GL: First - thanks for serving. I honestly appreciate what you do.
However, I am shocked, SHOCKED to hear that parents primarily want what is best for their own kids! And to think that they want to get the maximum possible is AMAZING! Next you will tell me that people try to maximize the deductions on their taxes too!
I am a voucher fan with kids in the local public school system. I heavily support my school and district. I also want what is best for my kids.
However, let me pass on two issues that I have personally dealt with in our local, outstanding district:
A teacher 2 years from retirement phoning it in. When asked if we could get them out of the classroom, was told no - they had tenure and the union would fight it. When asked if I could request that my child NOT get that teacher, I was told that parent requests are not allowed. I was forced to make a significant pest of myself until the school agreed to keep my kid from getting that teacher. The other 30 kids, however, were screwed.
A principal that would not meet with parents except in very small windows that effectively froze out anyone who worked with little job flexibility. This protected bitch ruined the school experience of many children - but we could not get her fired.
These are both from my very well to do suburban district. I can give you a dozen more from the inner city schools that my wife and volunteered at prior to having kids. At those schools the parents did not have the same cash flow and flexibility that I now enjoy - so they are just screwed.
I am happy that you are working to fix things, but I think it is insulting to cast aspersions on parents who can not fight the entrenched education bureacracy and are instead asking that they be allocated at least a portion of the money that the local public school gets for their kid - to be used somewhere else to possibly make a difference.
Perhaps if anti-voucher advocates started advocating for reforms that truly would fix public schools – such as merit pay, elimination of teacher tenure, tracking of students, etc. – it would be a different story. But it seems that those who oppose vouchers also oppose any attempts to change the current education status quo. All they call for is more money, as if that will fix anything. So you’ll excuse me if I’m skeptical about the prospects for real education reform when the education establishment not only opposes vouchers but any other attempt to try and address the issues plaguing our public school systems.
I’ve had family members who were teachers and school board members, Waste, so please don’t think I don’t have an appreciation for public education or the people who run such. That said, though, I was struck by one of your comments:
Unless they are your sons and daughters, they ain’t yours. And while I do certainly recognize a shared responsibility to educate these kids and help them become productive citizens, let’s not forget who ultimately has decision making authority for them.
And if their parents decide that the job of education and citizenship development is met by those private schools rather than the public ones - more power to them.
You explicitly state that traditional education doesn’t work for some of your students and you’re working to broaden your offerings - and I think that’s great. But I wonder why you’d seek to expand choice in one area and restrict it in another.
Exactly, you never hear " “Let’s fix the problem.” You always hear instead “hey, let’s take your tax money and spend it on my kids so they can get the education I want them to have.”.
I also applaud you being on the school board- kudos!! The most I have done is sit Civil Grand Jury for a year and investigate various schools that are really screwing up. But it’s an attempt to help fix the problem.
No one doubts there is a problem- but running away from it won’t help at all. Taking money away won’t help either. Do you really think that if you take 10% of a bad school districts funding that the bad adminstrators that caused the problems will take a 10% salary cut? You’re punishing no one but the students that can’t afford to leave to a private school and that punishes all of society.
Bullshit. Earlier in this thread I cited The Kansas City Project, where a judge mandated that new schools be built with an unlimited budget. Go back and look it up. Or just google it. It’s become crystal clear now you’re just full of shit and blinded by some knee-jerk statist utopia the mandates you see public schools as the ONLY possible avenue to educating our kids.
And that’s all fine and good, but as was said earlier in this thread, envy makes for a bad basis to public policy. And do you think that you are justified in taking money away from my child so that your child will be better educated? Because that is precisely what every voucher plan that I have seen to date does. And I’m just kinda funny about not screwing everyone else so that a given child has what I think is a better chance.
How much bitching did you, as a community of concerned parents, do? The harsh glare of the media spotlight can make for a damned fine disinfectant. I can tell you that when my district encounters situations like that, every effort is expended to get that teacher out the damned door. Some dig in and wanna fight, which our administrators are happy to do. Things don’t always turn out precisely as we concerned parents would like, but we know that if we bitch loud and long enough, we will be heard and responded to.
You say you couldn’t get her fired. Why not?
