Gblock;903176 wrote:What is the main reason you think urban districts have been less successful? serious question. they also have unions, they are smaller, some may have better teachers but i would say thats debateable. i know we visit other successful districts all the time and have them come into our schools and copy a vast majority of the things they do. in some cases to the letter.

You don't have (for the most part) the family and community support public schools need to be successful. The roadblocks that unions present aside, anything innovative being tried in urban districts probably doesn't go anywhere because you need motivated students, families that care, and a general sense of community pride in making sure things work well.

I don't know about a lot of other districts, but I sure don't see that in Columbus schools. I see it meandering along, with lots of in-fighting about which buildings should stay open, and the general politics of the superintendent's office. In the meantime, the schools aren't anywhere near effective and haven't been for a long time -- but they sure are quick to come back to taxpayers on a regular basis for more money, even though enrollments have been dropping.

For a district like this, you need to simply give out vouchers to those families that truly are interested in getting good schooling, and if necessary bus those who don't but aren't old enough to walk away into neighboring suburban districts until they either have a change of heart and start applying themselves, or get old enough to also walk away.

Not a perfect solution, I grant you. But I see no reason to keep funding districts that are circling the drain with little hope of ever righting the ship.

Writerbuckeye;903651 wrote:You don't have (for the most part) the family and community support public schools need to be successful. The roadblocks that unions present aside, anything innovative being tried in urban districts probably doesn't go anywhere because you need motivated students, families that care, and a general sense of community pride in making sure things work well.

I don't know about a lot of other districts, but I sure don't see that in Columbus schools. I see it meandering along, with lots of in-fighting about which buildings should stay open, and the general politics of the superintendent's office. In the meantime, the schools aren't anywhere near effective and haven't been for a long time -- but they sure are quick to come back to taxpayers on a regular basis for more money, even though enrollments have been dropping.

For a district like this, you need to simply give out vouchers to those families that truly are interested in getting good schooling, and if necessary bus those who don't but aren't old enough to walk away into neighboring suburban districts until they either have a change of heart and start applying themselves, or get old enough to also walk away.

Not a perfect solution, I grant you. But I see no reason to keep funding districts that are circling the drain with little hope of ever righting the ship.

while i understand your points and the perceptions that are out there, i disagree with several points based on the reality of what i see from actually being involved. Vouchers are a great idea and some have taken advantage, but im curious to know what private schools are looking to take in some of the students that we serve?? Watterson, Ready, Desales?? Suburban schools also dont want them either... Can u imagine the uproar if some of the students we serve were put next to your daughter in class?? I can assure you that the schools you are talking about with vouchers only allow either good athletes or specifically chosen kids and families into their schools.

However we are losing students both to vouchers and charters. when i started in 96 we had 85000 kids, now we have around 53,000 this is why we are constantly shutting down schools, trying to save taxpayers money. I also think we have made our levies last longer than promised every time. when i was hired i remeber the first levy that they passed was for three years and we didnt come back again for 8 years.

As far as unions, our members voted at my school(and we are not the only ones) to take only a thirty minute lunch, stay for at least one night a week for tutoring(most stay 3 nights), do home visits at least one saturday morning a month(most do 2), take on additional summer hours and several other things that we are not required. we also visit other successful schools and are trying to implement many many ideas that are innovative and research based.

Now some would say we are failing and say we have been for a long time, but i can tell you that when i started our grad rate was below 60 percent and this year we are likely to hit 80 percent. I would say that we have made improvements. Do we still have a long way to go? sure. Are there still problems? yep. but we also have 5x the students as many of these districts that you are comparing us to and we dont get to pick them. Im glad our district is losing some students, maybe we do need to lose a few more. We have some of the most at-risk children in the state of ohio in our schools.

In my school right now we have students who are in shelters and must move every 27 days to a new shelter to stay eligible. we have students who even with their limited cognitive ability are still more with it than some of the parents i meet in my current position. sometimes not only must we educate but we spend a lot of time parenting and counseling and helping students survive in very heartbreaking situations. that being said i wont make excuses and we still need to keep making improvements as teachers and administrators. The publicity from the throat slashing isnt helping thats for sure.

Gblock;904074 wrote:I can assure you that the schools you are talking about with vouchers only allow either good athletes or specifically chosen kids and families into their schools.

