Would anybody care to defend Obama's assault on public education.

[MadHound]

Can anybody defend Obama's assault on education? He is, after all, opening the flood gates to privatized education. This is written into law with his Race to the Top initiative after all. Furthermore he and Duncan are wanting to tie teacher's careers to how well their students do on the ever increasing amount of standardized tests that Obama wants administered.

Yes, he eliminates AYP, but instead he replaces it with a simple, but effective method for getting rid of public schools. He simply eliminates the bottom five percent, year in, year out. Every year those schools in the bottom five percent will either see their entire staffs fired and replaced (remember, this is the president who has praised the mass firing of teachers before), most likely with less qualified but cheaper TFA teachers, or the schools will simply be closed, then reopened as a privatized charter school. Year in, year out, the bottom five percent. Given a couple of decades or so and virtually all the schools will be privatized.

In what is perhaps the ultimate in cynical crassness, Obama's education funding, at a time when school districts are desperate for funding, is not given out freely, but comes with more conditions that attached to a loan from the mob. If states are selected to receive Race to the Top funds (this is a competitive process that pits states against each other) they must agree to more testing, merit based pay, and to drop all laws that restrict private schools in their state. Obama obviously knows how to extract the most in concessions from those who are over a barrel.

And why shouldn't education be over a barrel, it has been under funded over the years, including under Obama. That stimulus package last year originally had an additional 16 billion in funding for school repair and construction, something that is not only desperately needed, but would have been one great way of stimulating the economy. Instead, that was taken out at the last minute, with the approval of Obama and the Democrats, and replaced with more tax cuts. Like there weren't already enough tax cuts in the stimulus:eyes:(forty percent of the stimulus was in the form of tax cuts).

Teachers, parents and others concerned with public education in this country put a lot of time, money and effort into getting Obama elected because they believed he represented a positive change from the education policies of Bush. Instead what we're finding is that Obama is will to go much further than Bush ever dreamed of. So again I ask, can anybody defend the education policies of this administration? Furthermore, if you can't defend Obama's education policies, then answer this, why should anybody who is concerned with education support this president. It certainly isn't because things would get worse, they already have. It appears that voting either for Obama or a 'Pug would be voting against a teacher's best interest at this point.

So please, if you can, defend these policies of Obama.

[NightWatcher]

1. Why the baseless Obama-bashing?

Oh wait, sorry I see an eloquently worded criticism siting facts and truth.

Keep the kids more stupider. Somebody's going to have to repair the golden toilets of the rich.

Oh, K and R

[DailyGrind51]

2. To play "Duncan's Advocate", it is not an attack on public education,

but an attack on an education system monopolized by the NEA/AFT, more concerned with protecting their status quos rather than the futures of students.

[katandmoon]

4. A Bush supporter could not have said it better.

[blondeatlast]

49. +1. One of the rare times I unequivocally agree with you. nt

[laughingliberal]

51. +1000 nt

[Bluebear]

91. +

[DailyGrind51]

134. Yet, their are people who think of our Mayor Daley as a "great Democrat"!

Yet, Daley and "W" were having a "bro-mance", when "W" was in town. The best school superintendent Chicago ever had was Dr. Ruth Love who was truly independent, which was why she was forced out.

[DailyGrind51]

141. I apologize for the misspelling of "there"!

[MadHound]

5. Ah, so it's an anti-union thing, hmm.

Well aside from throwing out the baby with the bathwater, it is obvious that nobody in this administration has ever belonged to either the NEA or AFT. I do, my parents did, and the funny thing that I've seen over the past forty plus years is that these unions don't put teachers first, aren't first and foremost concerned with protecting their status quo. What they are most interested in, first and foremost, is what is in the best interest of the student.

Besides, what is wrong with a unionized work force? Oh, yeah, that's right, these are the new Dems, the DLC types were dealing with, who want to please their corporate masters by doing away with unions. Never mind.

[griffi94]

10. as opposed

to private charter sxhools more concerned with protecting their corporate bottom line. i wonder what they'll plunder next.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. So anti Union pure and simple

[donco6]

22. As a school administrator, I can assure you -

Education is not "monopolized" by the NEA. (I don't work with AFT, so I can't speak to that).

Yes, we have to work with the union, but frankly, if we didn't, it would be easy to make decisions that don't even take teachers into account at all. If having to work with them means being "monopolized", well I can't really help you there.

Plus the fact, they don't always win. We negotiate. They get something, we get something. We show them our money situation, we all get together and figure out how best to spend it. We all took a pay freeze last year, and this coming year we're getting a 2.5% base, no steps. It was a good, affordable arrangement and I think everyone knows it's fair. What's wrong with that?

Unions are not the boogeyman the rightwing has managed to create.

[erinlough]

79. This is an important post

and as a union President I can assure you it is accurate. I found my relationship with the board and my Superintendent to be most important. I guess each district operates in its own way, but in most I have encountered this is the way it works.

The misunderstanding of unions is maddening.

[wcast]

84. I have been a long time local union president

and this is 100% true. With the NEA, very little, if anything, trickles down to the local level. Our state union, PSEA, has more influence, but it is the local that makes us strong. PA has 501 little mom and pop unions that get big support from PSEA, but issues are dealt with on the local level.

My small, north-central school districts could never get the starting salaries of some of affluent districts, or the benefits, but we still stay here and teach. We love our community and are committed to it. Most communities have an army of teachers who are volunteers in that community, behind the scenes. Many don't realize until it is brought to their attention. Our salaries are spent in these communities, keeping many small businesses in place. When we hand out books to the children during our summer parade, we are helping our community. Same for blood drives, book drives, little league coaches, Sunday school teachers, etc. Most committees are manned by a majority of teachers who do not get extra money for the assignment. Need new books, overhaul of the discipline policy, chaperon for a dance, someone to run the score board at the basketball game or other sporting event, take tickets at the school play, these are primarily done by teachers.

I have taught school for 17 years. I started out as a computer science major. Liked computers, love teaching. But I'll tell you, I don't know if I can hang on for another 17. I'm so sick of being the scapegoat, of hearing the snide comments, of being the political football. I'm to the point that I don't encourage anyone to be teacher, and am trying to talk my own daughter out of being one. If she chooses to do it, at least she'll know what she is getting into.

[donco6]

86. That is exactly what it's like here, too.

And I have a feeling the teachers all feel like you do. And I don't know what to do about it - even IF there is anything I can do about it. I'd love to make them feel better, but they are BARRAGED daily with nasty comments from every possible direction. And then the school "scores" get posted in the paper and they see their school that they work so hard in getting HAMMERED. It just makes me want to weep. I'm at a loss.

[Dinger]

129. Wow, It's Nice To Hear An Administrator Say That:)

Ours never would, I assure you.

[proud2BlibKansan]

132. Same here

So many people don't understand how unions work. Sad.

[donco6]

138. I've just found most problems are cause by peole who DON'T KNOW THE CONTRACT.

I don't know what happens to some people - the water? the heady atmosphere in the office? WTF? But they get promoted and the inner Hitler just erupts. I've never understood it, but I've seen it happen over and over and over. Horrible things!

I can tell within the first few weeks if a new principal is going to make it or not: When they start talking about all the new ideas they have, what they're going to implement this year in their new school, etc. etc., AND THE TEACHERS HAVEN'T COME BACK YET! How can you talk about everything you're going to do, and you haven't even met with your staff yet? That's a huge red flag.

