Page 194 of 201 FirstFirst ... 94144184192193194195196 ... LastLast
Results 1,931 to 1,940 of 2002

Thread: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

  1. #1931
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    The point is, when students and parents have greater options and greater freedom, the success rate is always a bit higher than the status quo. We should be giving students more of these open avenues to retain some sort of education regardless of standardization rules.
    Go for it, nothing's holding you back.



    I have little disagreement with the above stated facts. But it has little to do with our discussion. We're not talking about creating some massive cultural improvement. This debate is not about failing parents of a certain ethnic group. This is about giving those parents who care a chance to better the lives of their children. Look, if a parent is failing to be a proper parent (regardless of ethnic background), we, as outsiders, can only hope that the children of such parents can learn essential skills on their own and develop a sustainable, prosperous life. For those children, all we can do is hope. But for the thousands of poor parents who actually do care about the future of their children but do not have the means to change their learning environment, a liberalization of education is exactly what they're looking for. I've brought it up with Boo and I'll bring it up with you. Have you been reading about the parent trigger laws in Compton and Chicago? Under your pro-status quo position, those poor parents are screwed. They have no other options. Under my position, they have choices and alternatives
    .


    It has quite a bit to do with our discussion since you previously implied I might be racist for stating the fact that African-American children generally score lower in math and science due predominately to socio-econominc reasons. We need to address that obstacle to learning.

    I was just reading of the achievements by the Compton public school, "State test scores at the school have risen 77 points over the past two years, said Frank Wells, Southern California representative for the California Teachers Association. "We've got something that appears to be working," he said. "We would've preferred that the parents pushing this would've been more amenable to working with the teachers in the school." This shows education reform does not require the elimination of public schools.
    Compton Parents Use New 'Trigger Law' To Demand Charter School


    So, what about the special needs schools and learning institutions that were created specifically to meet the needs of such students? Are you in denial of their existence?
    You are not familiar with public education if you think all special needs kids go to special schools. "The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as amended in 2004, does not require inclusion. Instead, the law requires that children with disabilities be educated in the "least restrictive environment appropriate” to meet their “unique needs.” And the IDEA contemplates that the "least restrictive environment" analysis will begin with placement the regular education classroom." I know because my wife was a special needs teacher in a public school.
    Special Education Inclusion | Special Education | Resource Pages on Issues | Issues & Advocacy | WEAC | Special Education | Resource Pages on Issues | Issues & Advocacy | Wisconsin Education Association Council



    That's if you can get the politicians and bureaucrats to stop wasting money on ridiculous program and fancy buildings. In reality, however, class sizes can only be a certain size. If you see a large influx of students, you can either cram more into the classroom or you can build more classrooms and hire more teachers. Private schools have the resources and the freedom to build more classes, more schools, and hire more teachers. Do you see public schools doing any of that? No, and it's largely because they're restricted by regulation. It took two decades of overcrowding and parental complaints before the district in my town FINALLY decided to build a second school. And when they should be hiring teachers, administrators are instead building fancier buildings and hiring more administrators. While the bureaucratic structure acts like the typical bureaucratic structure, the private schools are doubling, even tripling, the number of schools and the number of teachers in a classroom.
    Like I said, you get what you pay for. Its what happens when there is a preference for tax dollars going to give the wealthy tax breaks instead of to education.



    Do you eat? Is eating an essential part of living? Yes? Yes? Ok, well do you depend on the government (or public sector) to fill your belly with nourishment? Do you depend on the public sector to put clothes on your back or a roof over your head? The vast majority of Americans depend on themselves (the private sector) to meet essential demands for food, clothing, and shelter. Why should health care or education be any different? Those who cannot afford such items (and it is truly a small minority) have charity to depend upon.
    Its only important if we care about being competitive in the world.


    What? That is a ridiculous remark. Charity can afford to take on the education of children whose parents truly cannot afford education. My grandfather is a prime example. He was born the old-fashioned way, in a shotgun house at the hands of a midwife. His family had no monetary resources. They depended upon their community to serve their educational needs. A localized community is far more efficient in providing charity for those who need it as opposed to a giant national government that coddles any and all who apply for a handout. And by the way, my specific design for education would mirror the systems in Western Europe where public educational funds are tied directly to the students and it is the parents who decide the education. In the cases of Denmark or the Netherlands, rather than spending 12K per pupil per year on a grossly mismanaged school system, they instead distribute a fraction of that money to parents who then choose (from a variety of options) their child's education. Public schools in such countries are forced to compete with private schools and other public schools for the attention and funds of the parent. And such a system has had remarkable success.

    In your grandfather's day, special needs children were kept at home or in institutions, and I would be willing to wager there were not many poor black kids at your grandfathers private school either. You are trying to compare oranges and apples.

    That is kind of going in my direction. And do you wish to provide any commentary for such a system?
    I quoted it above and provided a link.


    I'm saying that all degrees are not equal in worth and the market dictates (according to basic supply and demand) the necessary wages of a certain occupation. I highly praise those who live to teach, and such individuals are usually found in private or independent schools. Just look at my comparison. You have one teacher in a public school getting paid fabulous wages compared to his private school counterpart, fabulous benefits (which they certainly are), and union protection. When any of those things are questioned or called under review, the teacher goes on strike and the students are left without a teacher. Where are all the underpaid private school teachers in this fiasco? They're still in their classrooms teaching kids because that is what they live to do.
    So you are interested in arriving at the lowest common denominator. Big surprise. I am interested in attracting the best and the brightest. We have different priorities you and I.


    Your approach is not realistic, it is simply status quo. And your comments comparing teachers to ditch diggers is incredibly condescending. I, too, agree that teaching is one of the most important and (in some cases) one of the more difficult jobs in this country. But even those circumstances do not necessarily warrant a six-figure salary.
    Who's making a six figure salary? The average teacher salary in Wisconsin is only $51,000. If you add in the benefits, its only $75,000. What do you feel teachers should make? And don't cop out that it depends on market rates. What salary do you think would attract the best of our college graduates?

    I'll ask you straight out, do you believe an individual with a bachelor's degree in engineering should be paid exactly the same (let's control for experience) as an individual with a bachelor's degree in sociology?
    It depends on what their job is. Are you implying that engineering is more important than educating the future generations? If you want to make comparisons, do you think a college educated teacher should make no more than a ditch digger or a truck driver with a HS education or GED?

    When did I ever say they should ll be paid the same? THAT is EXACTLY what you said regarding educational backgrounds. And being that you view your own standards as supreme over the standards of the entire world, what (in your kingdom of kingdoms) kind of teaching salary would you dictate? I'm not looking for charity to take on my responsibility, either. All I've said was that charitable organizations have the capability to take on the educational responsibilities of the small minority of people who cannot truly afford an education for their children. And I'm right, just based on observations regarding other essential demands and needs like food, clothing, and shelter.
    If you lower their wages, they will be the same. Nothing stops charitable organizations from helping out now. However, you can't expect, nor would we want, charities and corporations to take over one of the most components of the success of our nation.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  2. #1932
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    Explain why smaller class sizes, zero tolerance toward violence and misbehavior, and greater parental involvement are not "especially desirable differences." And another thing- you're misconstruing my positions. I do not support the elimination of public schools but rather championing for greater free choice and liberalization. We can't have all parents involved because this isn't a perfect world. But currently, the parents who wish to choose an alternative education for their child are left absolutely hopeless without the proper monetary resources. We can give these parents what they desire through greater empowerment. Have you been reading up on the parent trigger laws? I suppose you're against them.
    Not sure you're following me. no one said any of those weren't desirable. But, it is a difference between public and private schools. If private schools had to adhere to the same rules and population, which would include larger classrooms and uninvolved aprents, they would struggle just as much. It isn't the teaching that is different, but the population. And private schools can control the popualtion.


    We both have passed agreed that violence and illegal behavior must never be tolerated in a school setting, regardless of public or private affiliation. You expressed contempt for the fact that public school are forced to retain such students (some are, and other districts offer alternative options), and you have even gone so far as to support the repeal of truancy laws in order to help this proposal succeed. Very few of your colleagues agree with you on this position, I imagine. But it is one of the few places where we can agree.
    Yes we agree on this. How many others do or don't I can't say.

    I have asked you repeatedly to define "fixing public schools" and your only past responses have been very vague generalizations of what we 'could' do to raise the respect of teachers and schools and to reduce waste. I believe your idea of "fixing" is merely throwing more money at the problem. You don't seem to support any sort of reform in the way schools and parents account for the behavior and success of teachers. As I recall, you gave teachers VERY LITTLE responsibility in the actual performance results of the classroom, indicating you believe teachers are never failing in their endeavors and only maintain a microscopic efect (if that) on the overall success of the students. Very few spectators would agree with such sentiments.
    Actual specifics require more than can be done at this level of discussion. We need to involve actual teachers in this process. Demanding respect and respectful behavior at school is a start. Limiting class sizes even if it costs the tax payer another. If a student isn't in school to learn, that students goes home. The parent can work out babysitting.

    And you misread me concerning teachers. They are responsible for their doing their job to the best of their ability like anyone else. We differ on how we think we evaluate that. Teacher control only a few of the factors involved instudent success. They should be responisblle for knowledge of content and method of delivery, their job, and effort, as we all should be in any occupation, but students have minds of theit own, effected by all the things that effect any human being, with minds that are not fully developed, making them more likley to think irrationally. Add to it poor parents, or hunger, or violent neighborhoods, or abuse, or drug use, or all of them and the student becomes a very difficult challenege that most would likely fail at teaching.

    And again, I do not see private schools as the silver bullet solution. Instead, I support greater liberalization of education because I TRULY believe education is an individual pursuit and it requires an especially tailored learning process, regardless of the ability or intelligence of the student. It is also moral, in my opinion, to give parents and children the freedom to choose their own learning institutions and to retain some control over their own learning methods.
    You want to spend tax payer dollars for it, and I see that as removing the better students with the most support from the public school, and leaving the most challeneging behind. This is defeatist, and not how our public dollar should be spent imho.


    I hold administrators and politicians more responsible for the current problems facing America. Teachers do share a portion of the responsibility, but of course you seem to believe teachers are somehow absolved of ALL performance matters.
    Again, judge teachers on what they are responsible for. They don't take the tests, and cannot make a student even try, let alone succeed. Learning is something the students does. Without the student trying, learning will not take place, no matter how good the teacher is or isn't.


    You've pretty much brought up every argument piece that Ravitch has stated. Some of it I can agree with, like the failure of NCLB. However, she specifically criticizes testing and choice as undermining education. She goes on to discuss the testing aspect, which I tend to sympathize in some parts. But she never mentions the reasons why free choice is undermining education. I even scoured the Internet for articles written by her and I found one published in the Wall Street Journal. Again, she says nothing about choice but only focuses on the testing.
    It takes money away from the publiic school, leaving the most needy the least resources.

    Imagine that! An inconclusive poll with contradicting responses. Who would have figured?
    It's more one of interst in that the contradictions raise a few questions.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #1933
    Mr. Professional
    Mensch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,666
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Amazing! When public employee workers organize, they call it a rightful protest. When inner-city parents and their affiliates do it, it's called "slash-and-burn" organizing. There's not a shred of evidence that these parents or the organizations that they're apart of are resorting to intimidation of any kind. An article in the LA Times (which by the way, is quite confusing in its delivery of information) is not substantial proof to document such "harassment."

  4. #1934
    Mr. Professional
    Mensch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,666
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Go for it, nothing's holding you back.
    First of all, I am not a parent. Second of all, I'm championing for educational free choice so that those with the least amount of resources may have the opportunity to choose from a variety of options. Look at it this way, you're talking to a libertarian who is willing to allocate public funds for education so long as the parents have a chance to spend that money on the school of their choice! In my proposal, the poorest of parents who care about their kid's education (you know, the kind you see gathering together at a community lottery for the chance to win a rare seat at a private school) would have a choice. Under your status-quo reckoning, there would be no change. Poor parents with no regard to their children's education will continue making poor choices and poor parents with a heart for concern will be stuck sending their kids to a poorly performing, gang-ridden school. You know that campaign for change? I haven't heard a single propoosal from your side that has deviated from the status quo. Throwing more money at the system without accounting for its direction IS the status quo.

    It has quite a bit to do with our discussion since you previously implied I might be racist for stating the fact that African-American children generally score lower in math and science due predominately to socio-econominc reasons. We need to address that obstacle to learning.
    And exactly what is that obstacle? Are you implying that white racism is keeping black children at a lower performing rate and we need to address such a problem with affirmative action style measures? I do believe there are serious problems facing a substantial number of families in this country, but I do not care to draw the lines on race and ethnicity because I frankly do not even recognize the existence of any race outside that of the human race. My observations and my proposals stem from a need for change that works, not one that placates racist theories or racially-designed quotas. I strongly support the free choice of all Americans, regardless of ethnic or economic background, to choose the best education for their children. As I've mentioned before, a person's color has nothing to do with their ability to perform well in school. Some of the best schools in the country are HBCUs and private all-black schools that catered to the African-American community when the public schools were closed to them.

    I was just reading of the achievements by the Compton public school, "State test scores at the school have risen 77 points over the past two years, said Frank Wells, Southern California representative for the California Teachers Association. "We've got something that appears to be working," he said. "We would've preferred that the parents pushing this would've been more amenable to working with the teachers in the school." This shows education reform does not require the elimination of public schools.
    Compton Parents Use New 'Trigger Law' To Demand Charter School
    An amazing fleet. Out of all the failure coming out of Compton's school district, you're perfectly willing to take the word of a single teacher's union spokesperson that highlights a very questionable improvement. Where's the actual evidence, besides his word? Why does the district continue to rank 22 out of 24 despite the two years of consistent improvement? Why does more than 60% of parents still wish to see radical change occur, if such radical change is already occurring? Are the parents just stupid? Why does the district continue to show such remarkable high rates of dropout and low rates of advanced education (3%!)? Is it simply because we're not spending enough tax dollars on the incredibly failing system? That can't be true, because we've doubled the amount spent per pupil over the past twenty years (adjusted for inflation) while improvements rates have remained flat lined. I know I'm repeating myself, but you never responded to such an essential statistic.

    You are not familiar with public education if you think all special needs kids go to special schools. "The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as amended in 2004, does not require inclusion. Instead, the law requires that children with disabilities be educated in the "least restrictive environment appropriate” to meet their “unique needs.” And the IDEA contemplates that the "least restrictive environment" analysis will begin with placement the regular education classroom." I know because my wife was a special needs teacher in a public school.
    Special Education Inclusion | Special Education | Resource Pages on Issues | Issues & Advocacy | WEAC | Special Education | Resource Pages on Issues | Issues & Advocacy | Wisconsin Education Association Council
    First of all, it becomes increasingly difficult to define "special needs students." You could be referring to mentally-disabled students or you could be referring to disruptive gifted students. In the case of both, it is obvious that a general, mainstream classroom may not be suitable for their needs. Gifted students are usually disruptive in class because they're not being challenged enough, and public schools are usually slow to see this. An obvious solution to their problem is to send them to advanced courses and/or technical training. Mentally-disabled students are a different matter entirely. I remember such students in my elementary school who were especially placed in special needs classrooms. Someone like your wife would have been their teacher. Yet, according to the letter of the law, this is absolutely unacceptable because a special needs classroom does not meet up to the standards of a "regular education classroom."

    Like I said, you get what you pay for. Its what happens when there is a preference for tax dollars going to give the wealthy tax breaks instead of to education.
    That's ridiculous. I carefully pointed out the faults of administrators wasting tax payer dollars on lavish spending habits, and you've got no other response but to tax more and spend more. Absolutely astonishing!

    Its only important if we care about being competitive in the world.
    What does that mean? Could you please respond directly to the points I made?

    In your grandfather's day, special needs children were kept at home or in institutions, and I would be willing to wager there were not many poor black kids at your grandfathers private school either. You are trying to compare oranges and apples.
    Granted, there wasn't as many African-American students in his school as there are today, but there was definitely a significant handful (his graduating class, after all, was only about three or four hundred). And again, times and attitudes have changed. It would be unfair to characterize all American private schools as 'racist' and restrictive to people of color. The best way to lift such restrictions would be by supporting an element of free choice. Under the status quo, there is no such thing. And as for the special needs students, I believe I've addressed this issue in the above paragraph, and I don't believe special needs is primary concern for advancing education reform. The problem lies mostly with poorly performing inner-city schools AND sub-par standards held by the majority of mainstream public schools. The real problem arises when we compare the test results of our students with those of foreign students in other countries. Even the best public schools in our suburbs can't compete with similar schools in Western Europe, Japan, Korea, or elsewhere. Obviously, the problem has nothing to do with special needs, but rather with general standards and freedom of choice.

    I quoted it above and provided a link.
    I asked specifically for COMMENTARY. A quote and a link is the opinion and research of someone else. I specifically wanted to know what YOU think.

    So you are interested in arriving at the lowest common denominator. Big surprise. I am interested in attracting the best and the brightest. We have different priorities you and I.
    There you go again, misconstruing my opinions. How are you able to take my praise for private school teachers (the best in the business) and turn it into the lowest common denominator? Do you really think you're the only one here wishing to attract the best and the brightest?

    Who's making a six figure salary? The average teacher salary in Wisconsin is only $51,000. If you add in the benefits, its only $75,000.
    Let's stop right there at 75,000. You obviously believe public school teachers (or teachers in general) are underpaid ditch diggers. I know of not a single ditch digger making 75K a year in wages and benefits.

    What do you feel teachers should make? And don't cop out that it depends on market rates. What salary do you think would attract the best of our college graduates?
    That is the difference between you and I. I don't support central planning by the enforcement of a dictator's iron fist. You believe teachers ought to be paid x number of dollars (you haven't yet specificed, but I'm sure you have a number swirling around in your head) and schools ought to be forced to pay such teachers the salary YOU deem appropriate. I, on the other hand, realize the situation is far more complicated. The market is filled with far too many factors and variables to leave such decisions up to a handful of politicians and bureaucrats.



    It depends on what their job is. Are you implying that engineering is more important than educating the future generations?
    No, I asked a specific question and you failed to answer it.

    If you want to make comparisons, do you think a college educated teacher should make no more than a ditch digger or a truck driver with a HS education or GED?
    I think you should pay me for wasting my time.

    If you lower their wages, they will be the same. Nothing stops charitable organizations from helping out now. However, you can't expect, nor would we want, charities and corporations to take over one of the most components of the success of our nation.
    There is plenty of things stopping charitable organizations from helping out. By taxing the crap out of the wealthiest of Americans, you are in effect taking money out of the hands of charitable organizations (who do you think have the resources to fund such organizations?) and giving it to a third party to be mismanaged into a wasteful system.

    And what do you mean by "charities and corporations taking over one of the most important components of the success of our nation"? I suppose you believe the only success stems from government and the public sector. That's very unfortunate.

  5. #1935
    Mr. Professional
    Mensch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,666
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Not sure you're following me. no one said any of those weren't desirable.
    "Yes, difference that can't be in the public school, and not especially desirable differences"

    But, it is a difference between public and private schools. If private schools had to adhere to the same rules and population, which would include larger classrooms and uninvolved aprents, they would struggle just as much.
    That's my main concern. Why should private OR public schools be forced to adhere to such rules? Why can't public districts and private academies be given the autonomy to build more schools, more classrooms and hire more teachers? I'd actually support higher taxes for education if I knew there would be free choice associated with the funding. If we can support the repeal of truancy laws, surely we can support the decentralization of education and essentially the deregulation of education. As for uninvolved parents, NEITHER one of us has a solution to such a problem. However, for the involved parents living with limited funding and a poorly-performing school, my solution gives them a way out. Yours does not.

    It isn't the teaching that is different, but the population. And private schools can control the popualtion.
    Then explain what is so remarkably different about American private schools and private schools in Western Europe. Private schools are based on private tuition. Therefore, it is possible for certain private schools to deny students based on their lack of ability to pay, but this isn't the case with all private schools or even the majority. As I've already mentioned numerous times, many private schools are tied to a church or an affiliated community. If an individual parent(s) cannot afford the tuition, private charity by and for the community steps in to make up the difference. But with my proposed system, even charity would not be necessary because parents would have direct access to their own educational funds (which by the way, they theoretically paid for in taxes). As for denying children based on their inability to learn, that is a bogus LIE.

    Yes we agree on this. How many others do or don't I can't say.
    I'm still trying to wrap my mind around your logic. You believe students and parents should have the right to abstain from education, but if they so choose to be educated, they must resort to public education or pay the hefty tuition by themselves (and therefore be taxed twice for the same education) in order to receive an alternative education.

    Actual specifics require more than can be done at this level of discussion. We need to involve actual teachers in this process. Demanding respect and respectful behavior at school is a start. Limiting class sizes even if it costs the tax payer another. If a student isn't in school to learn, that students goes home. The parent can work out babysitting.
    If you're so interested in raising more taxes to pay for more public schools, why can't we agree to allow the funding to be issued to the parents so they may choose the education of their choice? Again, it took two decades of overcrowding and complaints in order for my public school to expand and build another school. It takes a private academy just a couple of years to do the exact same thing. If you want the public school to start acting like the private school, you will need to deregulate and liberalize the education further.

    And you misread me concerning teachers. They are responsible for their doing their job to the best of their ability like anyone else. We differ on how we think we evaluate that. Teacher control only a few of the factors involved instudent success. They should be responisblle for knowledge of content and method of delivery, their job, and effort, as we all should be in any occupation, but students have minds of theit own, effected by all the things that effect any human being, with minds that are not fully developed, making them more likley to think irrationally. Add to it poor parents, or hunger, or violent neighborhoods, or abuse, or drug use, or all of them and the student becomes a very difficult challenege that most would likely fail at teaching.
    Yes, I acknowledge all of those variables. But in the past, it just seemed like you were shifting blame far away from the teachers. The current accountability measures include being evaluated by your closest colleague. That is by far the opposite of objective review. But I suppose you'll disagree.

    You want to spend tax payer dollars for it, and I see that as removing the better students with the most support from the public school, and leaving the most challeneging behind. This is defeatist, and not how our public dollar should be spent imho.
    Explain how such a system is defeatist in Denmark or the Netherlands. Explain something else to me. If a public school is absolved from paying the 12K necessary to teach a pupil because that pupil has relocated to a different school, how is that taking money away from the school? If the responsibility of the cost of learning has been shifted to another party, it is no longer the responsibility of the first party.

    Besides, this is largely irrelevant and speculation. Good public schools will continue to retain the majority of their students while neglectful public schools will be forced to change or withdraw. All in all, the individual retains the right to choose.

    Again, judge teachers on what they are responsible for. They don't take the tests, and cannot make a student even try, let alone succeed. Learning is something the students does. Without the student trying, learning will not take place, no matter how good the teacher is or isn't.
    It sounds like we could just issue the textbook and remove the teacher and let the chips fall where they may. And if you're against standardized testing, how else do you propose we evaluate the success of learning in the classroom? The tests which exist to illustrate the defining gap between our learning success and the learning success of other countries can be best described, in your opinion, as...<fill in the blank>

    It takes money away from the publiic school, leaving the most needy the least resources.
    Again, pure speculation. It could very well happen to public schools that are performing horribly, and well-performing schools will likely see little to no change. The issue is not protecting the funding (which is has been grossly overpaid) for public schools but ensuring the integrity of education as a whole. If more students benefit from such a reform, then why oppose it? Money is not the end-all solution to this problem.

    It's more one of interst in that the contradictions raise a few questions.
    What is that? Parents are stupid and educators know what's best? Let us examine the questions you're pondering. Do you believe parents truly believe their public schools are working in a adequate and sustainable fashion? If so, then what leads you to believe these same parents would remove their children from such successful schools if we allowed open enrollment?

  6. #1936
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    First of all, I am not a parent. Second of all, I'm championing for educational free choice so that those with the least amount of resources may have the opportunity to choose from a variety of options. Look at it this way, you're talking to a libertarian who is willing to allocate public funds for education so long as the parents have a chance to spend that money on the school of their choice!
    Oh, well that explains it. Enough said.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  7. #1937
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    "Yes, difference that can't be in the public school, and not especially desirable differences"
    Read the rest, as I try to explain the statement. We have to decide if we want public schools to be as restrictive.

    That's my main concern. Why should private OR public schools be forced to adhere to such rules? Why can't public districts and private academies be given the autonomy to build more schools, more classrooms and hire more teachers? I'd actually support higher taxes for education if I knew there would be free choice associated with the funding. If we can support the repeal of truancy laws, surely we can support the decentralization of education and essentially the deregulation of education. As for uninvolved parents, NEITHER one of us has a solution to such a problem. However, for the involved parents living with limited funding and a poorly-performing school, my solution gives them a way out. Yours does not.
    Because of freedom and money. Smaller classrooms cost. You have to have more teachers, maybe more schools, and it costs. We ahv eparents that will never really care. Do we abandon the children? It's an option. But we do have to decide. And it isn't schools that perfomr poorly, it's the population of students that perfom poorly. It is quite possible the instruction is sound, the effort great, and the population lacking. As no one has really assessed the reasons why a population scored poorly, you're making a leap in assuming it to be the school's failing.


    Then explain what is so remarkably different about American private schools and private schools in Western Europe. Private schools are based on private tuition. Therefore, it is possible for certain private schools to deny students based on their lack of ability to pay, but this isn't the case with all private schools or even the majority. As I've already mentioned numerous times, many private schools are tied to a church or an affiliated community. If an individual parent(s) cannot afford the tuition, private charity by and for the community steps in to make up the difference. But with my proposed system, even charity would not be necessary because parents would have direct access to their own educational funds (which by the way, they theoretically paid for in taxes). As for denying children based on their inability to learn, that is a bogus LIE.
    Again, cost is but one way to discriminate. Some discriminate based on ability or prepardness. Others on family or connections. Thepoint is they can be choosey. And keep in mind different countries have a different social outlook on education. In otherwords, their parents, their peers, everythign aropund them approaches education differently than here. You can't do a direct comparison.

    I'm still trying to wrap my mind around your logic. You believe students and parents should have the right to abstain from education, but if they so choose to be educated, they must resort to public education or pay the hefty tuition by themselves (and therefore be taxed twice for the same education) in order to receive an alternative education.
    Abstain? I thought we were talking about disruptive students? And it isn't resort. Public by definition means public. Private by definition means private. It seems very simple to me.

    If you're so interested in raising more taxes to pay for more public schools, why can't we agree to allow the funding to be issued to the parents so they may choose the education of their choice? Again, it took two decades of overcrowding and complaints in order for my public school to expand and build another school. It takes a private academy just a couple of years to do the exact same thing. If you want the public school to start acting like the private school, you will need to deregulate and liberalize the education further.
    Because private isn't really better than public. It is often actually more expensive. And if you change those rules, you make private public, and at the end of the day, we've only made one the other and fixed or improved nothing. Pasisng the problem on doesn't fix it.

    Yes, I acknowledge all of those variables. But in the past, it just seemed like you were shifting blame far away from the teachers. The current accountability measures include being evaluated by your closest colleague. That is by far the opposite of objective review. But I suppose you'll disagree.
    Not shifting, never shifting, but recognizing the limitations of the teachers, and how the focus is too narrao when it is only on the teacher, and therefore, ineffective.

    And no, I wouldn't make it a friend, if that is what you mean by closest. Someone who knows something about your subject and job would be valid.


    Explain how such a system is defeatist in Denmark or the Netherlands. Explain something else to me. If a public school is absolved from paying the 12K necessary to teach a pupil because that pupil has relocated to a different school, how is that taking money away from the school? If the responsibility of the cost of learning has been shifted to another party, it is no longer the responsibility of the first party.
    Why? Different country with diferent student populations and social views of education. I don't know near enough about thier situations. It isn't like different countries compare directly, or that we really want them to.

    Besides, this is largely irrelevant and speculation. Good public schools will continue to retain the majority of their students while neglectful public schools will be forced to change or withdraw. All in all, the individual retains the right to choose.
    Again, it isn't the school, as if it were a person, it is the population that goes there and all the factors involved with the school.

    It sounds like we could just issue the textbook and remove the teacher and let the chips fall where they may. And if you're against standardized testing, how else do you propose we evaluate the success of learning in the classroom? The tests which exist to illustrate the defining gap between our learning success and the learning success of other countries can be best described, in your opinion, as...<fill in the blank>
    Tests that require thought and ability to use all you've learned. The worst type of tests are standaized bubble tests. They tell us very little. A good test takes time, and isn't gradable in a machine.



    Again, pure speculation. It could very well happen to public schools that are performing horribly, and well-performing schools will likely see little to no change. The issue is not protecting the funding (which is has been grossly overpaid) for public schools but ensuring the integrity of education as a whole. If more students benefit from such a reform, then why oppose it? Money is not the end-all solution to this problem.
    Possible? I think most of us believe anything is possible, but that doesn't make it likely. We have to look at the factors. A non caring parent isn't like to what is needed to move. Nor is there any evidence any statistacly significant number of students would benefit. It is more likely for those who benefit, others will be hurt. A better approach seem to me to try and improve public educations (which isn't really completely broke btw).

    What is that? Parents are stupid and educators know what's best? Let us examine the questions you're pondering. Do you believe parents truly believe their public schools are working in a adequate and sustainable fashion? If so, then what leads you to believe these same parents would remove their children from such successful schools if we allowed open enrollment?
    As the poll showed, most believe thier school is doing well. It's others who are not. Kind of like when people hear a lot of negative talk and they just accpet that it is negative. Few actually study or look into any of this, nor would I expect most to.

    Whether most would or not is a question mark. A number, whatever the number is, will simple see a maybe and try it. Others wil mistakenly think they are getting something they aren't. Others won't be able to move as a child can't do it on their own, and will be left with what is left.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  8. #1938
    Mr. Professional
    Mensch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,666
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Oh, well that explains it. Enough said.
    Is that your way of forfeiting the debate?

  9. #1939
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by ElijahGalt View Post
    Is that your way of forfeiting the debate?
    No, it is my way of acknowledging that we are never going to agree and it is a complete waste of time to keep going back and forth over the same issues.

    We will just have to agree to disagree.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  10. #1940
    Mr. Professional
    Mensch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,666
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Walker takes broad swipe at public employee unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    No, it is my way of acknowledging that we are never going to agree and it is a complete waste of time to keep going back and forth over the same issues.

    We will just have to agree to disagree.
    Unfortunately, that may be true. I just wish you would be a little bit more considerate of my views and not disregard everything as irrelevant. I've spent a considerable amount of time specifically debating each and every one of your points with thoughtful examination. Your response was lacking a clear specific point-by-point evaluation of my own thoughts and opinions. I wish you were Mark Twain. I could at least count on him to be more thoughtful.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •