Archive How to fix public schools

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Sep 17, 2011 3:11pm

merged threads coming

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Sep 17, 2011 3:13pm

if Justin can get his shitty software fixed....

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Sep 17, 2011 3:15pm

nope, his software still sucks, quotes posts coming

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Sep 17, 2011 3:17pm

Writerbuckeye;897095 wrote:More money to Columbus schools is just about as bad. Talk about throwing it down a rat hole.

Bigdogg;898405 wrote:I would love to hear your idea of fixing Columbus city schools. Let me guess, more vouchers.

Writerbuckeye;898416 wrote:I don't believe big city schools are fixable as they now exist. The teachers union contracts, and the lack of parental involvement combine to make a pretty toxic environment. One thing I know for certain won't fix them: throwing more money at them.

Once the schools were taken out of the neighborhoods under the guise of desegregation, they lost any community support that had been there, and that even further complicated the issue.

Vouchers at least give options to those parents who are involved but don't have the resources to move or put their kids in private school; but they aren't going to fix the problem. Then again, nothing can.

Bigdogg;898421 wrote:Please give proof of the positive correlation between teacher union contracts and poor student performance. This should be good

Gblock;898472 wrote:columbus city schools actually outperforms districts of similar size and demographics

Writerbuckeye;898474 wrote:The contracts will block any attempts to adjust staffing, evaluations of staff members and compensation based on merit rather than longevity. Anything that is innovative that would require changes in hours, additional responsibilities, etc. would likely go against the contract as well.

My main point remains: I don't believe large urban districts are fixable any longer. Too many variables for a one size fits all fix.

Honestly, I think we'd be better off issuing vouchers to those families that truly care about education, disbanding districts like Columbus that do nothing but fail in almost every way, and eliminate the law that says kids have to stay in school until they're 16.

Let those who really want an education get it from a district that's succeeding.

Perhaps if the district were simply disbanded and those taxes eliminated, neighborhoods in the city that want to re-start an education plan in their own areas would be free to do so.

You can't force people to get an education when they don't want to be there, and that's what we're now doing. It's an abject failure in pretty much every major urban school district in the country.

Writerbuckeye;898475 wrote:So of those that suck, they suck the least. got it.

Gblock;898478 wrote:some people will never see the positive. ccs has made great improvements in the last 10 years. our grad rate will be close to 80 percent this year and our dropout rate less than 5 percent. with an 18 percent special ed pop and a 12 percent pop that speaks limited english. your right writer vouchers are great and the parents who do care do use them, but what about the kids that are left? that no one cares about? i will continue to work and advocate for them everyday despite negative people like yourself who think that you are better than others. i would love to see how you wouldve turned out or even if you would have survived through some of the things these kids go thru. two of our high schools are even ranked nationally proving that you can come to ccs and get prepared for college and life success if you take advantage of the opportunites we provide.

continue

B

Bigdogg

Posts: 1,429

Sep 17, 2011 4:12pm

Ha ha Lj your secret is out. Why is this political?

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Sep 17, 2011 4:16pm

huh?

B

Bigdogg

Posts: 1,429

Sep 17, 2011 4:22pm

Are you really that stupid?

O-Trap

Posts: 14,994

Sep 17, 2011 4:24pm

Bigdogg;899894 wrote:Are you really that stupid?

Sounded to be in the realm of a political discussion to me when the issue of "union" correlation was brought up, as that always tends to make its way into a heavily political topic.

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Sep 17, 2011 4:36pm

No, but you are now banned from the thread and have received an infraction for your 2nd personal attack fo the day

j_crazy

Posts: 8,372

Sep 17, 2011 4:46pm

LJ;899927 wrote:No, but you are now banned from the thread and have received an infraction for your 2nd personal attack fo the day

Lulz. Someone is angry today.

LJ

Posts: 16,351

Sep 17, 2011 4:47pm

j_crazy;899966 wrote:Lulz. Someone is angry today.

Not really, littledog just likes to harass me. He knows I won't put up with it, then whines because he breaks the rules.

Ok, back on topic

ernest_t_bass

Posts: 24,984

Sep 17, 2011 4:53pm

LJ;899927 wrote:No, but you are now banned from the thread and have received an infraction for your 2nd personal attack fo the day

Thread banning is now here, so the gayness of the mods will be skyrocketing.

ernest_t_bass

Posts: 24,984

Sep 17, 2011 4:53pm

You wanna save public schools, you need to limit the phys-ed teacher/student hookups.

Thread Bomber

Posts: 1,851

Sep 17, 2011 5:03pm

Better yet, lets give public money to private corporations.

Education for profit might be even better than heathcare for profit.

believer

Posts: 8,153

Sep 17, 2011 5:33pm

Thread Bomber;900026 wrote:Better yet, lets give public money to private corporations.

Education for profit might be even better than heathcare for profit.

For profit schools do tend to output better students.

A

Al Bundy

Posts: 4,180

Sep 17, 2011 5:58pm

believer;900085 wrote:For profit schools do tend to output better students.

Most of the results of for profit schools that I have seen tend to be terrible. http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/04/03/ohios-for-profit-charter-schools-make-great-businesses-crappy-educators/

I would much rather see vouchers for non-profit private schools.

W

wkfan

Posts: 1,641

Sep 19, 2011 8:11am

believer;900085 wrote:For profit schools do tend to output better students.

Link, please??

BGFalcons82

Posts: 2,173

Sep 19, 2011 10:14am

John Stossel's take - http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/16/stupid-in-america/?test=faces

Albert Shanker, the teachers' union president who, years ago, first turned teachers unions into a national political force, was even more honest. Shanker callously said, "When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."

Union leaders first. Teachers second. Kids third. Or maybe fourth or fifth, after the school board, the principal's union, or some other part of the Blob.

Cleveland Buck

Posts: 5,126

Sep 19, 2011 10:25am

Thread Bomber;900026 wrote:Better yet, lets give public money to private corporations.

Education for profit might be even better than heathcare for profit.

The "public" doesn't have any money. They take everything they have from private individuals.

cruiser_96

Posts: 7,536

Sep 19, 2011 10:37am

A number of great points from writerbuckeye. 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.

Q

QuakerOats

Posts: 8,740

Sep 19, 2011 11:04am

Without competition, public shools will continue to deliver sub-par results. The union machine control of the public education monopoly has to end, first and foremost. Then we can begin to proceed with the ideas that will promote competition and better results.

G

Gblock

Sep 19, 2011 11:15am

are we talking about urban public schools or all schools?? i dont think you can say suburban schools are producing sub-par results...but then i guess i dont know what you mean by sub par results.

Writerbuckeye

Posts: 4,745

Sep 19, 2011 1:37pm

I was talking about those districts that have been failing and flailing the past 10 years. Most of those are the large, urban districts.

Suburban schools, for the most part, seem to be fine. Same with most of the small town and rural districts.

G

Gblock

Sep 19, 2011 1:46pm

Writerbuckeye;903161 wrote:I was talking about those districts that have been failing and flailing the past 10 years. Most of those are the large, urban districts.

Suburban schools, for the most part, seem to be fine. Same with most of the small town and rural districts.

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.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Sep 19, 2011 7:27pm

cruiser_96;902901 wrote:A number of great points from writerbuckeye. 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.

Valid points but the ability to adequately educate one's own children is essentially lost in today's society because of the need/desire for both men and women to have careers and work. Educating kids requires more than what you can accomplish when not at work.