We have an Agreement for a reason. It's not just the Teacher Contract - it's an AGREEMENT between the teachers and the admin. There shouldn't be any whining about it, or any manipulation to get around it. It is what it is. You hold your end, they hold theirs. Anything outside that and you have to work it out.

Maybe it's because I spent time in private business first before I came here. I worked with purchasing and contracting so I understand how that world works. I dunno. But the idea that the union is all to blame is just silly. They wouldn't get so pissed off if people would just recognize what the Agreement means.

[proud2BlibKansan]

142. Speaking of contracts

Our supt tried to get our board to suspend the seniority clause in our contract last night. 40% of us are displaced due to school closings and HR is having problems placing everyone. They've had since March to get this done. Now they are under the gun timewise and he's getting nervous.

Fortunately we got a heads up and lobbied our school board members who were on our side and refused to even second the motion to vote on suspending the contract.

Bottom line is administrative incompetence shouldn't result in the teachers contract being suspended. They screwed up, they need to fix it, but not at the expense of their employees.

People who aren't in this business just don't understand how teachers are trampled on by administrators. That's what makes the trash talk in the media even harder to tolerate. We're already treated like shit. How much more are they going to pile on?

[donco6]

143. We don't even think about closing a school unless we know what we're gonna do.

We did close 2 schools this year. When we knew that we'd have to (we got cut 6.5% in funding this year), we looked at the staff in the two schools. We figured out who was non-probationary, what their endorsements were, and we started working on the other schools to see who was going to have openings. Out of about 45 teachers, we had 5 who were non-probationary who had endorsements we didn't have an immediate spot for. So we worked with them individually. 4 found spots outside and 1 got placed later after a teacher requested a leave. All done! And that's with 1 HR director and 1 clerk.

Sometimes, I still think the problems are just that districts are encouraged to get so huge they lose track of their humanity. We're only about 6000 kids. I work directly with the Athletic Director (TOSA), the class sponsors (eight teachers on a stipend who do Homecoming, Prom, dances, events etc.), and all Operations (Finance, Maintenance, Custodial, Transportation, Food Service, Capital Projects, Insurance . . . and other stuff I can't even remember now). Here, we're CLOSE to the work, the kids, the schools. When we make a decision here, we live with it as much as anyone else. I just think that makes a difference.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

30. Wow, so Obama has succumbed to one of the favoriate right-wing talking points?

Is that what you're saying?

[DailyGrind51]

38. He isn't the only one! Did you happen to watch "McLauhglin Group", this weekend?

Clift and Page joined in Crowley's praise of President Obama's (Duncan's) education reform.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________


MS. CLIFT: And we should mention Arne Duncan, who's the secretary of Education.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Where is he from?

MS. CLIFT: He's from Chicago.

MR. PAGE: Hyde Park, Chicago.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What did he do there? What did he do there?

MS. CLIFT: He was the education superintendent there.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Right. Is he feeding these ideas to Obama?

MS. CLIFT: These are his ideas, yes.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Namely, that teachers are deficient.

MS. CLIFT: No, he is pushing against the teachers -- MR. PAGE: (Laughs.)

MS. CLIFT: -- but he's also championing the teachers. He's not blaming all the teachers.

MR. STIREWALT: These are not --

MS. CLIFT: He's trying to put in systems where you can weed out teachers who are not effective.

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Obama leveled a big knock at teachers and he said --

MR. PAGE: John -- John --

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- if the students are not doing well, it's the teachers' fault.

MR. PAGE: John, I know --

MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is it the teachers' fault?

MR. PAGE: I know --

MS. CLIFT: It's more complicated than that, John.

MR. PAGE: I know, as a former teacher, where your sympathies are, and I understand that. I've got a lot of teachers in my family. But, you know, Obama's not out knocking teachers. Obama's standing up for parents, standing up for communities. The teachers' union, their job is to stand up for teachers, and they do that job very well. But --
______________________________________________
Watch the entire conversation at:

http://www.mclaughlin.com/

[MadHound]

41. And that attitude right there is part of the problem

If the kid isn't doing well, blame it on the teacher. No matter if this is the best teacher in the world, blame it on the teacher. Don't hold the parents responsible, though they should be insuring that their kids study at home. Don't blame the kids, though the little dears would much rather be rotting their brains out with TV and video games. Don't blame the community which refuses to provide adequate money and resources in order that a teacher can do their job. Nope, a teacher is somehow supposed to overcome parental neglect, student apathy, and the lack of community resources.

[DailyGrind51]

61. Parents, or lack there of, are the problem, but they are the "uncontrollable variable".

[Donnachaidh]

39. so it's union-busting.

No wonder the repukes aren't saying boo about this program. They probably applaud it. :puke:

[sabrina 1]

42. That was Bush's argument, airc, he called teacher's unions

terrorists, or his Sec. of Ed. did. At least they had to apologize. But this administration is sailing along, destroying the Public School system, betraying teachers and parents, contrary to what was promised in the campaign.

They are privatizing everything with virtually no opposition. Next is Social Security. If all of this was being done by the Bush administration, democrats would be screaming, as did when Bush tried.

[blondeatlast]

48. The NEA/AFT are the only entities dedicated to protecting public education. nt

[Jakes Progress]

56. newt heartily approves your outrage.

So does bill bennet and all of the other reagan era neocons who started the lies about education that you have swallowed.

[proud2BlibKansan]

63. Wow

[Diane R]

110. Can I please recommend your post? I'm tired of threads that value teacher's jobs above all else.

A lot of people are hurting. People in the private section have had to sacrifice a lot. Yet, heaven forbid if a teacher should lose their job.

[MadHound]

111. You know, it isn't that we value our jobs above all else,

It's that we value our students above all else. You know, the next generation, our future.

Yes, we're pissed at Obama, but not just because thousands of teachers across the country are losing their jobs. It is because Obama and Duncan's policies are having a direct, adverse effect on our students. We've already lost one generation to this testing madness under Bush and NCLB. Do you want to lose even more generations to even more testing madness, and poorly run privatized schools that exist more to make their owners a profit than actually educate children?

[proud2BlibKansan]

115. Children suffer when teachers lose their jobs.

HELLO!?

[Catshrink]

117. It's about the kids and the quality of their education.

Think of this: If there are 600 students for sophomore English and 4 teachers, each teacher will have 150 students, 30 per class section. That's a lot of essays to read. One teacher loses her job, now that 600 students are divided up by the remaining 3 teachers so that each one has a total of 200 students or about 40 per class section. How much personal attention will each student receive? How much time can a teacher spend grading an essay? The result will be fewer essays assigned because there is just so much that is humanly possible to do. In addition to the increase in workload (more to grade, more administrative tasks, more parents to contact, etc.) for the remaining teachers and the few essays assigned, classroom management becomes more complex.

So yeah, heaven forbid a teacher should lose her job. It's the kids that suffer.

When people make snarky anti-teacher comments, they are rarely thinking about the kids. For teachers, they are the reason we do what we do.