I stopped reading after that. You can assure that? Then you are full of it. The mission of the Catholic schools is to educate. They aren't going to turn away a student because they were a problem at another school. I know when I was in high school, we had several kids in my class who had been expelled from public schools around the area. Their parents sent them to Mooney instead, so that they could get some discipline. And to say that they will look to see if a kid is a good athlete before they accept his voucher is absolutely absurd.

sherm03;904110 wrote:I stopped reading after that. You can assure that? Then you are full of it. The mission of the Catholic schools is to educate. They aren't going to turn away a student because they were a problem at another school. I know when I was in high school, we had several kids in my class who had been expelled from public schools around the area. Their parents sent them to Mooney instead, so that they could get some discipline. And to say that they will look to see if a kid is a good athlete before they accept his voucher is absolutely absurd.

ok ill grant you that u had several...in my post i said we have many parents who use vouchers, however the number of vouchers isnt going to be able to solve the problem which is the topic of the thread..also many of these schools dont have the space to take many more students if they wanted to. and i can assure you students have been removed from other districts and charter schools and come back very quickly. i see it on a monthly basis.

In my opinion the problem with formalized education is that it became too good, too efficient, so much so that people began relying on it solely and people began placing the entire responsibility of educating their children on the respective school systems. This is whereby we have failed.
The responsibility to educate and become educated must exist in the hands of the parents and students themselves. The educational system is a tool to be used in that process. It's not the only tool yet we rely on it as such along with trying to fund it to be the sole provider.
If we try and transfer the responsibility to a formalized education system we will never get the results we desire.
The family itself is the primary educator. It must be that way. When the family gives up that responsibility we then try and fund an educational tool as if it's the primary and only source of education and without ultimate accountability existing with the family the school systems don't have a chance.
We don't have to fix schools. We have a fundamental, cultural problem that exists in the family.
More money won't fix it. Better schools won't fix it. Without the desire to learn and without an educationally inspiring home-life even the greatest school system in the world won't be able to properly educate a child.
Our focus in solving the problem continues to be in the wrong area.

I you want to "fix" schools we should reduce the services offered to the basic required primary education foundation and reduce to funding to match. The additional desired educational opportunities can e sought out and found by the individuals and families.

I don't like that very much though because it sucks for those who currently take advantage of all the great services our schools offer.

It should not take a government to educate us. Those who want to become educated will and always do, with or without the government.

imo we need to fix communities...if we are going to put more money in education it needs to be in programs like head start etc...many of these kids get behind during the most critical years when your brain is forming critical pathways and most receptive to learning new info. it becomes harder to catch up as they get older.
pretty soon the low income housing is going to get run out of the downtown areas so some of you are going to get your wish. the projects by my school which were the first to open in the US are closing in October. all around "the hood" one street at a time is being redeveloped w condos and remodeled housing for young familes and professionals. this might in itself shift the future of big urban schools and suburban schools.

Con_Alma;904117 wrote:The responsibility to educate and become educated must exist in the hands of the parents and students themselves. The educational system is a tool to be used in that process. It's not the only tool yet we rely on it as such along with trying to fund it to be the sole provider.

Bingo. Without parent involvement and student effort, there is nothing a teacher can do to make students learn. It has to start at home and parents and students have to be willing to put in the effort and do the work.

Gblock;904133 wrote:imo we need to fix communities...if we are going to put more money in education it needs to be in programs like head start etc...many of these kids get behind during the most critical years when your brain is forming critical pathways and most receptive to learning new info. it becomes harder to catch up as they get older.
pretty soon the low income housing is going to get run out of the downtown areas so some of you are going to get your wish. the projects by my school which were the first to open in the US are closing in October. all around "the hood" one street at a time is being redeveloped w condos and remodeled housing for young familes and professionals. this might in itself shift the future of big urban schools and suburban schools.

Can't be done. LBJ thought his "war on poverty" was the answer to doing what you're talking about, and it made things much worse.

Government can't create communities and make them stable and good. It doesn't work. Hell, look at when new housing has been built in poor communities to try and give folks a fresh start. Within 5 years, those new buildings look like they've been around and not cared for in 50 years.

You can't force people to make education a priority, either.