Two things: First, I’ve yet to cast aspersions on parents who can’t fight. Quite to the contrary, I’ve cast aspersions on those who fight without cease to take money spent on my child and give it to a private school. Second, as I just stated, voucher proponents don’t want to take “at least a portion” of the money that the public schools get for their kid. They want to take the average figure, which is virtually never the true figure. And when I see the figures bandied about, I know full well that sometimes they include Title monies which the district wouldn’t even get if their child didn’t have his or her butt in class, thereby skewing things even further. For what it’s worth, I would cheerfully give the money spent on a couple of kids back to their parents just to get rid of them (the parents, primarily). But that would set a bad example. And I, at least, am thinking of the children.
My community takes a great deal of pride in our students. In much the same way that a basketball player is said to be playing for a school or school district, we consider them “our” students. I would have thought that went without saying. My ignorance has been fought.
And if so, then they can pay for a private school education. Or get a scholarship. I can tell you that my district has had two instances recently wherein students were given a ride at a private school because of athletic prowess only to have their scholarships revoked upon injury. If that’s the sort of education and citizen development that those parents want for their children, then I think we’re playing out of different rulebooks.
Again, if parents choose to send their kids to private schools, then by all means do so. But understand that making that choice will have consequences. The most obvious of which is that they will pay for the private education. I’m not looking to restrict choice. I don’t, however, want the choices of parents who choose to send their kids to private school subsidized by tax dollars. Some of that comes from my belief that public education is important, some of it is pure classism and some of it has to do with my particular view of religion in schools.
Wow! Now I’m an “anti-voucher” advocate? Well, just another to add to my list of “anti” labels.
I don’t necessarily think that merit pay is such a bad idea. I fail to see what elimination of tenure would do and have seen firsthand a principal who had a hardon for a teacher do his level best to try and get this teacher forced out but was unable to do so due to tenure. As well, I’ve known teachers who got their walking papers when they were up for tenure due to bad blood between them and building administrators. Is tenure perfect? No. But I think elimination of it makes precious little sense. And whether anybody acknowledges it or not, student tracking exists. So, what were those reforms again?
Then you’ve not paid attention to a single thing I’ve posted to date. A pity, really. One likes to think that everyone can be taught. Again, my ignorance has been fought and vanquished.
Well, I thought what we were discussing at the root of it all was the DC voucher system, which takes no money from the public schools at all. Furthermore, the DC school system over the years has shown itself particularly resistant to reform, its per-pupil costs are sky high, and its overall performance is abysmal.
Even people who support public schools in general can’t support the situation in DC. Forcing kids to attend those schools is immoral, in my opinion - a student who does everything expected of him in those schools can graduate with decent grades and head out to the job market with an eighth grade reading and math comprehension level.
So yeah, I’m a supporter of the vouchers in DC. Everyone else in DC who could manage it ensured a decent education for their kids by moving to Maryland or Virginia or sending their kids to private school on their own - and that includes the teachers who teach in DC themselves. Why should the rest be trapped in a bureaucracy that no longer has any interest in actually educating children, and hasn’t for some time?
Like I said, I’m a supporter of public schools, but I’m not a supporter of the DC situation, and I don’t know how anyone with any consideration toward these children can be.
You can look at The KC Project and delude yourself into thinking whatever you want, but my response was to show an blatant example of what DrDeth was whining DIDN’T exist. And that it was already cited in this very thread. So, you saved up this little formulaic rejoinder and used it all up for nothing. Tsk, tsk. How sad.
To start at the end, I am thinking of the children as well. Your insinuation is insulting, once again.
On the cash side I am happy to accept a compromise that is less than the average. I am fully aware that using the average is not entirely accurate measurement. I would welcome an analysis of what the true variable cost of a student is, and start there in our determination of how much could be provided as a voucher grant. Funny how I never hear that proposed by the anti-voucher people - they seem happy to have private schools pull out kids as long as they can keep the money that they get for those kids. You want cash for your kid, I want cash for mine. Why is your desire so superior to mine?
I did a fair amount of fighting to just get my kid out of the shit-teacher’s classroom. Too bad about the other kids though. As for the principal, she did not do anything actually illegal, so it was a tough battle. She finally retired and was replaced.