[Starry Messenger]

123. I'm for saving all jobs.

I don't think people in the private sector should have to sacrifice to the bone they way they've been forced to. However, using the market-driven thinking in the way you are displaying would mean that there are a shrinking number of children that need to be educated. Well guess what, there aren't. When teachers lose their jobs, children go uneducated. We can't just warehouse the surplus or stop production the way that private sector corporations can/will if they cease to make profits. Children aren't widgets.

[proud2BlibKansan]

147. Crickets

Lovely.

[stray cat]

3. Who wants to defend the inequality of public schools?

Where you can afford to live determines whether your kids get a decent education - how is that democracy? I am in favor of giving kids a chance and some of the charter schools in Harlem do that and how can anyone wish those kids back into the local public schools?

As an employer of a small business ie 4 people - I also need to hire people who can read, do 7th grade math and capable of at least some logic - someone else will have to hire those who never learn to do any of the above.

[MadHound]

11. Then the government, rather than killing public schools, needs to fund them.

Public schools are funded mainly through the local tax base. Of course inner city schools suffer because their tax base is crap. Some of this money can be made up through the state, but given state revenues, that simply isn't enough. Therefore the US could, and should step in and help make up the difference in order that there is enough money across the board. Instead, Obama is making districts and states compete for this cash, like dogs fighting for scraps. Is that right or fair?

If you fully funded public schools evenly across the board, there wouldn't be this problem with inner city and rural schools (who also suffer from this same problem). But apparently we would rather let these schools go to hell in order to condemn the entire system while privatizing as much as possible.

Oh, and charter schools aren't a panacea either, they do no better, and sometimes worse, than public schools.

One other thing, work to change your local funding formula. Currently public schools have to get a super majority in any election for school funds. No other public agency is funded that way. This funding formula has guaranteed that schools will be chronically underfunded for the past decades. Let us change that formula and start fully funding all schools before trying the privatization route.

[glitch]

43. Just more Reaganomics: cut off govt programs at the knees then shoot them in the head

when they can't run. Oh, and loot the treasury and commit waste on the resources.

[MadHound]

44. Yep, you've got it, and Obama did say that he was an admirer of Reagan.

Scary, when you come to think of it, a Democrat actually admiring Reagan.

[laughingliberal]

53. Yep. Classic Norquist/Reagan philosophy. Underfund the hell out of it and scream when it fails. nt

[donco6]

29. You speak as if all public schools are like Harlem

They are not. But the federal laws impact us all as if we were.

Why should I have to close a school again when we just did it three years ago and we're finally seeing our scores increase? We're faced with sanctions because the federal rule gives you just 3 years to meet Adequate Yearly Progress, which is a status score measured by numerous indicators, including special ed., gaps between minorities, English language proficiency, etc. ALL the factors have to show green or you move down a category. It's just not possible to pull it off in three years for a school that's changed its entire staff and created a new pedagogy and curriculum. We're getting better with our high poverty, low English-speaking population, but it's going to take more time.

Throw in the fact that, because our community cannot support mill levy elections like our neighbors can, we receive about $1500 per pupil LESS than our nearest neighbors. They've all managed to pass bond elections for new schools (thus relieving pressure on their own capital maintenance budget), and mill levy overrides that provide additional funding per pupil for operating expenditures. This is a DIRECT result of the poverty of our district.

Forcing us to outsource our education services to corporate charter schools is not the answer. But that's the inevitable outcome of NCLB no matter WHAT you do.

[Jakes Progress]

57. As an employer you should know your business.

It is obviously not education or you would know that every thing you complain about in your post will be exacerbated by the things that arne is doing.

There are lots of threads and resources where you can learn these things, or you can just go ahead an sing the simplistic lies that the neocons started under reagan. How would you like having people who don't know anything about how your business works telling you how to do it?

[leftofcool]

6. Another point of view from a retired teacher

Not too long before I retired, a discussion came up in the teachers' lounge about the future of education. Here is what several of us thought would probably happen by the year 2020. Teachers would be replaced with "video profs." Kids would be taught by watching the video teacher with a lap top. The only other human in the classroom would be a class monitor no doubt making minimum wage. All tests would be taken using the lap top and all tests graded by some central location on the computer. Many public schools would be shut down and class sizes would increase so there may be auditorium type classes with 500-600 per class (much like some college courses). If all of this is true as some teachers believe then shouldn't we do the best we can with the policies Obama may implement? I am not saying I agree with all of them.

[MadHound]

12. We should base our actions on simple speculation?

I would rather base it on facts, and here's one for you. The top education systems in the world fully fund their education system. Rather than under paying their teachers, they pay them well, comparable to six figures in this country. Teachers are respected professionals, comparable to doctors in this country. Their opinions are sought out and valued and shape education policy in their respective countries. Their schools are, each and every one, fulled funded, in good shape with the needed resources. I would rather try what is proven to work rather than that which is simply based on speculation.

[griffi94]

15. hate to say it madhound

but the only fact that really comes into play is that private enterprise wants the money.
all the other shit about test scores and not being able to fire bad teachers is just that...shit.
when the charter school debate was raging here in texas that was the main thrust of their argument, that bad teachers couldn't be fired. i have no idea how the myth got started that bad teachers couldn't be fired.

every single argument against public education could be used against law enforcement as well. will that be the next thing that gets plundered. it's hard to fire bad cops and the high crime areas are still full of criminals. solution is to get rid of the expensive nonproductive police force and let haliburton set up private and for profit law enforcement.

[blindpig]

70. Spot on

Always, follow the money.

Capital is running out of venues to fatten on. This is part of that 'innovation' that proponents of capital are so proud of.

[leftofcool]

17. I agree with you, however

you are talking about other countries who actually value and respect their teachers, who do fully fund education. When have either of those things ever happened in this country? Do you really believe that we will ever have an administration that will do all of the above? What we want or wish for our educational system in this country is not what we have. So, the big question is, do we make the very best of what we have or do we continue to want/wish/hope/dream for something that is never going to be a reality? The bigger question is how these implemented policies will effect the kids.

[MadHound]

18. How about we work to fulfill that empty rhetoric?

This country has long said that education is one of our top priorities. We need to start changing education policy to make that rhetoric reality rather than simply capitulating to a political system that is corporately corrupted and wants to regress our education system to third world status.

[leftofcool]

20. Agreed....where do we begin?

It seems that no matter who we elect to office, we get the same old tired crap on education. And truthfully, I have yet to hear or see one Democratic official who really gives a damn.

[MadHound]

23. Starts at the state and local level.

Best first step I can think of is getting rid of the supermajority needed to pass any school funding bill. No other sector of our government has to get a supermajority in order to get their funding, in fact no other sector has their finances so dependent upon the voters. Change this and you would see more money going into you public school system.

[uponit7771]

7. Only if the Obama bashers explain their overt dislike of him first

[MadHound]

13. Ah, so legit criticism of Obama's education policies is now "bashing."

Orwell just luuuuuvs you!:rofl:

[griffi94]

16. maybe the education policy won't seem so bad

if you clap louder and yell hooray.

[NashVegas]

50. As Well As "Overt Dislike"

[QC]

54. Any statement that does not praise Obama bashes him.

It's been that way for a while now. Either you break out in ecstatic goosepimples when you hear his name, or you loathe him. There's nothing in between.

[LWolf]

36. Overt dislike of

Neoliberalism.

Privatization. Union-busting.