One of the biggest problems we have in this country is the mentality that everyone is equal genetically; all of us are smart enough to go to college if we have the drive; and all of us have the same set of values, if only they're brought out in the right way.

It's bunk. You are always going to have criminals, people who want a free ride, and those who won't care about education or bettering themselves or their children.

We need to accept this and move on.

Writerbuckeye;904294 wrote:One of the biggest problems we have in this country is the mentality that everyone is equal genetically; all of us are smart enough to go to college if we have the drive; and all of us have the same set of values, if only they're brought out in the right way.

It's bunk. You are always going to have criminals, people who want a free ride, and those who won't care about education or bettering themselves or their children.

We need to accept this and move on.

I'm not convinced it's a genetic issue. I've tutored at risk kids and they aren't dumb. They just need someone to ask if they did their homework, explain anything they can't understand and give a crap in general. The kids I worked with were from single parent homes who had mothers working multiple jobs to make ends meet. They made bad decisions but they were trying and they wanted their kids to do better than they did.

Isn't that the american dream? That your kids can do better than you?

Writerbuckeye;904294 wrote:Can't be done. LBJ thought his "war on poverty" was the answer to doing what you're talking about, and it made things much worse.

Government can't create communities and make them stable and good. It doesn't work. Hell, look at when new housing has been built in poor communities to try and give folks a fresh start. Within 5 years, those new buildings look like they've been around and not cared for in 50 years.

You can't force people to make education a priority, either.

One of the biggest problems we have in this country is the mentality that everyone is equal genetically; all of us are smart enough to go to college if we have the drive; and all of us have the same set of values, if only they're brought out in the right way.

It's bunk. You are always going to have criminals, people who want a free ride, and those who won't care about education or bettering themselves or their children.

We need to accept this and move on.

i guess im confused...i thought you said it was bad schools...now its genetic??..if its genetic then what difference would vouchers make?? if all "they" know how to do is destroy nice things what good would it be to move them to nice schools?? criminals come in all shapes and sizes and colors...i.e. bernie madoff and those types. its not about how smart you are.

I believe that this cycle can be broken 1 family at a time. 1 neighborhood at a time not by the government, but by us. No one can do everything but every can do something. as far as funding it is cheaper to invest in young people/childrens education than it is to pay for their prison/foodstamps/uneployment later.

cruiser_96;902901 wrote:... We can't force education. I see it all the time. If kids do NOT want to be there, do not make them. Then comes the argument of where would you rather them be, breaking into your house? Certainly not, but the role of the school is not to babysit.

Good parents do not need schools as much as schools need good parents.

Schools exist to help ME educate my child... not the other way around.

You know Con_Alma... for a midshipman, you're not half bad. :thumbup:

Comin' from an old grappler like you that's flattering...as long as you don't mean I'm more than 1/2 bad.

Gblock;904324 wrote:i guess im confused...i thought you said it was bad schools...now its genetic??..if its genetic then what difference would vouchers make?? if all "they" know how to do is destroy nice things what good would it be to move them to nice schools?? criminals come in all shapes and sizes and colors...i.e. bernie madoff and those types. its not about how smart you are.

I believe that this cycle can be broken 1 family at a time. 1 neighborhood at a time not by the government, but by us. No one can do everything but every can do something. as far as funding it is cheaper to invest in young people/childrens education than it is to pay for their prison/foodstamps/uneployment later.

You obviously didn't read everything I wrote. Not everyone is cut out for school or will be good at it (genetics, background, combination). Why waste time on these folks? Cut them loose so they don't interfere with those who want to be there.

Vouchers would obviously go to families that value education and students who want to learn.

These two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

The idea that somehow throwing a bunch of money at the school system is going to prevent people from becoming criminals is out and out stupid. All it does is waste money.

See some of the other posts on here: schools shouldn't be there to raise kids in lieu of parents; it's not their function.

So who decides who are "wastes of time" and who "values education"?

And where does raising kids end and education begin? Are schools to only teach how to read basically and add basically? Is that the main function of our education system in your eyes then? I assure you that if we start pumping out kids educated on those tenets we'll be even further behind than we already are.

I Wear Pants;904651 wrote:So who decides who are "wastes of time" and who "values education"?

