsall in the August 16 radio edition of the Tavis Smiley Show. “The Democrats try to build turnout. These ads try to suppress turnout. It’s an effort to keep the Black vote down on the assumption that Blacks vote Democratic.”

Stephanie Tubbs Jones, the Black Democratic Congresswoman from Cleveland and co-chair of the Democratic National Committee, declared:

“The reason they’re running these ads…is that Bush has no record with regard to African Americans he can run on, so what he’s going to do is go to the negative side. They are denigrating to African Americans, to think that African Americans would be stirred by an ad such as this to suppress the Black vote. The ads are paid for by white, rich Republicans.”
In an interview with Knight Ridder newspapers, Bradley-Bush operative Virginia Walden-Ford tried to frame the ads in positive terms. “I wanted people to think about the accomplishments of the administration and how it affects black people's lives," she said. But the ads said nothing about the Bush administration or its policies – because there is nothing appealing to say. They were designed purely to discourage Blacks from voting.

Thus the farce – that Republicans were serious about garnering 15 to 25 percent of the Black vote – came to an ignominious end, in August. Back in January, Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie swore that increasing the GOP share of the Black vote was “a top, top priority.” Yet before the most intense campaign media activity had even begun, the Republicans set their Black attack dogs loose with ads that blamed Kerry’s absence from the Senate floor during a vote in May for the failure to extend unemployment insurance benefits – despite the fact that it was Republicans who opposed the extension. "Maybe Kerry thought the more of us who are unemployed and hurting – the more likely we would vote Democratic!" said the ad – as dishonest and cynical an example of campaign poison as has ever been broadcast on Black-oriented radio. The ad wasn’t pro-Republican, it was anti-Black voting. The “alternative,” conservative Black political leadership so expensively cultivated by the GOP and its affiliated foundations has one purpose: to neutralize African Americans as a political force.

And no wonder. There is simply no match between the broad Black political consensus and Bushite Republican ideology and practice. As Harvard social demographer Dr. Michael C. Dawson has observed, Blacks “could all look like liberal Democrats compared to the rest of them , but among each other, some Blacks look like Mondale Democrats, some of them look like Clinton Democrats, and some of them look like Swedish Social Democrats – more of them look like that." (See Analysis, November 21, 2002.) Bush-type Republicans do not exist in statistically significant numbers in Black America, despite Armstrong Williams’ high profile in the corporate media and Clarence Thomas’ odious presence on the Supreme Court. Bush will certainly get more Black votes than he deserves, based on actual commonality of opinion – somewhere around the 8 percent he got in 2000. But the inferential data are more dismal for the Republicans than in any election since 1964.

Black voters fired up

A July CBS/BET poll of Black voters revealed the Grand Canyon that separates African American opinion and that of whites – and the ocean that roils between Bush and the Black electorate. Only 3 percent of Blacks are “enthusiastic” about the Bush regime; 11 percent are “satisfied.” Just 11 percent believe the Bush presidency is legitimate, having won the 2000 election fairly. (Only 32 percent of whites think Bush is an illegitimate President.) A mere 8 percent of African Americans say the Iraq war was “worth the cost.” Significantly, only one in ten Blacks think vouchers are the best solution to school problems.

The worst news for Republicans: 83 percent of Black registered voters told pollsters that they would “definitely” vote in November, up from 71 percent in 2000, when Blacks turned out in record numbers in many areas. GOP leadership is determined to blunt this fierce energy at all costs.

The Wild Card

There is a great anger among African Americans, which can be invoked with the mention of a single word: Florida. However, there is also a wild card out there, a joker that Black America has never before had to confront: the electoral effects of faith-based bribery of Black preachers. (See “Defunding the Right Rev. Dr. Greedygut,” January 2, 2003.) Tens of millions of dollars have been doled out by faith-based offices in most federal departments: Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Justice, Education, Agriculture, the Agency for International Development. In June, the faith-based political grab bag was extended to the Veterans Administration, the Small Business Administration and the Department of Commerce.

Thousands of Black clergy – heavily weighted with Pentecostals who, before the political money became available, largely eschewed temporal, electoral affairs – have applied for these grants and contracts. Are they capable of mobilizing large congregations for Bush, against the better judgement – the Black consensus – among church membership? The great anomaly in the CBS/BET poll is Black antipathy to gay marriage. According to the CBS/BET poll: “More than half (53%) of African American voters think there should be no legal recognition of same-sex relationships. Among voters overall, 39% share this view.”