It's the policies. I don't like neoliberals. They hurt people, they hurt the nation.

[truth2power]

55. I do believe that Skinner said, in that most recent thread about rules..

that DUers were not to refer to those supporting Obama as "Obama apologists".

Does it not follow that those who are offering criticism of Obama and/or his policies should not be referred to as "Obama bashers"?

Just asking...

[Jakes Progress]

58. Can't get past it can you?

First, stop using the word "basher" when a logical, details analysis of a policy disagreement comes up. It smacks of desperation and the lack of any defense. Surely you think better of Obama than that he has no reasons for his actions. But you can't give them, so you use names. So stop it.

Second, This is a discussion of policy. It is the administration's policy. I would be willing to bet that if bush had put forth these same plans, you would have taken to the streets in protest. The only reason bush didn't get this through is that he knew Democrats wouldn't stand for it. For the record, bush loves these plans. As does newt, bill bennet, and grover norquist. These things are reagan's dream. That's some company you are keeping there.

Thrid, I don't really dislike Obama. Be fun to have him down to the pub and have a beer. Maybe we could set him straight. He seems like a nice guy. But he is not skilled at picking advisors and he lacks the knowledge to know what is going on in his name. (I prefer that image than the only other alternative which would have him as a lying tool of the corporate elite. Just thinking that is too depressing so I stick with my untried, unwise, and unready concept.)

[proud2BlibKansan]

68. I don't dislike him at all. I think he's a good man.

I just disagree with his policies on education.

I also couldn't stand John Edwards but loved his platform.

Not all of us are simple minded. :)

[meow mix]

87. overt dislike? haha i was among the biggest koolaid drinkers

now that im critical and disappointed i have overt dislike?

[griffi94]

8. same old same

re-direct public money to private bank accounts.
de-fund the public schools to the point where they can't help but fail, declare public education a failure.

this sounds like an extension of that voucher thing that the previous administration tried.

here in texas the performance of the charter schools have been very underwhelming. i'm talking across the board not any one school, but the charter program as a whole. the test scores have been behind the average public school and the enrollment hasn't been what was expected.

of course the enrollment will go up if the public schools are de-funded and forced to closed.

[inna]

9. Only those who don't know all the details. KR

RTTT: Just say NO
Diane Ravitch
Research Professor Of Education, New York University
http://education.nationaljournal.com/2010/05/education-reform-stakeholder-s.php#1579842

Race to the Top is chock full of bad ideas for improving education. The states should just say no. It is tough to turn down a barrel full of federal cash when your budget is crashing, but RTTT will not improve schools. The program--over $4 billion of federal dollars to promote privatization and to double down on NCLB's testing strategies--was never authorized by Congress; it is highly unlikely that a Democratic Congress would have lent support to this approach, which apparently was cooked up in the inner sanctums of the NewSchools Venture Fund.

It is now clear (see a summary in yesterday's NY Times or in my book The Death and Life of the Great American School System, chapter 7) that charter schools in aggregate do not produce higher test scores than regular public schools, yet the U.S. Department of Education is laying out cold hard cash to push states to open more privately managed schools. Some charters do an outstanding job, most don't. Why does the Department think it will strengthen education by urging the opening of more mediocre charter schools? This is a strategy that gladdens the hearts of the hedge fund managers and other billionaires who are behind it, but will do little to help the public school system that still enrolls 97% of our children.

The strategy of judging and paying teachers based on student test scores thrills the business community (which seldom uses such an approach in paying their own employees or their CEOs), but it would not win the approval of any respected testing expert. In fact, testing experts specifically advise not to link diagnostic tests to decisions about pay, tenure, or sanctions.

RTTT predictably is opposed by teachers, not just teacher unions. It is profoundly demoralizing. RTTT is NCLB on steroids. Ten years from now, we will look back and wondered why the federal government committed itself to a program of privatization, closing schools, and judging teacher performance in ways guaranteed to drive thoughtful educators into a different line of work.

...

Second, it is historically unprecedented that the U.S. Secretary of Education has been given a discretionary fund of $5 billion to do with as he pleases. This is simply mind-boggling. The stimulus package from which this money is derived was intended to "stimulate" the economy and to keep Americans working, not to give the Department of Education carte blanche to impose its favorite ideas on the states.

There is something bizarre about the current situation, with the Department of Education dangling $5 billion before the states to persuade them to change their laws and adopt unproven, risky programs.

[MichiganVote]

19. I'll tell you what..when the president of the US sits down in the back yard of home in Harvard with

at least 5 teachers from across the US to have a beer and a dialogue about their work as teachers PLUS adds in major media attention to "both sides of the issue", then maybe we'll talk.

Till then all Obama is doing is ratcheting up the bitch about teachers, bitch about the fact that teachers have unions because of politicians and the public and piss and moan.

Every facet of our government needs improvement. Singling out teachers and other educational personnel is no different than the profiling that was done by the cop and by the professor.

Obama is a joke when is comes to education and Duncan is his clown.

[leftofcool]

21. Actually, Obama should spend at least 3 days teaching in a classroom.

[proud2BlibKansan]

69. Could Arne be his para?

That way they can shoot some hoops at recess.

[leftofcool]

89. Yep! Actually, put Arne is a middle school classroom!

[MadHound]

26. Trouble is this "joke" has already adveresely effected education,

And will continue to do so. He is doing more than ratcheting up the rhetoric, he is taking direct, concrete actions that will do much harm for years and decades to come.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

24. Here is a Democracy Now transcript about what really went on in the Chicago schools

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/26/a_look_at_arne_duncans_vip
A Look at Arne Duncan’s VIP List of Requests at Chicago Schools and the Effects of his Expansion of Charter Schools in Chicago

skip

PAULINE LIPMAN: Yes, good morning. I’m really glad that Azam has done this story, because it provides some evidence for what we’ve pretty much known on the ground all along. And as you said, I think that what it reveals is a bigger scandal.


The larger scandal is that Chicago has basically a two-tiered education system, with a handful of these selective enrollment magnet schools, or boutique schools, that have been set up under Renaissance 2010 in gentrifying and affluent neighborhoods, and then many disinvested neighborhood schools. So parents across the city are scrambling to try to get their kids into a few of these schools. So instead of creating quality schools in every neighborhood, what CPS has done is created this two-tier system and actually is closing down, as you said, neighborhood schools under Renaissance 2010 and replacing them with charter schools and a privatized education system, firing or laying off, I should say, certified teachers, dismantling locally elected school councils, and creating a market of public education in Chicago, turning schools over to private turnaround operators. And this is, in the bigger, bigger scandal, this is now the national agenda under the Obama administration for education.

Public education is just another giant cash cow the privateers want to take over. It's big bucks. Rahm talks too much and when he gloated abouted "preserving the private delivery system of health care" and "open markets" for education he let the cat out of the bag.

Do a little googling about Arne Duncan, Chicago schools and Renaissance 2010 and you won't believe what you come up with. Not to mention a grand jury investigation into the "Clout" scandal.

Another good google to educate yourself is Arne Duncan schools and disaster capitalism - that is what is being practiced.

[MadHound]

27. Oh I know all about Duncan and his record,

He is wanting to take his failed Chicago initiative nationwide, and as you say, reap the benefits for his corporate buddies.