The results do. Kids who do not attain a minumum degree of success (read passing the classes) will 'fail' and, therefore, wash out of school. They have an option of going to a technical school (if they are admitted), the Military, etc. we need to get out of the business of passing everyone on to the next grade regardless of their achievement, or lack thereof.

I Wear Pants;904651 wrote:And where does raising kids end and education begin? Are schools to only teach how to read basically and add basically? Is that the main function of our education system in your eyes then? I assure you that if we start pumping out kids educated on those tenets we'll be even further behind than we already are.

Education begins with academics. Teaching kid 'life skills' is a parents job. How to manage a checkbook, etc is not the job of the 'normal' school distrct, IMO. Education needs to teach each student a basic level of knowledge at a minumum. This amount should be defined, in today's structure, by the State Standards. Students who qualify for advanced courses (Adcvanced placement in high school, eriched or advanced in elementary and middle) should receive the advanced training. We also need to stop the ability of a parent to 'legislate' a child into advanced coursework in elementary school (my wife is an elementary teacher and sees this each and every year...kids who cannot do the work are put into advanced classes due to their parent badgering the principal to do so).

We need to use the resources that we have wisely and not waste them on children who cannot do the work.

wkfan;904669 wrote:The results do. Kids who do not attain a minumum degree of success (read passing the classes) will 'fail' and, therefore, wash out of school. They have an option of going to a technical school (if they are admitted), the Military, etc. we need to get out of the business of passing everyone on to the next grade regardless of their achievement, or lack thereof.



Education begins with academics. Teaching kid 'life skills' is a parents job. How to manage a checkbook, etc is not the job of the 'normal' school distrct, IMO. Education needs to teach each student a basic level of knowledge at a minumum. This amount should be defined, in today's structure, by the State Standards. Students who qualify for advanced courses (Adcvanced placement in high school, eriched or advanced in elementary and middle) should receive the advanced training. We also need to stop the ability of a parent to 'legislate' a child into advanced coursework in elementary school (my wife is an elementary teacher and sees this each and every year...kids who cannot do the work are put into advanced classes due to their parent badgering the principal to do so).

We need to use the resources that we have wisely and not waste them on children who cannot do the work.

Um, I don't know where you went to school but kids do fail to pass grades. If you don't pass the required classes you don't graduate. That's the reality now. Where are they doing otherwise?

For your second point, again I say we will fall very, very far behind the other countries if we adopt this approach. Very far.

What you propose would result in people with IEPs, etc essentially being told "fuck you, go be a ditch digger".

A question I pose to all of you praying for the shuttering of public schools for the glory of every family for themselves education: do you think that having a class system that's difficult to move "up" in is detrimental to the overall well being of a society?

I Wear Pants;904680 wrote:Um, I don't know where you went to school but kids do fail to pass grades. If you don't pass the required classes you don't graduate. That's the reality now. Where are they doing otherwise?

For your second point, again I say we will fall very, very far behind the other countries if we adopt this approach. Very far.

What you propose would result in people with IEPs, etc essentially being told "**** you, go be a ditch digger".

A question I pose to all of you praying for the shuttering of public schools for the glory of every family for themselves education: do you think that having a class system that's difficult to move "up" in is detrimental to the overall well being of a society?

You end up with a class system no matter what you do. It's inevitable. People find their own levels, unless government intervenes and forces them into a level that doesn't fit. When that happens, you end up with welfare states like most of Western Europe.

And guess what: those are class systems just as much as anywhere else.

The ultimate class system, ironically, was the old Soviet Union. The state decided who should be slotted where, and there was no discussion.

I Wear Pants;904680 wrote:Um, I don't know where you went to school but kids do fail to pass grades. If you don't pass the required classes you don't graduate. That's the reality now. Where are they doing otherwise?

For your second point, again I say we will fall very, very far behind the other countries if we adopt this approach. Very far.

What you propose would result in people with IEPs, etc essentially being told "**** you, go be a ditch digger".

A question I pose to all of you praying for the shuttering of public schools for the glory of every family for themselves education: do you think that having a class system that's difficult to move "up" in is detrimental to the overall well being of a society?

Ummm...not sure when you went ot school, but the reality is kids are passed on to the next grade, especially in elementary school regardless of their proficiency in the subject. "Holding a kid back" is totally up to the parent.

What do you think happens in those other countries that are 'ahead of us'?? In japan, for example, if you do not pass the entrance exam for high school.....you don't go to high school! Those kids go to a technical school or something else that is better suited for their abilities. This is exactly how we have fallen behind...spending precious resources and time on kids who cannot cut it. I'm sorry, but that is the harsh reality and you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth by bemoaning telling a kid to be a ditch digger yet saying that seperating the wheat from the chaff is why we are falling further and further behind.

I am a product of public schools, as are both of my kids. I had no expectation that the school district that they attended (and it is a very well renowned district) would teach them about anything other than the subject matter. That was my job. Also, I am not 'praying for the shuttering of public schools' because, in many ways, they are better than the private or parochial alternative. What I am saying is that we need to get away from the thought that we need to include each and every child in a mainstream school environment. Many of them simply cannot make the grade (pardon the pun).

Writerbuckeye;904699 wrote:You end up with a class system no matter what you do. It's inevitable. People find their own levels, unless government intervenes and forces them into a level that doesn't fit. When that happens, you end up with welfare states like most of Western Europe.

And guess what: those are class systems just as much as anywhere else.

The ultimate class system, ironically, was the old Soviet Union. The state decided who should be slotted where, and there was no discussion.

There are ways to make upward mobility within classes a better possibility.

Complete free market systems whether it be in business or any other endeavor will always end up with a tiny amount of winners and a lot of losers or bystanders.

I Wear Pants;904702 wrote:There are ways to make upward mobility within classes a better possibility.

Complete free market systems whether it be in business or any other endeavor will always end up with a tiny amount of winners and a lot of losers or bystanders.

So....in our nanny state, we artificially make those losers or bystanders into the winners???

Guess everyone should get a trophy.

wkfan;904701 wrote:Ummm...not sure when you went ot school, but the reality is kids are passed on to the next grade, especially in elementary school regardless of their proficiency in the subject. "Holding a kid back" is totally up to the parent.

What do you think happens in those other countries that are 'ahead of us'?? In japan, for example, if you do not pass the entrance exam for high school.....you don't go to high school! Those kids go to a technical school or something else that is better suited for their abilities. This is exactly how we have fallen behind...spending precious resources and time on kids who cannot cut it. I'm sorry, but that is the harsh reality and you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth by bemoaning telling a kid to be a ditch digger yet saying that seperating the wheat from the chaff is why we are falling further and further behind.

I am a product of public schools, as are both of my kids. I had no expectation that the school district that they attended (and it is a very well renowned district) would teach them about anything other than the subject matter. That was my job. Also, I am not 'praying for the shuttering of public schools' because, in many ways, they are better than the private or parochial alternative. What I am saying is that we need to get away from the thought that we need to include each and every child in a mainstream school environment. Many of them simply cannot make the grade (pardon the pun).

Fair enough. I'm perfectly fine with having alternative options beyond the college preparatory one that is the de-facto standard right now. Much like France or really much of the rest of the world does.

I must have incorrectly inferred or read incorrectly that you or some of the others meant that they wanted to merely worry about those at the top whilst the others could find their own way. That I disagree with.

wkfan;904703 wrote:So....in our nanny state, we artificially make those losers or bystanders into the winners???

Guess everyone should get a trophy.

Did I say nanny state. I just meant that there is a role government can play that is beneficial to us as a society. Too little government is just as detrimental as too much government.

I Wear Pants;904705 wrote:Fair enough. I'm perfectly fine with having alternative options beyond the college preparatory one that is the de-facto standard right now. Much like France or really much of the rest of the world does.

I must have incorrectly inferred or read incorrectly that you or some of the others meant that they wanted to merely worry about those at the top whilst the others could find their own way. That I disagree with.

As do I. Not everyone is a Doctor, Lawyer, Accountant, Teacher, etc. There is a HUGE need for plumbers, electricians, drywallers, painters, etc in this world.

wkfan;904707 wrote:As do I. Not everyone is a Doctor, Lawyer, Accountant, Teacher, etc. There is a HUGE need for plumbers, electricians, drywallers, painters, etc in this world.

i certainly think vocational system is the way to go...i see a lot of kids wasting time in a algebra class...some of the worst academic students would be some of the best vocational students.

also i never said throw more money at schools...but school levies are a fact of the current unconstitutional system we use to fund schools...costs go up on everything including schools