You continue to paint voucher proponents with a broad brush - a brush that is not accurate. It might by your reaction - but I could respond with “I have never met an anti-voucher person who wasn’t just another public school bureacrat trying to defend their job and pension while doing the least amount of work possible.”
At least I am thinking of the children, and trying to find new ways to help them rather than just doing the same old shit over and over again.
Initially, yes. However, as things are wont to do, the topic jumped all over the damned place. Which is how we wound up on page 5. When I first dove into this morass, it was primarily to slap down the particularly egregious ignorance of those who were bleating that everything bad in society was the fault of the public schools, teachers unions, entrenched bureaucrats, politicians &c. I honestly don’t know all that terribly much about the DC schools. They sound like anarchy with naptime and juice boxes. Unfortunately, I’ll not have much opportunity to investigate the topic this weekend, but if I get a chance, you may rest assured I will.
I can tell you that I’ve heard parents say the same things about the schools in my own district and I know from firsthand experience that the hyperbole doesn’t match up to the reality.
Coupla things: I not only looked at The KC Project. I lived it. So there’s no delusion on my part whatsoever. And from how I read DrDeth’s post he was complaining about voucher proponents who want to take money from public schools where anyone can go, and give it to private schools where the student population is rigidly controlled. He was in no way speaking of a school district that was in decidedly less-than-ideal shape and the noble if misguided attempt of a judge to right that wrong. If he is still reading this and I am mistaken, I welcome his actual position. Yours, though, appears wildly off the mark.
And I agree that the rejoinder was formulaic. Trite and hackneyed, even. But those were your words, not mine.
Umm, what was I supposedly whining about? That pre-voucher parents didn’t try to fix things? What does the KC project have to do with this?
GLWasteful Is more or less correct when he said: "And from how I read DrDeth’s post he was complaining about voucher proponents who want to take money from public schools where anyone can go, and give it to private schools where the student population is rigidly controlled. He was in no way speaking of a school district that was in decidedly less-than-ideal shape and the noble if misguided attempt of a judge to right that wrong.
With one small caveat- taking the taxpayers money from schools controled (at least a little) by the taxpayers (which are “public schools where anyone can go”) and giving it to schools where the taxpayers have no control at all- i.e. “Private schools where the student population is rigidly controlled”.
And Mr Moto- of course the DC system takes money from the schools- where do you think the money comes from? In this scheme the transfer is more indirect but the transfer is still there. The taxpayer’s pockets are only so deep, if you spend a shitload on Vouchers the shitload has to come from somewhere.
Y’know, for someone who was gleefully using sarcasm toward me, your skin seems kinda thin.
To start at the beginning, I’m glad that I’ve now encountered one individual who doesn’t feel that he’s entitled to an average. And averages are not only “not entirely accurate,” they’re not accurate at all. And at the end of the day, you’re still talking about taking taxpayer dollars and using them to further religion. Not always, no, but quite often. And as I pointed out earlier, a lot of those monies are Title monies. So the public school loses out on them when kids are pulled and put into private schools. As a public school teacher, I imagine you know that. And I actually want cash for all of the kids. Just so happens that mine is one of them. In a couple of years, though, she’ll be done with High School. I plan on serving on the board for longer than that. Since I am looking at the base of society as a whole and trying to make it better and you are looking no further than your own child, then I think my desire trumps your own.
I’m glad that you were able to be of some assistance to your child. And a principal need not do anything illegal to lose her job. She’s up with all of the other principals in having her contract renewed. If you really felt that strongly, you should have spoken to your elected representatives at that time.
Not “might be”. . .is. And I see it up close and personal. And, of course, here on the intrawebs. And you’re free to respond however you would like. However, I am not a public school bureaucrat trying to defend my job and pension while doing the least amount of work. As a school board member, I get paid squat. I’ll not retire from the public schools, because I’m a school board member. I suppose technically I could work in another district, but I don’t. And as I’ve already said, the school board can be an incredibly tough job.
As am I. So I suppose we can both sleep soundly tonight.
Let’s go to the videotape, where I quoted you as saying this:
I then cited the KC Project as proof that your statement was wrong. Because we have a stellar example of someone trying to “fix the problem” while keeping the current system and giving it a HUGE, unprecedented infusion of money. All to no avail.
What does the KC project have to do with this? 