[Radical Activist]

64. That raises two interesting questions.

1) What were the public charters schools doing well that made them so successful and popular with parents?
2) What barriers were keeping the same things from happening at non-charter public schools?

Chicago public charter school students are picked by lottery so we can't dismiss it as a case of the charters cherry-picking the best neighborhoods.

[Hannah Bell]

65. chicago charters do cherry-pick, through various means. the existence of lotteries doesn't preclude

cherry-picking.

[Radical Activist]

74. Care to answer either of the two questions?

I bet not. That would require something other than repeating the talking points.

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. You need to go back to the gentrification of the neighborhoods

First the poor people are kicked out of their neighborhoods by the nice neoliberals. Then their kids lose their school when it becomes a charter. The nice neoliberals are praised for being brave enough to move into a scary neighborhood, the schools are praised for being so greatly improved and the poor people who used to live there and send their kids to the neighborhood schools take up residence in a homeless shelter miles away.

See, it all works out for everyone!

[Radical Activist]

73. Yet Chicago public charters take students from all neighborhoods

including low income areas. So your story doesn't address the question.

[proud2BlibKansan]

78. It's a lottery system. And it's not at all fair to the kids who live in the neighborhood.

They lose their home and then their school. I find that appalling. Sorry if you don't get it.

[conscious evolution]

137. gentrification is a nice way to say ethnic cleansing

[MadHound]

77. OK, here you go

First of all the hype about charter schools doing so well is just that, hype. The only reason that a few charter schools have been able to blow the doors off is because they get to hand pick their students.

The barrier to public education accomplishing that kind of performance on a consistent basis is the same barrier that has existed for decades now, money, the lack of it and the poor distribution of it.

How well do you think any business would do if the public got to vote on whether or not that business got adequately funded? Not well, but that is what happens in education. To compound that problem, the distribution of that money is a political and socioeconomic football that is constantly kicked around. Inner city and rural schools don't get what they need while suburban schools get plenty.

Fix the money problem, start paying teachers like the professionals they are, and you will greatly reduce the problems with education in this country. The trouble is nobody has ever wanted to try that solution, so though we talk a good game about the high priority of education in this country, we simply don't follow through. We were able to get by for years because teachers were a captive work force, women didn't have many career options, so the best of them went into teaching and were miserably paid. The miserably paid part still holds, but we no longer have that captive work force. Thus, bright young students considering a career may want to teach, but simply don't think they can afford it, so the look elsewhere. Pay teachers what they deserve and you will get the best and brightest flocking to the classrooms.

[Radical Activist]

82. You aren't reading.

The article you just linked in the OP says the Charters were performing well and are very popular with parents. So there's something more there than just hype. Am I only supposed to read the parts of the article that support your argument?

And it's still untrue to claim that every charter gets to hand pick their students in Chicago. It's untrue no matter how many times you claim it. In Chicago they keep a proportionate number of minority and low income students at each charter. And its disingenuous to talk about the discrepancy between urban and suburban school districts when the comparison in this case is about schools that are all in the same district. You're just repeating the usual talking points instead of addressing my questions.

Yes, we need to pay teachers more. You know one of the barriers to getting more good teachers? The starting pay is crap because of the seniority based pay system. Giving school districts more money won't result in more good teachers getting hired as long as they still aren't able to give a decent salary to new hires. The older teachers with more power in NEA/AFT will go on screwing younger teachers and take the extra revenue for themselves.

[MadHound]

90. Speaking of not reading, I didn't link to an article in my OP,

And frankly have no idea what you're blathering about in that regard. Perhaps you're mistaking me for somebody else?

Charter school lottery, ooo. Have you ever seen how weighted those things are? Have you ever read those charters and seen how students with disabilities, physical or learning, can be disallowed? Guess not, and so much for whole lottery thing.

You want to look for discrepancies in schools, let's look at urban schools. One urban school's tax base includes several businesses, a factory and decent residential areas. The other consists of blocks of abandoned homes, a few convenience stores and lots of rental houses (which are, in some cases, taxed at a lower rate). That's your discrepancy right there, again boiling down to the relative prosperity of the tax base. Money, that's what it comes down to.

Your reasoning for why starting teachers are paid crap is, well, faulty to say the least. The low pay isn't due to the seniority system, but again due to money (funny how it keeps coming back to that). Again, school funding propositions need a supermajority to pass, and most of the time they don't. Thus, not just beginning teachers, but all teachers are paid poorly.

Back to that issue of seniority, what is your beef with seniority pay? What, you don't think that people who have experience should be paid for that experience? That's contrary to the way that pay scales across all professions work. Tell you what, when you get thirty years in seniority at your job can we cut it back to starting wage? What, you don't like that? So why do you think this "solution" should be applied to teachers?

You're not only anti-education, but you're also anti-union. Congratulations, you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[proud2BlibKansan]

96. Crickets

:rofl:

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donco6]

127. Guess you hit a nerve. Oops. n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

92. What article in the OP?

And hey if I'm screwing younger teachers please tell me what I'm getting out of it. Is it at least good sex!

[MadHound]

98. If you're screwing younger teachers,

Tell me how you're getting away with it.

The poster obviously has no clue about anything to do with education. Another "expert" with no experience, something that education has far too many of.

[proud2BlibKansan]

102. Should I be using a condom?

I mean if I'm really screwing them I want to be responsible about it.

[MadHound]

103. Don't worry, McDonald's has got you covered,

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8745758>

[proud2BlibKansan]

106. LOL!!

[donco6]

95. I can tell you what they do here.

What were the public charters schools doing well that made them so successful and popular with parents?

Here, we have many charters. Colorado was one of the first to implement charter law. There are a number of reasons why parents find certain ones attractive:

1. Marketing. Charters which are part of national corporations know how to market. This is foreign territory to public schools. Charters set aside considerable amounts of funding to purchase air time, billboards, newspaper ads, direct mailers, etc. We get them all the time. For some reason, it's not seen as a "waste of money" for them, but if we were to do that, we'd have taxpayers down our back complaining about how we're not spending our money on the kids.

2. Curriculum. Some charters offer curriculum that's attractive to a certain segment of the population. Core Knowledge is one of these. It's a philosophy that says all knowledge is framed upon Core concepts, and without a strong understanding of the Core, you don't have anything to link new knowledge to. Some public schools have adopted it, but not a lot. It's pushed strongly in fundamentalist churches. It tends to be very Western-centric.

3. Magnet-cum-Charter. Some charters are created as magnet schools. These are schools that limit their enrollment to a certain population. Denver School of the Arts is one of these. Others operate as magnets, though they claim to accept anyone who applies. But when you see that claim, you really have to dig deeper. What is the application process like? Normally, you'll find an application form, an essay requirement, some family information. And it's all in English. Around here, that would automatically discourage our Spanish-speaking kids. They know the score.

4. Discipline. Charters don't have to worry about discipline. If a kid doesn't toe the line, he's sent back to the default school. If a kid misses a certain number of days of school, he's sent back to the default school. They cannot be accused of denying access to instruction because the default school exists. It's the public school that has to worry about number of suspensions, expulsions, truancy, Office of Civil Rights complaints, etc. So this looks attractive to parents.

5. School buildings. This can be a plus or minus. Here in Colorado, a large number of charters were formed for White Flight. They relocated out to suburbs where they secured financing and constructed new school buildings from COPs or community finance bonds or other instruments. A new building looks attractive to parents.

6. Test score success. Again, in a White Flight charter, the test scores will look elevated, so that's a given. Other charters appeal directly to other populations though and sometimes they can seem to show "success" with them. KIPP is one of these. But KIPP's success is misleading. Again, you have the discipline and attendance issues wrapped up, so that's going to weed out quite a few low performers. And KIPP is completely built around this discipline concept, so they're even more strict than others. But their model DEPENDS on being able to get rid of kids who don't follow their Behavior Standards. But from a parent perspective, this looks attractive.

7. Special education. Charters usually do not accept high-needs special education kids. These include medical needs (trach tubes, stomach tubes, one-on-one paras, etc.) and emotionally disturbed (which are the peak of high needs, often requiring outplacement at Day Treatment centers year-round at about $40,000 per student). The charter often will accept low- and moderate-needs students, so you'll often hear that they take them, but this is misleading. This saves a charter an awful lot of money, as we are reimbursed at only 30% of our actual cost for service delivery for special education students.

What barriers were keeping the same things from happening at non-charter public schools?

I think I spelled out quite a few things in the list above. Public schools serve as the "default" school for the charters. We're the last chance, and we also bear greater responsibility. We have to monitor how many kids we expel, for example. If we have too many from a minority, we get complaints filed with the Office of Civil Rights and we can fall under sanctions. If we have kids who are truant, we cannot just kick them out because public schools cannot deny them access to education. There is no default under us.

Having said that, we can create schools that offer what charters offer. We have quite a few here. We have 3 Expeditionary Learning, a Montessori, A Big Picture school, some others. What I found when we brought them on board was that they almost DEMANDED a default school. We refused to provide one. Their models, at that point, depended on being able to remove any kids who didn't "fit" their program! We don't do that here. So they're really having to learn how to work with kids who have nowhere else to go. And actually - they're doing it.

Hopefully this helps you to understand some things.

[donco6]

118. Or not. n/t

[Radical Activist]

120. What is this supposed to mean?

Yes, when there are three people writing very lengthy responses it's not realistic to expect that I'm going to respond to everyone immediately.

You pull the bait and switch I always see in these discussion. MadHound keeps doing it as well.
1) Bash Duncan for his evil Chicago public charter school shenanigans.
2) Use the worst stories of private charter schools from Tennessee, Colorado or anywhere else other than Chicago PUBLIC charters.

You see why I'm skeptical?

[donco6]

125. I can't speak for Chicago. Sorry.

I can only speak of my own experience. Ignore it if you like. These aren't worst case scenarios - just what happens on a daily basis here.

[Orlandodem]

25. Obama is destroying American public education. Obama is pissing off 4 million teachers.

Obama, and all Democrats, will pay in 2012 if he keeps this up.

[ecstatic]

28. How can you defend a school in the bottom 5%

:shrug: Probably because nobody you know attends one. I think more money should go towards making sure each school has enough teachers, etc... but something MUST be done about schools that continue to under perform.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. How about lowering class sizes and providing more social services in the school?

If a school is in the bottom 5%, it's probably full of students from severely damaged and struggling families. How many bottom 5% schools are in Scarsdale, Grosse Pointe, Beverly Hills, or other affluent communities?

[Catshrink]

32. Start with the underperforming parents

Where are they? How are students held accountable? Poverty? Unemployment? Anti-intellectualism? Schools are part of the equation but most important is the attitude kids bring to the classroom. If they don't want to learn and don't get support at home and won't even bother getting their butts to school, it isn't the school that's underperforming but the school gets all the blame.

[MadHound]

33. Actually, being a teacher, I know several people who have attended one of those

So please, don't ass u me.

But you're right, we need to fund these schools. Let me explain why and how these schools are underfunded.

First and foremost, school funding is based on the local property tax base. Schools in inner cities and rural areas don't have a large tax base to deal with, therefore their funds are low. Furthermore, virtually every school funding policy is put to the test of the voters, something that we don't do with hardly any other sector of government (when's the last time we voted on whether politicians get raises or not). Not only do we subject school funding to the whims of the voters, but in almost every locale, it takes a supermajority to pass any school funding issue, again, something that is not required for other sectors of government. Therefore, while most people are in favor of funding their local schools, enough cranks and anti-tax folks can be found and organized in order to kill the funding. This has been going on year in, year out for over fifty years. The cumulative effect of this is that schools, especially in low tax base districts, become chronically underfunded, and thus under performing. Hard to teach science when running water isn't available in the science labs. Hard to teach biology when the text books are from before DNA was mapped.

So we need to dramatically change local funding practices, that's the first step.

The second step is to change state funding policies. Education funding is always a target in state budgets. One of the reasons is that state education funds are now, in many states, dependent upon lottery or other gambling revenue. That's how gambling was sold to the states, they could use the money for education. But instead of adding that gambling revenue to state education funds, gambling revenue became the state education funds. And that revenue fluctuates dramatically from year to year.

Furthermore, the state each have some sort of formula for distribution of that money to local school districts, and in most states that funding formula is skewed towards giving more money to suburban districts while giving a pittance to inner city and rural school districts, who once again have the short end of the stick.

So we need to dramatically change how we fund schools on a state level, namely preventing the fluctuations in state funding and changing the fund formulas in order to make sure that every school district gets their fair share.

Finally, we need to change how federal education funding is awarded, crafted, and implemented. Education funds have become one of the big footballs of the federal government, being kicked around and around, changing from one administration to another. For instance, this Race to the Top funding is full of hooks, mainly that if a desperate state wants those funds, they've got to institute more tests, merit based pay (based on testing) and wipe out any laws that limit private schools. This is the ultimate in cynical education funding, especially in these desperate times. However strings like this have been attached to previous funding initiatives and education is one of the lower priorities in federal government funding anyway.

Thus, we need to stop the feds from using education funds as a football and fulfill the rhetoric that politicians love to preach, namely that education is one of the top priorities in this country.

If you took these steps, I guarantee you that under performing schools would start performing well.

[kelly1mm]

60. But the "beauty" of the bottom 5% meme is there will ALWAYS be

a bottom 5% - even if every school had every student getting 90+ percent of the test questions correct. Similar problem with AYP. If a school starts out with 90% proficient in 10 years it better be 100% proficient of it is now a failing school for not making AYP. It does not matter that they may be the highest preforming school in the district - they did not increase so FAIL!

[donco6]

34. I have several of those in my district.

According to the state metrics, they fall in the "bottom five percent" (which is very difficult to figure - bottom five in what exactly?)

We had a school this past year that we closed due to "low-performance." We didn't want to, but because of NCLB rules, the state was going to take it over and turn it into a charter. We didn't feel that was in the best interest of the kids, so we closed it ourselves and helped the kids enroll in other schools.

That particular school is located in our lowest-income area of our very low-income district. Recent news showed our zip code having the highest rate of unemployment and foreclosure in Colorado (We're in southern Adams County). The kids arrive speaking no English - about 80% are monolingual Spanish when they arrive. By third grade, they have to speak English well enough to meet proficiency on the state CSAP test. This is not a "standardized" test, where 50% of the kids "pass", this is a standards-based test where you either hit the bar or you don't. Most of our kids didn't.

This hurdle is very difficult to pass when your population is so concentrated. We focused intense effort here - the best training, the best leadership, extra paraprofs in classrooms, after-school tutoring, summer school, Title I funds - you name it. We saw great growth in student performance from year to year - always more than a year's growth in a year - but it was never enough to clear the bar.

So now that school is gone. I knew very well the kids who attended there. They are smart, bright, intelligent kids who can't speak English yet. The teachers are hardworking, knowledgeable, competent folk. The parents in that community very much wanted their kids to learn English. So it wasn't for anyone not trying really, really hard. And it had nothing to do with the union.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

40. Oh, donco, quit confusing the right-wingers with FACTS

Actually, I'll grant them a point if they can name one school in an affluent area with a majority of college-educated parents that is in the bottom 5%.

The whole Arne Duncan approach can be summed up in the following bit of office folklore:

"Floggings will continue until morale improves."

[LWolf]

37. Schools underperform?

They are perpetually underfunded, and understaffed, of course, and that leads to fewer options when it comes to serving students.

Students underperform. Educate yourself about the reasons why.

[w8liftinglady]

45. one of my best friends is a 5th grade teacher in "the bottom 5"

He is a hero in my eyes.The students come from impoverished families,many with single parents.Their home lives are horrific.Many have been the victims of abuse or neglect.The fact that they can perform on grade level now that he has worked with them for a year means so much more than any test.They have self-esteem and some hope.They have friends.They can communicate with people outside their neighborhood.Many came from homes that did not speak English.This accounted for a good portion of low-performing grades.The teachers drive 30 miles to teach these kids.They do it because they love them and are committed to their getting a good education.
I'm trying to figure out how these teachers/schools will be punished?Will they fire these teachers who don't perform according to some standard?I'm a nurse,and understand the necessity of performing according to standards-but there are people who,because of some life situation-fall out.I feel this is eliminating the few who can communicate with these kids.
Just my opinion.

[MadHound]

46. According to Obama's ESEA renewal plan, the bottom five percent of schools will suffer 1 of 2 fates,

Either the entire staff at the school will be fired, and new staff brought in (cheaper, less skilled staff at that, probably Teach for America grads, etc.). Or the school itself will be closed, bought out by a private company and reopened as a charter school (again the staff would be let go).

This would go on, year in, year out, each year the bottom five percent, no matter how well they're actually doing, would be closed out and replaced with private, charter schools. Twenty years from now, we will see the spectacle of well funded, well educating schools being closed because they were now in the bottom five percent, since all the rest of the lower performing school would be gone. It is a stealth way of privatizing our school system across the country.

[Jakes Progress]

59. Don't believe the neocon propaganda.

You are smarter than that. Under perform on what scale, by what measure, on a test created by whom? Stop looking for simplistic answers. There aren't any.

[proud2BlibKansan]

67. I know lots of kids who attend one of the low performing schools

And I know quite a few folks working in them.

Does that mean my opinion on this issue is suddenly valid?? Woohoo. I'm thrilled.

[LWolf]

35. There is no legitimate defense. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. Reagan had "welfare queens" Obama has "underperforming teachers".

[blondeatlast]

52. No, I'm considered a cheerleader here, but I think it's shameful

to threaten public education the way he has.

[Radical Activist]

62. Will any reform that threatens seniority based pay be portrayed as evil incarnate?

Probably.

[Hannah Bell]

66. straw

[Radical Activist]

75. No, it's pretty obviously true.

We see it again and again.

[MadHound]

72. Now where did I mention anything about seniority based pay? Oh, yeah, I didn't

My main complaints are the lack of money for education and the privatization of education. But somehow you got seniority based pay out of that.

OoooK then, I'll just let you go on your merry way since it is obvious that you have nothing relevant to contribute to this discussion.

[Radical Activist]

76. Right, much of the public see the weakness of the seniority pay system

so the argument is made on other grounds, like gross exaggeration about Obama promoting private charters and hating unions.

[MadHound]

80. Ah, so you're accusing me of being disingenuous, I see.

Whatever.

First of all, let me address public perceptions about education in general, the main one being that it is something that they want, but they don't want to pay for. This is shown over and over again in failed school bond after failed school bond. That's where this hatred of seniority pay system comes in (a system that is used through the various professions, yet I don't see the public complaining about paying a doctor with thirty years experience more than a doctor with two, why's that?)

Second of all, the public also believes that they have the right to meddle in every little thing about their school district. This results in everything from helicopter parents to getting RW fundies on school boards across the country, cramming creationism down our throats. It is past time to start letting educational professionals, the ones with the background and experience in education, to start making the decisions, to start setting policy (and yes, this includes getting that idiot Duncan out as SoE). We wouldn't let a rank amateur decide how a high rise would be constructed, simply because he lives in one, so why do we do that with education policy?

And as far as tenure goes, please, go read a tenured teacher's contract. They are not bullet proof, not by any stretch of the imagination. They can be fired, it isn't even that hard (just look around places like KC or Central Fall RI). Tenure simply means that the teacher gets a fair hearing before the school board before the decision is made. *GASP* Heresy! I don't get that at my job! That's what unions are for, to fight for your rights like that:eyes:

[Radical Activist]

83. I've seen funding referenda for schools pass many times.

When they fail its usually because the public has specific issues with how money is being spent or how the schools are run. That's democracy and the public has every right to have a voice in what's being taught to their children. To suggest the public doesn't have that right is offensively elitist, anti-democratic bullshit that makes me hope you aren't a civics teacher. Unbelievable.

[MadHound]

88. I've seen them pass many times as well, however I've seen them fail many, many more times

The reason being that it takes a supermajority to pass any school funding proposition. Tell me, what other government funding measure takes a supermajority to pass it?

Then there is the fact that school funding is horribly mismanaged when it comes to distribution. At the local level, funding depends on the property tax base, which means that wealthier areas get the funding they need while urban and rural schools are left high and dry. Furthermore, states funding formulas for distribution of state education monies are also skewed in favor of suburban schools, again, leaving urban and rural areas out in the cold.

So I suppose you think that we should allow ordinary folks to determine when and how a medical procedure is done? Or how the fire department puts out a chemical fire? Or how large a sewer pipe needs to be? Oh, you think that should be left to the experts in the field? So why don't we let the experts in the field of education determine education policy? Or do you like having creationism forced upon our children.

[Radical Activist]

114. Those laws vary by state.

I agree that property taxes are a poor way to fund education. That has nothing to do with Chicago charter schools that are all in the same district. As a state law, it's also outside of Obama's control.

What schools teach and how they operate have a significant impact on everyone in the community. So the community deserves a voice. The idea that everyone should unquestionably hand their child over to big brother for whatever educational experience that particular school chooses is frightening. Your attitude reaffirms my feeling that there are educators who will portray any reform as horrifying because they don't welcome any change desired by the general public.

[proud2BlibKansan]

97. The tax payers in my district haven't approved a tax increase to fund schools since 1969

Do the math. That's 41 years.

[MadHound]

99. Geez, and I thought I had it bad out here in the sticks,

My local district hasn't passed one for seven years, I thought that was criminal. Forty one years, :wow: No wonder the schools up there are going to hell.

[proud2BlibKansan]

100. That's why the federal judge on the deseg case ordered a tax increase

And made the state of MO help pay for improvements in the district. But since then we've been public enemy #1 in the state of MO.

[MadHound]

101. Yeah, I knew you guys were getting the short end of the stick from the state,

But damn, forty one years, what's it going to take to get your local folks to pull the lever for a school bond?

[proud2BlibKansan]

104. They're poor and they believe the hype

The majority of the people in this community believe we are unaccredited. But we are not and never have been. Between TIF financing, real estate red lining that created segregated communities and poverty, this district has lost the PR game. It's actually quite sad. Our kids deserve so much better.

[MadHound]

105. That sucks, that really does,

Out here in the sticks the farmers around here are conservative, anti-tax and anti-education. The demographic is changing, slowly but surely, but in the meantime our schools continue to suffer as well.

What's sad is that these farmers pool their money together every year to defeat the school bond, and in doing so pay out about the same amount of money each year as what we're asking for taxes. Insanity at its finest.

[proud2BlibKansan]

108. We are both battling ignorance

The very thing our business labors to prevent.

It's pretty frustrating.

[Hannah Bell]

133. wow. what was the disparity between your district & other (maybe suburban?) districts?

[donco6]

107. We've failed 4 times and I can show you where every penny is spent.

I've never had a complaint about how our money is spent, not in 15 years.

[proud2BlibKansan]

109. Decisions about what is being taught need to be made by educators

Not politicians and certainly not parents. Look at Texas and their schoolbook nonsense. That can be avoided if you let the educators make those decisions.

[Radical Activist]

112. Maybe unresponsive attitudes like this

are why funding increases keep failing in your area. Few things impact the community more than what's being taught in schools, so yes, the community should have a role.

[proud2BlibKansan]

113. A role yes. But the decision should be made by experts.

Unless you want Texas textbooks in every state.

I live in Kansas. I know first hand what happens when folks who aren't experts make curriculum decisions.

[wcast]

81. Pennsylvania charter schools defend test scores

How about the fact that it is not working?!!

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_689889.html

By Jodi Weigand
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, July 11, 2010

"The latest Pennsylvania assessment test scores show that more charter school students are underperforming than students at traditional public schools.

Among charter school students, about 20 percent didn't meet basic academic standards in reading and math, compared with about 12 percent of district students, according to 2009 Pennsylvania System of Student Assessment test results.

"I get very upset when a report comes out and then people think that charter schools are no good," said Richard Wertheimer, founder, CEO and principal of City Charter High School, Downtown, which was given a warning last year because not enough black students met state math standards.

Whether a school meets federally-mandated student achievement goals is based on the number of students who score as advanced or proficient, meaning they showed a solid understanding of the material. About 75 percent of Pennsylvania public school students scored advanced or proficient in reading and math, compared with about 59 percent of charter school students."

I love it when the shoe is on the other foot. Now test scores don't mean anything?!! Everyone knows what works in education. Small class size. That is what charter schools are able to do, along with hand-picking their students like private schools. Or, how about paying teachers well enough to attract certified individuals to those underperforming districts like Philly in PA, where up to 40% of teachers are either not certified or are working out of their area of certification. You could also fix their schools, go back to neighborhood schools. People love to say that money is not the problem, but it definitely is. Bankers and wall street types are worth their money, but teacher's make too much!! Give me a break. Real reform costs money, it can not be done on the cheap. Most teachers work because they love what they do, not for the so called cushy job.

[bvar22]

85. Defense of Obama's assault on public education:

*You didn't get a pony.

*He doesn't have a magic wand.

*It takes a long time to turn a ship around.

*You didn't pay attention during the campaign.

*Its the Republicans' fault.

*We don't have 60 votes.

*Its only been 18 months.

*You never loved Obama.

*Thats just Right Wing Talking Points.

*You want Palin.

That was easy!
:party:

[Starry Messenger]

93. Hell no. There is no defense.

It's the biggest case of magical thinking I've ever seen. That they seemingly cannot put together the fact that so many families are struggling with poverty and unemployment and the fact that schools are being starved of resources and funds with the fact that students are struggling in school makes me wonder what planet these folks came from. I thought this was the "reality based" party. I think a larger dose of reality is obviously called for. If it isn't rank lack of reasoning power, then it is a cynical and heartless move to carry out the right wing agenda under the mantle of a Democratic administration.

[MadHound]

94. Sadly, I think it is the latter, a cynical and heartless move,

After all, we are talking about our two party/same corporate master system of government.

[Starry Messenger]

126. I tend to agree with you.

Some days my only scrap of hope is that they are just dumb, but this has all the earmarks of a well-thought-out plan to raid the public commons. If the Bush administration was orchestrating this there would be no end of protest here.

[Dinger]

116. Not Me, No Can Do

Sorry:-(

[Radical Activist]

119. The trouble at this point

is that you appear so hostile to any reform that I don't know whether I can believe your claims without specific references. I also read an awful lot of claims about what Obama's program may do with little or no mention of what it's actually funding so far. That's a red flag.

[Catshrink]

122. Well then do your own research.

It's a red flag for those of us in education when someone makes demands and wants us to do the leg work. Believe me, we have ample experience from our classrooms with students who try to get us to do the work for them. This discussion has been going for a while. Read up on education issues. You've already been given sources but what you seem to want is us to point your little nose at your specific demand, whatever that is.

It gets old, ya know. Every time madfloridian or hannah bell or another educator posts information about education, someone pops up who cannot fathom that something the administration is doing may not be beneficial to a democratic society.

If you don't want to take the time to educate yourself, maybe this isn't your issue. If you want to participate, you've got to do the work, if you just want to defend, well, if you want to be effective you still need to do your research.

[Radical Activist]

124. When someone makes a claim

the burden is typically on them to provide supporting evidence.
Referencing two of the most dogmatically inflexible posters in this forum doesn't help your argument. That may even be the cause of so many defensive reactions.

[donco6]

128. Under the bus with you, madfloridian and Hannah Bell!

You dogmatically inflexible posters, you!

[Catshrink]

135. And your little dog, too!

[madfloridian]

139. lol Just call me "dogmatically inflexible". I am okay with that.

I bet those that say I provide no evidence have never followed a single link of my research.

:hi:

[donco6]

140. That just makes me crazy.

Someone who can be on this board for years and claim to know NOTHING about the issues surrounding Obama, Duncan, NCLB, RTTT - WTF?

SOMEONE HASN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION!

[Catshrink]

136. Yeah...

and they have but the scales in your eyes prevent you from seeing it.

Get this: there's something called educational research part of which deals with how children learn. NONE of the educational research is being referenced or even looked at by the Arnephiles. Why? It doesn't support the agenda of the billionaire boys' club. Arne Duncan doesn't talk to teachers, he doesn't care about how children learn but only on how they score on a once a year test. Education and learning are very complex, perhaps too complex for a former basketball player, who has never taught btw, to understand.

[BrklynLiberal]

130. No defense here.

Destruction of the public education system and union busting all in one swell foop.

[eridani]

131. No. Why do you ask? n/t

[JoePhilly]

144. Clearly, Obama hates kids.

[proud2BlibKansan]

145. He hates teachers. Public school teachers.

And unions.

[bluethruandthru]

146. No defense for it.

One of many disappointments from this administration. I'm still trying to hang on to the hope.