This is Bush’s only opening for a “legitimate” inroad on Black public policy opinion. As reported in our November, 2002 Analysis of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies survey of African American opinion, self-described Black Christian “conservatives” in fact vote overwhelmingly “liberal” – that is, Democratic. Will the huge influx of Bush faith-based money sway the congregations? We shall see.

Crimes against citizenship

We estimate that the GOP and its associated troglodyte affiliates spent about $7 million on Black media – mostly radio – in the 2002 non-presidential elections. 2004 will be a billion dollar spending spree. We can expect Republican circles to significantly increase their budgets for Black media this time around – and that virtually all of it will go to negative, attack ads, much of it fronted by their Black surrogates, largely drawn from the phony school vouchers movement. They will masquerade as “new” organizations such as Virginia Walden-Ford’s People of Color United – but it’s the same corrupt crowd of Black mercenaries, working for the Bradley Foundation, Wal-Mart and Bush.

Meanwhile, the more familiar, down-and-dirty forms of Black voter suppression will run rampant – that’s why African Americans are so determined to vote, so that we can make up for the theft that is certain to be committed. MoveOn.org has joined Jesse Jackson and other Black leaders to demand that the Republican National Committee "disavow all forms of voter suppression, including voter intimidation, misinformation, purges of voter roles that disenfranchise qualified voters, the threat to discount provisional ballots, and other actions that undermine the rights of qualified Americans to vote." According to a paper issued by the NAACP and People for the American Way, The Long Shadow of Jim Crow:

This summer, Michigan state Rep. John Pappageorge (R-Troy) was quoted in the Detroit Free Press as saying, "If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we're going to have a tough time in this election."
Expect no quarter

It is foolish and ahistorical to speak of the possibility of tactical alliances between Blacks and the GOP. One cannot forge an alliance with the man who has you in his cross-hairs. After the 1964 presidential election, in which Republican Barry Goldwater appealed direcly to the white Democrats of the South, the GOP began to consciously morph itself into the White Man’s Party in Dixie. Like the Dixie Democrats, the Republicans fashioned campaigns that essentially ran against Black people. It became the Dixiecrat party, and has structured every national campaign strategy around its race-based stronghold in the southern states. Minus that secure base, the GOP would cease to be a national party – just as the Democrats would cease to be a viable national party without overwhelming Black support. This is the gridlock that history has bequeathed us, which cannot be changed between now and November 2, or any time in the forseeable future in the absence of the most intense and consciously transformative work by Black activists and progressive allies within and outside the Democratic Party.

In that sense, nothing has changed since 1865. Except back then, the pro-slavery party (Democrats) didn’t have a pack of Black folks in suits suppressing the freedmens’ determination to vote for Radical Republicans.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wettap Donating Member (66 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #80
81. Need I say more about rhetoric? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 03:23 AM
Response to Original message
83. Aha, another tag team has shown up to present rightwing propaganda
And here's what I say every time: Schools are locally controlled. If the schools are lousy, it's the fault of the local voters for electing idiots or corrupt old pols to their schoolboards.

That's why the public schools are wonderful in rich suburbs, where parents want their kids to get into Harvard, and can be lousy in Podunksville (where the parents say, "Our kids don't need all that there book learnin'. It just gives them ideas.") or in poor urban neighborhoods, where the parents may be at best working two jobs to survive and at worst involved in crime and chemical dependency.

You know all those European and East Asian kids who are supposed to be doing better than American kids?

They're the products of their nations' PUBLIC schools. In Japan, in fact, private schools tend to be for kids who can't hack it in the public schools.

But then, people in Japan value education, unlike Americans, who just want their kids to have job training.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UdoKier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #83
85. No shit.
I am so sick of the freepers on the board today.

I have *NO* GODDAMN PATIENCE FOR THEM today...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 03:39 AM
Response to Reply #85
87. Always in threes
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
recidivist Donating Member (963 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-25-04 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #83
94. Re: local control. Yes, you always say that. And I always agree.
But fighting the good fight at the ballot box, while important, is not enough. The big city school systems that preside over the bulk of the failing schools are nearly impervious to change. They have entrenched bureaucracies and ironclad union rules. It is difficult to change procedures, extremely difficult to change curriculum, and next to impossible to change personnel other than by attrition. Yes, we have active reform lobbies that batter themselves against the monolith, and I support them. But I have very little hope we will succeed.

Meanwhile, a child entering first grade this year will be a fifth grader by the time the next election rolls around. She will be in ninth grade in two election cycles. How many cycles is a parent supposed to wait for "the blob," as the public school monolith has been aptly called, to reform? Very few academically committed parents are willing to sacrifice their child's life prospects while they hope against hope that the next election will make a difference. (It won't.) So the academically concerned are off to the suburbs or to private/parochial school, and the public system continues to spiral downward.

This is not an all-or-nothing situation. Cities range across the spectrum in terms of the health of their public schools. There are cities that still have a strong middle class base to work with. But in places like Washington, D.C., the middle class is gone. It will not come back unless and until the public school system creates academic magnet programs and magnet schools, probably neighborhood based, that give middle class parents a reasonable expectation that traditional discipline and academic standards will be maintained. This will require ability grouping and some degree of selectivity; otherwise, the middle class students simply get lost in a system that is overwhelmingly dedicated to remediation of social deficits. Unfortunately, selectivity and ability grouping are political dynamite, especially if statistical differentials among the races get involved, as sooner or later tends to happen.

(You and I understand that this has to do primarily with class, not race, but the politics get racial very fast.)

None of this means reform cannot happen. It can. But the political dynamic is heavily against it, and few parents will sacrifice their child to a vain hope. You regard this as a selfish attitude. I regard it as realistic. I want the best possible education for every child, including the children of the poor. We are clearly not getting the job done. It's a governance problem and, as you know, I favor vouchers because they will enforce accountability and empower parents. Over time, this will produce the reforms the entrenched status quo will otherwise continue to block.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Toad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-25-04 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #83
95. Re: Local control
In the district where I taught for 11 years voters rarely stayed around long enough for the board members they elected to be seated. It's a little unfair to blame the state of schools on parents who can't even keep a roof over his or her child's head.

In many of my classes no more than 30% of the children who started the year finished the year in the district. 4-6 months was the average time spent in one residence Mom (generally) managed to scrape together first and last month's rent to get a place to stay. During the first two months, mom pays the bills that weren't being paid while scraping together the initial deposit, and puts food on the table. Come month 3, when the landlord figures out nothing else is coming his way, he starts eviction proceedings. Somewhere between month 4 and month 6 it's moving time again, generally out of the district into the next inner ring of inner city schools.

Even with the best local board, the best administration, and the best teachers, children whose lives are disrupted every few months by being yanked from one residence to another, from one circle of friends to a new crowd of strangers, and who don't have enough food to eat most of the time, or clothes to keep them warm are most likely going to be fragile and injured. That fragility and injury is going to be played out in school, regardless of how good the local board, administration, and teachers are. When the vast majority of the children in a district live in such uncertainty, the schools that try to educate these children are going to be troubled.

At the time I taught there, my district was considered good for an inner city district. Parents cared, for the most part, and tried to keep their children in the district even when they were forced to move because they knew the teachers cared about their children, and were not about to give up on them.

I was teaching 3rd or 4th grade math as the second mandatory year of high school math - not because the children were not intellectually capable of handling high school math but because they had not been in any one classroom long enough to have learned the fundamentals. Even on the rare occasion when I taught an academic math class (algebra, geometry, trig), it was at the rock bottom of the textbook level - same reason. It's difficult to solve algebraic equations involving decimals with students who never learned the fundamentals of decimals.

My philosophy as an educator has always been that if all of the people who can afford to send their children to private schools pull their children out of public schools, there will be little motivation to improve public schools. The group of individuals who don't necessarily know where their next meal is coming from who can still effectively demand a quality education for their child is a very small group.

Even so, I do not know that I would have sent my child to the school in which I taught. As a parent, my gut reaction is not to sacrifice my child's education for a principle that her sacrifice alone will do little to support. I would have felt the need to supplement her education extensively, and that would have been impossible on top of working 80-100 hours a week to try my best to reach the children in my classroom.

Fortunately, I did not have to make that choice directly as we moved before she was born. My child attends our local public school (50 miles away from where I used to teach). It is a bit lily white for my tastes, as is our neighborhood, although there is a fair amount of class and educational diversity, and we send her to summer camp in a (slightly smaller) inner city - which she actually enjoys more than the (whiter and richer) camp a couple of miles away.

From my perspective, the problem is much more basic than whether the parents bothered to vote for the right school board - it is the failure of our society to ensure that every child has a stable roof over his or her head, and food to eat on a regular basis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-24-04 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
89. So wettap, as a Minneapolis resident...
Edited on Fri Sep-24-04 05:43 PM by Lydia Leftcoast
you and your neighbors need to put pressure on your legislators, vote in school board elections, attend school board meetings, stay on the local administrator's asses, and finally, take advantage of the magnet programs that the city schools have.

That way ALL children in your neighborhood will have a better chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-25-04 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
96. How can teachers AFFORD doing this?
:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moderator DU Moderator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-25-04 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
97. locking
Original poster is no longer with us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 05:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC