Have you read the link I gave you?
I’m sure there is a pony in there somewhere. Why don’t you just paste the relevant conclusion?
Charter schools are not giving up, they are an idea that sprouted from nothing else working. But perhaps that was premature, as we have yet to hear your ideas on how to improve public schools.
So, what do you propose?
I propose that public schools redefine their task to take into account the lack of basic instruction kids get at home.
Simple.
Money is not the answer. But of course you won’t accept this. But you won’t read the clink either. Interesting.
Just the usual, “I really don’t know squat about charter schools or the topic in general, but my ideology says that charter schools are bad, bad, bad, so they must be. Even if they can be shown to work.”
So, once again, let’s hear your ideas on how to improve things. I, for one am mighty excited to hear them. Just think, with you ideas posted here you could begin to fix the entire system. Think of the kids. Share your insights and let them be showered with the light of the education they deserve.
Okay. Do you think you can get the teachers’ unions on board? Let’s start with what some schools do: a workday that goes to 6:30, or a 6-day school week. You on board? Think the unions will be on board?
Oh, and there’s the little problem of being able to fire teachers without turning it into a year or two-long affair. Whataya say, you in?
Studies have shown that does not improve overall test scores. To quote Terr, why should we try something that has been proven to fail?
What are you talking about? What studies are you talking about?
You said you wanted to do what the charter schools were doing to take into account the home environment. I told you what those things were. So, which is it? Do you maintain what you said here:
Or not?
If there rare other things you think they should do beyond or aside from what I mentioned, what are they?
Post #770
What? That post has nothing to do with what we were just discussing. Never mind that I responded with Post 773 that explained why you were using the wrong metric.
As it stands, you claim you want public schools to adopt those things that have worked for successful charter schools. I point out what those things are and ask if you are in favor of public schools adopting them, and if you think the unions will embrace them. So, here we are again:
You said you wanted to do what the charter schools were doing to take into account the home environment. I told you what those things were. So, which is it? Do you maintain what you said here:
[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
I propose that public schools redefine their task to take into account the lack of basic instruction kids get at home.
[/QUOTE]
Or not?
If there rare other things you think they should do beyond or aside from what I mentioned, what are they?
The conclusion is for 20 years they threw enormous amounts of money at the problem. Way more than the other school districts got. They got no results. And they won’t - not until they can remove the destructive minority of the students from the schools. They tried your “I would improve the public schools, and not abandon anybody.”. For 20 years and huge funding. They failed. What do you propose they do to achieve your goal?
Provide examples of communities that improved their test scores by abandoniing problem students.
Since public schools are not allowed to select their students - it cannot be shown with public schools. But - every time someone points out a private or charter school that spends less per pupil and gets much better results, the mantra of the liberals is “that’s because they don’t have to take every student that comes in”. Are they wrong?
How about you provide what you think should be done.
No. That does not make it a good plan to pursue.
Buses can be guaranteed to always run on time if they don’t have to stop to pick up passengers.
Besides, I have been assured that charter schools are required to accept all students. Was I misinformed?
Is this thread not about Walker?
Could you start a GD thread about charter schools rock/suck?
Walker held a brat fry to reach out to the Dems. Some Democratic pricks would not come, but it was a success over all.
Note, it is braaaaat not brat like a spoiled kid. I can’t believe Rachael Ray and Alton got it wrong.
I believe Houston Texas was (im)famous for this.
They hardly finally got it if they already got it in 2010, did they?
Black adult illiteracy rates are 1.6%. Hardly likely to be a factor in the election (how could they tell which candidate to vote for anyway?), though I do agree with the sentiment that the Republicans should find it easier to attract illiterate voters.
Which? Remember:
Republican positions tend to foster reliance on an employer of some sort in order to survive. That’s the opposite of the classical liberal position.
Religious Freedom Amendment: recognises the right to pray in public schools. Reliance on the divine.
Sanctity of Life Act: Foetus requires protection of federal government, can’t fend for itself.
Pentagon expenditure
Natural collapse of industry
Workforce Development Programs Act 2011, with $4.3bn for local employment and training, requiring state workforce boards be comprised of no less than 2/3rds of representatives of the business community.
Subsidies
NDAA: indefinite meals and roofing for US citizens.
Ooh, I love fish metaphors! I remember some effete Jewish working class intellectual expounding something like this?
Christ, just some socialist, sorry.
Anarchists? See the bit about dependence above.
Actually, the Republican position would be, “Hey, start your own business and be your own master. In the process you’ll be able to help a bunch of other people put food on the table for their families while they figure out how to start their own business.” That and some people would just prefer to not have their own business but still have to feed their families.
And do you not find it ionic that you’re using a quote from over 200 years ago from a member of the slave-owning landed gentry?
One isn’t one’s own master. There are finite resources in the country and owning a means of production means that it deprives another individual from that ownership. Property rights are unique in that matter, since others rights are not binary. Appropriation of surplus labour through prior access to the means of production is not benevolence. Putting food on the table of their workers is not the motivation. The motivation is to ever perfect the machine that extracts sweat from the back of another.
No, I don’t consider it ironic, I consider it hypocritical. The slave owners of the South made the same “two wrongs” plea, claiming that black slaves in their capable hands were better off than the exploited workers in the factories of the North East.