# Is this true?  If so, why?



## Wry Catcher (Sep 9, 2013)

"The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance"  Sandra Day O'Connor

Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 9, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> ...our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance...



Yet ANOTHER consequence of the increasingly monopolistic control of affordable education by government.  

Get the government out of running the schools and allow competition in the education market.  That is the only way to realize improved results and lower prices.  The 'top-down' status quo only serves to produce profoundly ignorant students (as O'Connor describes), ridiculous drop out and illiteracy rates, and skyrocketing costs that far outpace the overall rate of inflation.  

You want to redistribute money to poor families so that they can purchase an education for their children?  Fine, but the idea that government RUNS the schools, from what's in the text books to how many tater tots get served at lunch is the problem.  We need COMPETITION in education, not more central planning.

End the government monopoly on affordable education now!


----------



## DGS49 (Sep 9, 2013)

Yet ANOTHER illustration of the folly of "get out the vote" campaigns.  Given that most people are woefully uninformed and mis-informed, herding thousands of marginally-engaged citizens to the polls is a recipe for irrational election outcomes in which those candidates who have been able to compose the most compelling sound bites will win out, regardless of the candidate's real positions, competence, or even the desires and needs of the individual voters.

Kudos to organizations like the League of Women voters, who at least in principle wish to educate the public, but in a society where most young adults (who even give a shit) get their information from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, the solution to voter ignorance is elusive.


----------



## Moonglow (Sep 9, 2013)

govt. education does not stop you from learning.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 9, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > ...our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance...
> ...



Your use of the word government is unclear.  School Boards are democratically elected as is the Supt. of each District in California as is the State Supt. of Education.  All of whom can be replaced by recall or rejection by the people.

Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why.  I don't want a corporation to teach our kids, why do you?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 9, 2013)

DGS49 said:


> Yet ANOTHER illustration of the folly of "get out the vote" campaigns.  Given that most people are woefully uninformed and mis-informed, herding thousands of marginally-engaged citizens to the polls is a recipe for irrational election outcomes in which those candidates who have been able to compose the most compelling sound bites will win out, regardless of the candidate's real positions, competence, or even the desires and needs of the individual voters.
> 
> Kudos to organizations like the League of Women voters, who at least in principle wish to educate the public, but in a society where most young adults (who even give a shit) get their information from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, the solution to voter ignorance is elusive.



Wow!  Both the Daily Show and the Colbert Report offer more than "take our country back" rhetoric (i.e. nonsensical) and mean spirited character assassination; they expose contemporary issues and the pols who support or decry them to satire.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 9, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why.



Damn right.  Why?  Choice...choice in your education dollar that only competition can produce.  With centrally planned education (local, state and feds working together to screw things up), you get NO choice.  The outcome, as always, is crappy results and skyrocketing costs.



> I don't want a corporation to teach our kids, why do you?



Corporations, partnerships, LLCs, or just one guy that owns the operation...I don't care.  The point is with a free market in education, you get choice.  With choice comes the NECESSITY to produce superior results and to keep costs in check....or you send your kid to another school.  

I don't want government bureaucrats to "teach" our kids, why do you?


----------



## Moonglow (Sep 9, 2013)

not all public schools are unionized and the much of the planning is done by local committees.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 9, 2013)

Moonglow said:


> much of the planning is done by local committees.



Even if that local planning didn't involve state and federal mandates/funding, which all do, that's no reason for government to run the schools.  Should local committees run all markets?  Clearly not.  

The results speak for themselves.  Our kids fail/dropout at an alarming rate.  They graduate with 'skills' that wouldn't get them out of the 8th grade a century ago.  The costs far outpace the overall rate of inflation.  All because THERE IS NO CHOICE in the market for affordable education.

Rome managed to build it's empire without public education of any kind.  When they did implement government control of the education market, its timing matched their decline.  Not the only reason for their eventual failure, but a correlation and arguable causation in history we should not duplicate.

At the very least, get the damn Feds out from meddling in education!


----------



## jasonnfree (Sep 9, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why.
> ...



Finland produces top students with government schools _and_ they have teachers unions as do other countries with top performing students.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 9, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't [sic] explain how or why.




It don't? 


The system fails another one...


----------



## Moonglow (Sep 9, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > much of the planning is done by local committees.
> ...



Louisiana has.
Rome was pre-industrial and the education that was manged during the decline involved the clergy for the new Christian religion.

The Founding Fathers advocated public education as well as libraries.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 9, 2013)

jasonnfree said:


> Findland produces top students with government schools _and_ they have teachers unions as do other countries with top performing students.



_And_ they have a much smaller population, _and_ that population is much more homogeneous, _and_ they have much less immigration, _and_ they have much less linguistic, economic, and cultural diversity, _and_ a different history, _and_ different standards of measure, _and, and, and_....


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 9, 2013)

Our public secondary schools are mandatory, public, and non-competitive. They are not exactly the best in the world.


Our universities - even the public ones - are ultimately based on a competitive model. They are by far the best in the world.


So..............


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Sep 9, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> "The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance"  Sandra Day O'Connor
> 
> Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com



I certainly think the same thing every time I read one of your posts. Doesn't make it true, nor does it mean I can explain the cause.


----------



## boedicca (Sep 9, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> "The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance"  Sandra Day O'Connor
> 
> Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com





You can thank the federalization of public education combined with self-serving Teachers' Unions.  They've transformed schools from institutions of learning into centers of indoctrination and sources of pensions.


----------



## asterism (Sep 9, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> "The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance"  Sandra Day O'Connor
> 
> Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com



It's true because the current trend in public schools is against rigorous testing.  If kids don't need to know it to graduate and that's all they want to do, they won't know it.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 9, 2013)

Moonglow said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...



Louisiana still controls education from the state down...and they're not immune to the fed meddling.  Again, NO choice in affordable education.  If that's your retort, you're missing the point entirely.

That Rome was pre-industrial is completely beside the point.  They thrived like no society before them and their decline coincided with government education.  It matters not the form of government that controlled the education market.  What matters is the lack of choice and competition.

The founding fathers ensured that the Federal government would have NO place in education by specifically enumerating powers, among which you'll not find education.

Fail.

Further, you fail to address the dismal failure that is public education despite the phenomenal amount we spend per student.

Fail again.

Choice, competition...THAT'S what's needed.


----------



## theDoctorisIn (Sep 9, 2013)

I have two major arguments against privatizing education. First and foremost, I have an issue with profit being the motive of educational bodies. Secondly, "choice" exists in the public school system. Most major public education system in the country has merit-based magnet schools and competition - I went to "magnet" schools from 6th grade on, and got a better education in high school than most people get in college.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 9, 2013)

jasonnfree said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Yes, and we could identify a small student population of homogenized, wealthy students of Scandinavian decent here in America that get a reasonable education.  America is not a small nation where everyone is exactly alike, practically related.  

The status quo HERE is failing.  More of the same isn't the answer.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 9, 2013)

theDoctorisIn said:


> I have two major arguments against privatizing education. First and foremost, I have an issue with profit being the motive of educational bodies.



So did the communists.  Excellent...

Without a profit motive, how exactly do you expect an operation to attract customers?  What motivates them to provide a superior service?  What is the impetus to provide that service at a price point that their target customers can afford?

Good God man.



> Secondly, "choice" exists in the public school system. Most major public education system in the country has merit-based magnet schools and competition



Bullshit.  I'm talking about educational choice for all students at all levels of ability.  And your 'magnet' schools are still run by bureaucrats.

Pass.



> I went to "magnet" schools from 6th grade on, and got a better education in high school than most people get in college.



Not provable and statistically irrelevant.


----------



## asterism (Sep 9, 2013)

theDoctorisIn said:


> I have two major arguments against privatizing education. First and foremost, I have an issue with profit being the motive of educational bodies. Secondly, "choice" exists in the public school system. Most major public education system in the country has merit-based magnet schools and competition - I went to "magnet" schools from 6th grade on, and got a better education in high school than most people get in college.



Government funding does not remove the profit motive, it merely shifts it.

Instead of building a company where revenue exceeds expenses, administrators build a division where more employees and more influence means higher salary and pension.  The revenue is dispensed with by pressuring the county commissioners to increase taxes.  If they don't get their way, they just threaten to fire teachers and cut back on materials.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 9, 2013)

theDoctorisIn said:


> I have an issue with profit being the motive of educational bodies. .





Why?


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 9, 2013)

theDoctorisIn said:


> "choice" exists in the public school system...





Not for the most part and not for most people.


----------



## theDoctorisIn (Sep 10, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> > I have an issue with profit being the motive of educational bodies. .
> ...



Because when profit is the motive of educational bodies, they'll put profit over education.

I know that's not a great answer, but it's not a simple question, and I don't have a better one.

I don't accept the premise that profit is the only viable motivator. Education should serve a greater good.


----------



## theDoctorisIn (Sep 10, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> > "choice" exists in the public school system...
> ...



I support "school choice", in the sense that there should be a variety of public schools offering different curriculm available to people. I support charter schools, magnet schools, and have no issue with parents choosing to send their kids to private school.

I don't support vouchers, and I can't imagine the US without a public education system.


----------



## theDoctorisIn (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> > I have two major arguments against privatizing education. First and foremost, I have an issue with profit being the motive of educational bodies.
> ...



Don't be a fucking moron.



eflatminor said:


> Without a profit motive, how exactly do you expect an operation to attract customers?  What motivates them to provide a superior service?  What is the impetus to provide that service at a price point that their target customers can afford?



I think it's pretty clear that I support a "free" public education system. I say "free" in the sense that there's no fee paid to the school. I understand where the money comes from. In that, I see no reason to worry about price setting or attracting customers.

The problem with attaching a price tag to an education is the people who are least likely to pay to send their kids to a good school are the people who's kids most need good schools.





eflatminor said:


> Good God man.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I've never understood why people think that private sector "bureaucrats" are somehow better than public sector ones.



eflatminor said:


> Pass.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's anecdotal, but serves as an example of where I'm coming from on this topic.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > ...our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance...
> ...



Facts not in Evidence!

The public schools that produce better educated children overseas are all completely government controlled. The current public school system in the USA is based entirely upon the tax value that each school district places upon education. Overseas there is a uniform national standard of education. In the USA local school boards can cherry pick their curriculum. Overseas school books are standardized across the nation. In the USA schools can buy books from far right publishers that have altered or left out relevant facts. 

Furthermore the "competition" that was created by the "school voucher" system has been a dismal failure. The voucher schools are not producing any better results than the public schools. The reason for this is because as a nation the USA no longer treats education as being something to aspire to obtaining. Teachers are denigrated as being "lazy unions" and those with higher degrees are derided as being "elitist". 

Competition in education has nothing to do with the source of the funding. It comes from the parents pushing their kids to be straight A students. That is what is missing here. Until the attitude towards education changes from being incessantly negative to one of positive reinforcement no amount of outside "competition" is going to make one iota's worth of difference.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > much of the planning is done by local committees.
> ...



Ironic how that illustrates a lack of education in both history and logic. Not one reputable source on the fall of the Roman Empire would make that correlation let alone attempt to argue for causation.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

theDoctorisIn said:


> The problem with attaching a price tag to an education is the people who are least likely to pay to send their kids to a good school are the people who's kids most need good schools.



Spoken like a true central planner that's just SURE he knows what's best for others.

Pass.



> I've never understood why people think that private sector "bureaucrats" are somehow better than public sector ones.



Because government bureaucrats have no incentive to thrive.  In the public sector, if you don't please your customers, you lose your job.  Perhaps Carolyn Lochhead said it best:

"Public educators, like Soviet farmers, lack any incentive to produce results, innovate, to be efficient, to make the kinds of of difficult changes that private firms operating in a competitive market must make to survive."


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Logic not in use!



> The public schools that produce better educated children overseas are all completely government controlled.



Doesn't work here.  Stick to the reality of what we face in this country.  We spend more per student than all those countries (with the possible exception of ultra-rich Switzerland and Austria), yet the more we spend, the worse the results and the higher the costs.

Open your mind to possibilities that aren't part of the central planner's creed, for once.



> The current public school system in the USA is based entirely upon the tax value that each school district places upon education. Overseas there is a uniform national standard of education. In the USA local school boards can cherry pick their curriculum. Overseas school books are standardized across the nation.



Ah yes, more leftist central planning...that's the answer.  



> In the USA schools can buy books from far right publishers that have altered or left out relevant facts.



You're joking, right?  Have you taken a look at the tripe that passes for text books lately?  Good gawd man, open your eyes!



> Furthermore the "competition" that was created by the "school voucher" system has been a dismal failure. The voucher schools are not producing any better results than the public schools. The reason for this is because as a nation the USA no longer treats education as being something to aspire to obtaining. Teachers are denigrated as being "lazy unions" and those with higher degrees are derided as being "elitist".



"Vouchers" still deal with government run schools dumb ass.  There is no free market competition in affordable education, not even close.



> Competition in education has nothing to do with the source of the funding. It comes from the parents pushing their kids to be straight A students.



How's that working out?



> Until the attitude towards education changes from being incessantly negative to one of positive reinforcement no amount of outside "competition" is going to make one iota's worth of difference



A perfect example of policies and law being based on INTENTION rather than RESULTS.

You do not know what's best for other family's children, no matter how much you through a temper tantrum and insist that you do.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...



You mean "Not one LEFTIST source".  

Got it...


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> > The problem with attaching a price tag to an education is the people who are least likely to pay to send their kids to a good school are the people who's kids most need good schools.
> ...



The ludicrous fallacy of attempting to equate education to capitalism is so obvious and yet none of those who try to do so seem to be capable of grasping it. 

If there was a real profit to be made in elementary education why has this opportunity never been seriously exploited by corporations before now?


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> If there was a real profit to be made in elementary education why has this opportunity never been seriously exploited by corporations before now?



Wow, if this has to be explained to you, I'm not sure there is any hope...but here goes:

No company, entrepreneur or capital market is going to invest into a sector (affordable k-12 education) that is controlled by a government monopoly.

Think about it with a modicum of logic and reason.  The people are forcibly taxed to pay for public education.  Who, other than the very rich, are going to pay twice for their kids education?

Duh.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Your failure to substantiate your allegation is duly noted.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Strike two!


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > If there was a real profit to be made in elementary education why has this opportunity never been seriously exploited by corporations before now?
> ...



Primary education has been around in one form or another since the dawn of civilization. So has capitalism. In all those thousands of years you have failed to establish that there is a profit to be made in elementary education.

Strike Three!


----------



## psikeyhackr (Sep 10, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> "The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance"  Sandra Day O'Connor
> 
> Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com



How long did it take her to figure that out?

Our schools are designed to produce indoctrinated ignorance.

Various professionals want people kept ignorant of their area of specialty.

How can double-entry accounting be 700 years old and economists not suggest it be mandatory in the schools.  And then don't talk about what consumers lose on depreciation of cars and air conditioners and computers etc. etc.

Politicians want dumb voters too.

People can't figure out supposedly collapsing skyscrapers either.  That one is really funny.

psik


----------



## psikeyhackr (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Primary education has been around in one form or another since the dawn of civilization. So has capitalism. In all those thousands of years you have failed to establish that there is a profit to be made in elementary education.
> 
> Strike Three!



Mass education is less than 200 years old.  It did not exist in Adam Smith's day.  It started in the 1880s.  Before then it was for the rich.

psik


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> as a nation the USA no longer treats education as being something to aspire to obtaining. .



That is BS.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Competition in education has nothing to do with the source of the funding. .






Of course it does.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> If there was a real profit to be made in elementary education why has this opportunity never been seriously exploited by corporations before now?




Private primary and secondary schools do quite well financially (or at least the best ones do - you know, competition and all that). And students from all over the world, including a very great many from those countries  whose educational systems you admire so much, flock to such schools in the US every year. In fact, there is serious and increasing competition for limited spaces in those schools by families from around the globe seeking to get their children out of the centrally-planned paradise you dream of.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Your post suggests a privatized system of education is superior, but don't explain how or why.
> ...



Government bureaucrats?  Your disdain for teachers is noted.  

Who would teach in private schools (PS) and how would said teachers differ in content and approach from 'government bureaucrats'?

Would PS be subsidized by the taxpayer or would the burden fall exclusively on parents of kids attending such an institution of learning.

What I'm hearing is one more iteration of "ain't government awful", a poorly thought out and emotional response to a serious problem.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Of course, you didn't substantiate yours.  Pot, kettle...I see you've met.

For the record, the topic of Rome's fall and the correlation with public education was discussed thoroughly at this year's Freedom Fest.  Wish you could have been there.

Keynote Speakers


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Because...?  Ah, I see, the "because I say so" retort.  Beautiful, works every time...

Still waiting for you to defend the status quo.  How's that working out?


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Homeschooling has been around since the dawn of civilization.  Fail, again.

Still waiting for that defense of today's results in public education...



> Strike Three!



You go with that...


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 10, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



I have no disdain for teachers.  They should, and would, thrive in a free market of education...at least the more capable ones would.  And, they'd be paid well for their efforts, which is hardly the case today with the ridiculous concept of tenure dominating compensation.

Nice try to put words in my mouth.  Fail...again.



> Who would teach in private schools (PS)



Any teacher capable of performing up to the standards required of their paying customers...just like any profession.



> and how would said teachers differ in content and approach from 'government bureaucrats'?



They'd respond to the demands of their customers, like any service operation.  They'd meet or exceed expectations, provide good value for money, or they'd be replace...again, just like any operation. 



> Would PS be subsidized by the taxpayer or would the burden fall exclusively on parents of kids attending such an institution of learning..



Different issue.  You want to make a case that poor families should receive taxpayer money to pay for their kids education, fine.  I'm saying government shouldn't RUN the schools because that takes away competition, consumer choice, the necessity to thrive.  What you get, as always, is shitty results and skyrocketing costs...aka, the status quo.



> What I'm hearing is one more iteration of "ain't government awful", a poorly thought out and emotional response to a serious problem



Then make the case that despite our spending more per student than just about any other nation, why should we continue to allow unmotivated bureaucrats run the education market.  The floor is yours.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



The onus remains on you to prove that in spite of thousands of years of commerce and education that there is a profit to be made in elementary education. So far you have done nothing but spout platitudes without a single substantive aspect of a feasible business plan.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Still absolutely nothing resembling a viable method of making a profit from teaching elementary children.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 10, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Since you have exactly the same access to the information as everyone else it is not my problem if you wish to remain ignorant of the factors that actually caused the fall of the Roman Empire. That you clearly prefer the disinformation spouted by a far right forum with an anti-union agenda says volumes about your motivation when it comes to education.


----------



## psikeyhackr (Sep 10, 2013)

We live in a world where we are bombarded with bullsh!t information.  It is much worse now than it was in the 60s.  There were 5 television stations and still there were people on the tube talking BS.

How is anyone supposed to sort it out even if they devoted 8 hours a day to the sorting.

Ignore the BS and watch football.

It is like Bread and Circuses in the Roman Empire but now we have to make decisions about Global Warming and Peak Oil.

Oh yeah,  and now we can Google the BS on our smartphones.

No one can take the time to read a couple of good books because they can't find the good books.  Most of the books are BS too.

The Tyranny of Words (1938) by Stuart Chase
Anxiety Culture: Tyranny of Words - excerpt
The tyranny of words : Chase, Stuart, 1888-1985 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9H1StY1nU8]"The Tyranny of Words" - YouTube[/ame]

The Screwing of the Average Man (1974) by David Hapgood
[ame=http://www.amazon.com/screwing-average-man-David-Hapgood/dp/B0006W84KK]The screwing of the average man: David Hapgood: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]

psik


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 10, 2013)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/nyregion/22private.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

For-Profit Schools

Private firms eyeing profits from U.S. public schools | Reuters

How Sweden Profits from For-Profit Schools | Cato Institute

"A recent study by London&#8217;s Institute for Economic Affairs reveals that Swedish private schools are significantly outperforming government schools academically. According to official enrollment figures, private schools are also gaining market share from government schools &#8212; so the better schools are growing and crowding out the less effective ones. Excellence is &#8220;scaling-up.&#8221;"


----------



## asterism (Sep 10, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



K12 | Online Public School, Online High School, Online Private School, Homeschooling, and Online Courses options

LRN: Summary for K12 Inc Common Stock- Yahoo! Finance


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Multiple examples provided in this thread DESPITE the government monopoly on affordable education.  

How's that defense of the status quo coming along???


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> ...your motivation when it comes to education.



My motivation is to improve our dismal results and reign in the skyrocketing costs despite our spending more per student than most any other country.

And your plan?


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > ...your motivation when it comes to education.
> ...



The onus still remains on you to provide a viable business plan to replace public education with for profit corporations.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



I have.  It's simple.  Allow a free market to run educational programs and schools in the manner and form each community is willing to support with their voluntary purchasing power.  Whether those individual organizations are for profit companies or charity based organizations matters not.  This is no different than any other free market where competition provides choice and the impetus to produce an outcome that meets or exceeds the expectations of customers while providing good value for money.

You have yet to tell us exactly why that won't work much less provided us with an alternative plan, or even a defense of the status quo.

The floor is yours.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



That is not a viable for profit business plan. That is a pipe dream. No investor is going to put up a single penny in anything that poorly written. Real business plans show projected incomes, overheads and profit projections. They deal with marketing and take into account factors that might adversely impact the outcome and how they will be addressed and overcome. So far you have done nothing even vaguely resembling a business plan. The few links provided by other posters are either for 100% technological alternatives or for only targeting the wealthy. Your business plan must provide a for profit solution that will meet the needs of every kind of public school in the nation and clearly demonstrate that it will be feasible and profitable within a 5 year horizon in order to obtain any investment capital at all.


----------



## MisterBeale (Sep 11, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



There's a problem with this, what you're suggesting is facsist, it isn't "voluntary."  It is much like our current Auto insurance and Health insurance paradigm.  What you intend, is you intend to FORCE tax payers to PAY private suppliers of education, to educate their children.  You want them to CHOOSE between several options.  

You STILL want the tax payer to HAVE to pay their annual property tax mills, and have it go either toward a private for profit corporation, or to a public sector educational institution.  Either way, it is going towards CORE.  If you believe that CORE is the problem?  Well, then there is no escape from the REAL problem, or from having your money stolen to fund the beast.  

THIS is called, a _*False dilemma*_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma


> False dilemma
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Jump to: navigation, search
> 
> ...



Globalized Education Program Spikes, CORE Set To Indoctrinate Humanity

*A new global education program is moving forward at breakneck speed, the goal is to indoctrinate the populace of the world.*
http://intellihub.com/2013/09/05/globalized-education-program-spikes-core-set-indoctrinate-humanity/


> In just a 9-year span a globalized educational program referred to as CORE or Common CORE has made its way to 14 countries globally according to an official presentation. In fact, according to the document Innovating To Transform the World, Cores intervention benefits more than 35 million students, 60,000 youth, 105,000 teachers, and 88,000 schools globally.[1]
> 
> CORE is all about transforming the education spectrum in grades K-12.
> 
> COREs main directive is seeking to achieve the transformation of nations by revolutionizing the key building blocks of education, namely  Teaching, Learning, Assessment & Governance. In other words, its 100% globalist sponsored propaganda.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FV9cz7PcKE#t=3185]CORE: Our Common Enemy!!! (SHARE THIS VIDEO) - YouTube[/ame]
http://www.core-edutech.com/pdf/CETLAnnualReport2011-12.pdf

http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/08/29/core-making-children-stupider-around-the-world/

It's not about educating the young.  Not in the public schools, not in the private or charter schools.  It's about making OBEDIENT WORKERS.  This is exists through out ALL educational institutions.  Everyone is bickering over nothing, it is a distraction.  Home-school your children, and do not pay attention to state standards, or else your children are doomed.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Like I'm going to do a proper full fledged business plan for an internet discussion forum.  Are you fucking insane?



> The few links provided by other posters are either for 100% technological alternatives or for only targeting the wealthy.



No shit Sherlock.  When government has a monopoly on affordable education, only the wealthy can afford to pay twice.  Duh.



> Your business plan must provide a for profit solution that will meet the needs of every kind of public school in the nation and clearly demonstrate that it will be feasible and profitable within a 5 year horizon in order to obtain any investment capital at all.



I know how a business plan works.  I've started two businesses from the ground up.

Still waiting for that critique of a free market approach to education or even a defense of the status quo...


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Thank you for admitting that you have absolutely nothing to support your allegation. Have a nice day.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 11, 2013)

MisterBeale said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



How exactly is a free market "fascist"?  Can we link you to a dictionary?

I don't intend to force CUSTOMERS to pay for anything.  They want their children to get an education outside of the home, they can pay for it.



> You STILL want the tax payer to HAVE to pay their annual property tax mills,



Wrong.  With a free market based education market, there would be no need for property tax or the inflated rental rates that come with it.



> and have it go either toward a private for profit corporation, or to a public sector educational institution.



Wrong again.  I'm suggesting no government run schools, no 'public sector' institutions.  Only those run for voluntary customers.



> Either way, it is going towards CORE.



The federal government has no place in education.  



> If you believe that CORE is the problem?



Government run schools are the problem.  No choice in education is the problem.  No impetus on the part of bureaucrats to thrive or keep costs in check...these are the problems.  CORE only adds to the central planning nightmare.



> Well, then there is no escape from the REAL problem, or from having your money stolen to fund the beast.



The beast can exist at many levels of government.  Free markets, free minds.  No beast there.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Thank you for proving you have no ability to respond with logic, reason or specificity as to why a free market approach to the education market wouldn't work better than the status quo.

Now off you go.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Debating 101: When you make an allegation the onus is on you to support it when challenged to do so. You have failed to provide anything that would substantiate that a profit driven school system would work, let alone be an improvement. Hopefully you will have better luck next time.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Oh, you're back.  Hmm.  How's that defense of the status quo coming along?  Nothing?  Color me shocked?  

Again, schools could be for profit or charity based, but you keep spouting bullshit about how 'profit driven' systems don't work.  

Are you really done or can we look forward to that specificity, logic and reason you central planner nanny state suck ups are so well known for?


----------



## DGS49 (Sep 11, 2013)

In spite of the mountain of criticisms that could be directed at The American Public School System, for most American kids who attend them they provide the OPPORTUNITY to get a pretty damn good education, provided they apply themselves and their parents are engaged.

The proof of this fact is all around us.  Regardless of how you measure success, most successful Americans are the product of American public education.

But the American public school system has several major problems, none of which is easily resolved. In no particular order I would say:

All teachers and administrators are government employees. There is a mindset associated with government employees that few of them avoid, and most are not even conscious of.  There is a sense of entitlement, there is a sense that failure IS an option, but that you will never have to pay the price.  I won't belabor the point.  I worked for DoD for 5 years, and although we all considered ourselves Good Public Servants, the overall attitude was a cancer.

Teachers' Unions (unlike in Europe) have taken on the mentality of a labor union.  Rather than working with Administration to improve Education, they are concerned with nothing but money, benefits, and minimizing the work and responsibility level of every union member.  As a European friend once put it to me, American unions exist for the benefit of the WORST employees, and do nothing to benefit the better employees.  Teachers' unions go to bat for the worst teachers, and their main quest is to see to it that their incompetence is never exposed (through quantitative testing of students), or dealt with.

The world of Academe is populated by tens of thousands of mediocre people who consider it a Noble Cause to see that nobody in school is made to feel inferior or wanting.  This is why grades are bullshit today (half the class is on the Honor Roll).  This is why classes are generally not segregated by ability level (even "Honors" classes are populated by many students whose parents simply complained so much that they were accepted).  This is why the Teaching Establishment is so reluctant to place any great weight on SAT's, test scores, and similar quantitative measures - when they were students, their OWN scores were mediocre.

European schools are COMPETITIVE.  Only the top ten percent (more or less) ever get into a University, and you can't bullshit your way in, or endow a chair to get in.  You have to  have the goods.  Competition breeds excellence, but our teachers are too focused on avoiding disappointment for those who can't (or don't) compete and win.  And to avoid hurting their feelings, they give out bullshit grades, bullshit awards, and put stars on homework that is an embarrassment.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Repeating your one-size-fits-all profit motive fallacy is a waste of time until you can prove that it will work for public education. Obviously you can't or you would have done so by now. That you feel the need to erroneously ascribe positions to me that I have not adopted is yet another sign of the weakness of your argument. In desperation you have finally resorted to name calling. 

Given all of the above you have effectively conceded that you have no viable alternative to the status quo and nothing further of value to contribute to this discussion.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 11, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



I get your ideology.  And I understand that the public school system is broken.  The answer is not to privatize the system but to improve it.  One size does not fit every student - the success of the private school system is the kid must fit the system or out on their ass they go.

Public schools must accept every kid, bright or not, socialized or not, interested in learning or not.  Not an easy task and not one which the private sector would likely service.  Of course there would be providers who take 'troubled' kids and put them altogether in a contained environment, but rarely does that produce a well educated, socialized adult.

It also has the inherent risk of labeling kids and putting them in a box if they, for example, question authority or have interests which are not congruent with the lesson plan.

All kids need to learn how to read with comprehension, write clearly and compute.  They all also need to be socialized and not with the aid of the latest iteration of Soma.  The classroom in a public school is ideally a microcosm of society in general, a place where children of different races, religions and intellectual capacity can lean to get along and work together.

Of course that's idealistic, for many reasons that cannot be accomplished.  What might be a better way to integrate our kids into a diverse learning environment is to allow them to attend a school structured around their interests and talents.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 11, 2013)

Public schools also put kids in a box, one 'designed(?)' it seems to make learning distasteful:  "Sit still, don't talk, don't touch. don't, don't, don't".

Better our public schools should adopt the Montessori pedagogy at the beginning of their educational career:

Elementary

At age 12 the talents, abilities and interests of the child can be directed into an appropriate curriculum where the skills of reading, writing and computing can be developed further in areas which interest the child.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 11, 2013)

Years ago we had high school which focused on technology, auto mechanics, printing, woodworking and such.  Later there existed Regional Occupational Programs (ROP) within high schools where kids could focus (major in) a wide range of professional and technical areas.  One of the best was SCROP (Southern California ROP) in LA County.

I visited SCROP with other LE personal who managed jails, it was an eye opener.  Young people from the Hollywood Hills working in class with kids from the hood, both with the same interests.  Some learned to be Jet Engine Mechanics and received hands on training an experience at LAX.  Other learned drawing an animation at Disney Studios.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...




You haven't read all the links, have you?


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 11, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > If there was a real profit to be made in elementary education why has this opportunity never been seriously exploited by corporations before now?
> ...





Just thought I'd mention this again.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 11, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Our public secondary schools are mandatory, public, and non-competitive. They are not exactly the best in the world.
> 
> 
> Our universities - even the public ones - are ultimately based on a competitive model. They are by far the best in the world.
> ...




Thought I'd mention this again too.


----------



## asterism (Sep 11, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Our public secondary schools are mandatory, public, and non-competitive. They are not exactly the best in the world.
> ...



I posted a link to a profitable public company that operates elementary schools.  I wonder why it was ignored.  

http://www.usmessageboard.com/7814447-post53.html


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Sep 11, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> "The more I read and the more I listen, the more apparent it is that our society suffers from an alarming degree of public ignorance"  Sandra Day O'Connor
> 
> Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Boise, laments 'alarming degree of public ignorance' - KansasCity.com



Try watching or reading 

"Waiting for Superman"

They have a nice way of saying that the Teacher Union & the Democrat Party have practiced intellectual pedophilia on our kids for generations

"the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people" and the statement, "If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Nation_at_Risk

That's why Dubya gets assigned a seat in the 9th Circle, he had a chance to reform our educational system, but instead let that murdering scumbag Senator from MA reinforced the Sabotaged Status Quo


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Sep 11, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Years ago we had high school which focused on technology, auto mechanics, printing, woodworking and such.  Later there existed Regional Occupational Programs (ROP) within high schools where kids could focus (major in) a wide range of professional and technical areas.  One of the best was SCROP (Southern California ROP) in LA County.
> 
> I visited SCROP with other LE personal who managed jails, it was an eye opener.  Young people from the Hollywood Hills working in class with kids from the hood, both with the same interests.  Some learned to be Jet Engine Mechanics and received hands on training an experience at LAX.  Other learned drawing an animation at Disney Studios.



That's the model that should be started in grade school!


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

asterism said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Because none of your links addressed the question. They are not designed to replace the entire current public school system with a for profit alternative that will meet all of the needs of the existing system. Instead they are either a technological enhancement to existing public schooling and/or focused exclusively on the wealthy.

Eflatminor was claiming that a for profit model was the solution to public schooling. So far no one has been able to provide a viable business plan that establishes how that will work.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 11, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Years ago we had high school which focused on technology, auto mechanics, printing, woodworking and such.  Later there existed Regional Occupational Programs (ROP) within high schools where kids could focus (major in) a wide range of professional and technical areas.  One of the best was SCROP (Southern California ROP) in LA County.
> ...



Probably not many 8 or 9 year olds are ready to work on jet engines.

See:  SoCal ROC - Southern California Regional Occupational Center 310-224-4200

I see they/ve changed the name, but the concept remains the same;  go to the link and see what's available today.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



That is true but they are fascinated by science and technology. They will spend hours just trying to figure out how to take apart an old PC or printer. They love building robots and getting their hands dirty planting seeds and then watching them grow.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> asterism said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...





That's it, keep moving those goalposts around. You are a disingenuous interlocutor.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 11, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > asterism said:
> ...



So now you are calling eflatminor a"disingenuous interlocutor" because he "moved the goalposts" by alleging that competition and free markets were the "solution" to public schools even though he has proven himself incapable of substantiating that allegation? Thank you for reminding me why I ignore the vast majority of your posts.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Sep 11, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Not the point!

I did the "Bring your Dad to work" thing for my son when he was 6th grade. The guy before me was a fireman and he brought some of his equipment.

Long story short, my son said he was never asking me to come back again


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 11, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...




No, I was directing my comments at you. How's that Reading Comprehension course coming along?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 11, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > asterism said:
> ...



Nice try.  An Ad Hominem response to his argument is beyond disingenuous, it is dishonest. 

The foundation of his argument is this:  *They [your links] are not designed to replace the entire current public school system with a for profit alternative that will meet all of the needs of the existing system*

No one is arguing against private school.  Those who have the money will send their kids to them.  Most Americans cannot afford to do so, and given the latest stats demonstrating the 1% continue to garner more and more of the wealth or our nation, and Scott Walker, et al, want to reduce the income of many Americans, a private school experience will remain out of the reach of most of our kids.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 11, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Maybe you should read all the posts before leaping to some yahoo's defense. His original argument did not include the "entire system" part until after his original premise was (repeatedly) proven wrong. Then it became his central premise because he knew that if he kept broadening the premise - even to the point of absurdity - that he could try to prop up a faltering argument. THAT is moving the goalposts, Sunny Jim.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 11, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



The entire argument for private schools (replacing public schools) is easily inferred.  As I pointed out, no one is opposed to private schools though (and I didn't post this explicitly) the public should not be taxed to support a private, for profit, school (via vouchers).

The public should not subsidize religious schools which already have the benefit of accepting donations granting the parents of their students a tax deduction and receiving the same protections from police and fire as do public schools.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



However, the rich kid that gets put 'out on his ass' has the choice to attend a different school, more appropriate to his needs.  Were affordable education not run by government, there would be far more choices in education that would allow for education customers to choose the school they wanted and that wanted them.

Think of it this way:  If you walk into a car dealership and are unable to buy the car you want at the price you're willing to pay, you find another dealer that has your car at your price.  With affordable education, it's like government running every car dealership and they only sell overpriced Chevys, when you're a Ford man.



> Public schools must accept every kid, bright or not, socialized or not, interested in learning or not.  Not an easy task and not one which the private sector would likely service.



I disagree.  There are private schools today that thrive on concept of catering to kids with developmental and/or social problems.  They're only for rich kids of course, because government monopolizes the market for affordable education for ALL students.



> Of course there would be providers who take 'troubled' kids and put them altogether in a contained environment, but rarely does that produce a well educated, socialized adult.



I disagree.  A private or charitable school that focuses on troubled kids could very well produce superior results vs the notion of throwing short bus kids into the mix with all other students.  Further, if you're right, the market would respond by providing schools that catered to a wide range of students...going after educational dollars for people that think as you do with regard to a diverse student population.  However, I suspect that at a school that specializes in troubled kids, they could get the special attention they need.  The point is, if they didn't, those parents would have the choice to send them to another school...not the case with the status quo.



> It also has the inherent risk of labeling kids and putting them in a box if they, for example, question authority or have interests which are not congruent with the lesson plan.



There is no reason to suspect that a free market for education would reject kids that question authority.  If the that's what customers want their kids to do, schools will respond to that demand with an environment that encourages the questioning of authority.  Where there is a demand, a supply will always come forward to meet it...unless the law prevents that from happening.



> All kids need to learn how to read with comprehension, write clearly and compute.



Which is NOT happening today.



> They all also need to be socialized and not with the aid of the latest iteration of Soma.  The classroom in a public school is ideally a microcosm of society in general, a place where children of different races, religions and intellectual capacity can lean to get along and work together.



There is no reason to believe that private/charitable affordable schools wouldn't offer classrooms of kids with diverse backgrounds.  If that's what you want and others want for your kids, you'll get it.  Why would a company in the education market NOT respond to demand?  Makes no sense.



> Of course that's idealistic, for many reasons that cannot be accomplished.  What might be a better way to integrate our kids into a diverse learning environment is to allow them to attend a school structured around their interests and talents



Which a free market for education would allow.

You started by saying we should "improve" the status quo but not allow private organizations or charity step in.  You provided a critique of my idea, which I've responded to but specifically, how do you propose we improve on the government's control of affordable education?


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 12, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



But amazingly you are incapable of referring to any single one of them as being the "free market competition"" replacement for the existing public school system as you originally alleged was the "solution". On the positive side your track record of failing to provide anything of substance remains unblemished.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



We get you're a troll.  Now go away and let the grown ups discuss the idea of a free market vs. government controlled market for education.  Some of us hope to explore the subject and maybe learn someone from one another.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 12, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



Kindly refrain from projecting your own shortcomings onto others. As far as learning goes we already know that you are incapable of supporting your "free market competition" allegations.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



If you wish to tell us how you'd improve our educational system, we're ready to hear you out.  If you want to critique the idea of a free market for education, have at it.  Or defend the status quo, that's fine.  Otherwise, you're just trolling.  It's pathetic.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 12, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



What is your background and experience which you rely on in making what I consider absurd examples?  I spent a diverse 32 years in law enforcement working with probation, parole, corrections, school districts and  providers offering residential treatment for drug and mental health issues. 

With all honesty I believe your opinions are beyond absurd and solely based on a ridiculous ideology that the private sector is all good - it ain't - and government is all bad.

BTW, suggesting I'm opposed to public/private partisanship is absolutely wrong.  I wrote and managed DOJ grants which included collaboration between the Sheriff's Dept., Probation, various police agencies, State Parole, the Women's Shelter, 52-week batter's treatment programs, drug and alcohol providers, the faith community, HUD and the Chamber of Commerce.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> What is your background and experience which you rely on in making what I consider absurd examples?



Wow.  I thought we had begun a conversation on a civil level.  Guess not.

My background is an entrepreneur and investment banker.  Before that, I spent 15 years with a Fortune 100 financial services company.



> I spent a diverse 32 years in law enforcement working with probation, parole, corrections, school districts and  providers offering residential treatment for drug and mental health issues.



Great.  That certainly qualifies you to comment on the problems of the current education system in America.  I'd like to hear your opinion as to how to improve it...or a defense of the status quo.



> With all honesty I believe your opinions are beyond absurd and solely based on a ridiculous ideology that the private sector is all good - it ain't - and government is all bad.



First, I never said, nor do I advocate, that all in the private sector is good and in government bad.  I'm simply acknowledging the blatant failures of the status quo, despite spending more per student than other nations.  I'm suggesting consumer choice would be a better approach than a government monopoly.  Nothing more.

If you believe my opinions are absurd, then please, tell us how you would fix the results and costs we see today or defend the status quo.  I'm interested in your opinion.  I'm not interested in personal attacks.



> BTW, suggesting I'm opposed to public/private partisanship is absolutely wrong.  I wrote and managed DOJ grants which included collaboration between the Sheriff's Dept., Probation, various police agencies, State Parole, the Women's Shelter, 52-week batter's treatment programs, drug and alcohol providers, the faith community, HUD and the Chamber of Commerce.



If I suggested that, which I don't think I did, I apologize.  Again, I'm looking for someone to tell me why an education market based on consumer choice wouldn't work better than what we have today or alternatively how we could improve the status quo.

Stated differently, what's your plan?


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 12, 2013)

In response to eflatminor's "challenge" here are some of the issues his "solution" needs to address with viable and feasible options that will work in all circumstances.

1. Locations and Types of Services.

Schools are build to serve communities. They offer safe and secure premises with a variety of services that range from education, sports, music and arts, special needs, after school activities, counseling, languages, on site medical care, transportation, cafeterias, groundskeeping and janitorial services. Most business models focus on niches and specialize in order to be competitive. In this regard we have seen outsourcing of some service aspects such as administration, food and janitorial aspects of schools. What business model would be capable of profitably addressing all of the above in a one size fits all manner? 

2. Student Populations.

One of the major issues in public education is dealing with the ebb and flow of student populations as they grow and shrink depending upon the economic factors of the communities that they serve. Optimal class size is 20 children per teacher. How will your business model cope when it has to deal with an unexpected influx or drop in student population? Will it be flexible enough to expand the number of classrooms or deal with a drop in income because of fewer student enrollments? 

3. Academic Standards.

Parents will be paying your "free market" corporations to educate their children. How will you ensure that their children actually receive the necessary education? What guarantees will you provide to ensure that the parents are getting what they paid you for? How will you handle lawsuits when a child fails to pass a grade? How will you handle discipline issues? You are contractually obligated to educate their children. How will dealing with problem children impact your bottom line?

4. Parent/Teacher Associations.

These exist because concerned parents want to be involved in the education of their children. How do you intend to deal with this time consuming aspect of the business? These will occur after hours and you will be obliged to pay overtime in order to hear out what each and every concerned parent has to say. 

5. Politics and Prayer in Schools.

Most businesses place a moratorium on the discussion of politics and religion in the workplace. In schools children are taught about politics and religion. Many are encouraged to become politically active. Schools often have student led bible classes. As a for profit business you are going to have to deal with this minefield. How exactly do you intend to make a profit while dealing with these issues? Then there is the matter of the curriculum and whether or not you should be teaching "creation science" and allowing teacher led school prayers. There are no right answers here so how will you deal with the inevitable lawsuits?

Lots more to come but let's see you get started with those easy ones first.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 12, 2013)

We already have a consumer choice educational system, eflatminor.  It includes the public school system, religious schools, charter schools\, magnet schools and the right of parents and their kids to be schooled at home.

That said, I have already posted some but not all of my ideas on how the pubic schools might be improved, in the same post wherein I stated they are broken.  In short:

Incorporating a Montessori pedagogy for children in the lower division.  During that time complete an assessment of each child's abilities, talents and interests and incorporating them into a non rigid educational plan (evaluated each semester) by age 12.  Of course each child will need to learn, at their own pace, reading, writing and computation and then advance to the next stage of their educational experience by demonstrating competence in these three critical areas.  Competence will be petty much assured with annual assessments and remedial tutoring.

At age 13 and 14 (approximately) each child would enter a small campus within a middle school which they and their parents would choose a focus for each child's special interests:  Art, music, sports, mechanics or technology and incorporating the child's interest into history, math, literature, science, etc.

By the 9th grade the teen is ready to choose traditional high school or a regional occupational program.  See for example:

SoCal ROC - Southern California Regional Occupational Center 310-224-4200

SCROC incorporates public - private partnerships in a practical application of education which benefits the child and various industries.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> We already have a consumer choice educational system, eflatminor.  It includes the public school system, religious schools, charter schools\, magnet schools and the right of parents and their kids to be schooled at home.



I would argue that choice only exists for wealthy or perhaps gifted students...those that can afford a private education or whose parents can afford the time to home school.  Affordable education for average kids offers little to no real choice.



> That said, I have already posted some but not all of my ideas on how the pubic schools might be improved, in the same post wherein I stated they are broken.  In short:
> 
> Incorporating a Montessori pedagogy for children in the lower division.  During that time complete an assessment of each child's abilities, talents and interests and incorporating them into a non rigid educational plan (evaluated each semester) by age 12.  Of course each child will need to learn, at their own pace, reading, writing and computation and need to be able to advanced to the next stage of their educational experience by demonstrating competence in these three critical areas.
> 
> ...



That's interesting.  I'm a bit concerned this idea could be even more expensive that the status quo...which is among the highest cost-per-student in the world.  Still, worth looking into further.  I like the idea of incorporating partnerships with private entities.  I like the idea of requiring a mastering of the '3 Rs' before a kid can proceed.  Still, I like better the idea of true consumer choice in education.    

Would you agree that if government didn't so control the current market for affordable education, we'd likely see more of these SCROC-like programs?  I suspect we would at the local level.  I doubt that will happen as educational control continues to seed its way towards more and more state and federal oversight.  Either way, thanks for the input.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 12, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > We already have a consumer choice educational system, eflatminor.  It includes the public school system, religious schools, charter schools\, magnet schools and the right of parents and their kids to be schooled at home.
> ...



It might become more expensive at the onset, and change in every human endeavor is never easy.  Keep in mind the words of Justice O'Conner and comport her words with the success of students in other countries.  As one engaged in Investment Banking you might measure the risk of spending more today on the rewards of tomorrow.

Keeping kids interested, not making learning a chore but an adventure would, IMO, reap benefits far beyond anything we might imagine.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> In response to eflatminor's "challenge" here are some of the issues his "solution" needs to address with viable and feasible options that will work in all circumstances.
> 
> 1. Locations and Types of Services.
> 
> Schools are build to serve communities. They offer safe and secure premises with a variety of services that range from education, sports, music and arts, special needs, after school activities, counseling, languages, on site medical care, transportation, cafeterias, groundskeeping and janitorial services. Most business models focus on niches and specialize in order to be competitive. In this regard we have seen outsourcing of some service aspects such as administration, food and janitorial aspects of schools. What business model would be capable of profitably addressing all of the above in a one size fits all manner?



I'm hesitant to address your points given your history, but I'll give it one more try in the name of civility.

No business model need address a "one size fits all" approach.  That's the point.  With the choice that only a free market can bring, you're free to choose the educational approach that works for YOU without worrying about other people's families.  



> 2. Student Populations.
> 
> One of the major issues in public education is dealing with the ebb and flow of student populations as they grow and shrink depending upon the economic factors of the communities that they serve. Optimal class size is 20 children per teacher. How will your business model cope when it has to deal with an unexpected influx or drop in student population? Will it be flexible enough to expand the number of classrooms or deal with a drop in income because of fewer student enrollments?



Yes.  Businesses must be flexible to demand or they fail and are replaced by those that are.  

If you think 20 is the optimal class size, you get to seek out a provider that offers that class size, not what some bureaucrat thinks is optimal.



> 3. Academic Standards.
> 
> Parents will be paying your "free market" corporations to educate their children.



They pay now through property taxes and other assessments.  They have no choice in the matter.  I'm suggesting a voluntary approach will produce superior results with much better value for money.

And again, there is nothing to stop charitable organizations from competing in the educational market, which are rarely 'corporations'.



> How will you ensure that their children actually receive the necessary education?



Because if the provider doesn't meet or exceed your expectations for a 'necessary education', you get to take your money elsewhere, a choice you don't have with government run schools.



> What guarantees will you provide to ensure that the parents are getting what they paid you for?



You have such guarantees with the status quo of public education?  Hardly.  At least with choice you get to choose another provider if they've failed your child.  Companies or even charities that don't meet the expectations of their customers do not last long.  Government agencies NEVER go away.



> How will you handle lawsuits when a child fails to pass a grade?



Like any business handles a lawsuit.  First and foremost, they seek to avoid them by satisfying their customers.  You can't sue a public school when a child fails to pass a grade...and we all know how that's working out.



> How will you handle discipline issues? You are contractually obligated to educate their children. How will dealing with problem children impact your bottom line?



There would be a contract between the parents and the school, just as with private schools today.  They have no problems with the issues you bring up here, why should affordable private schools be any different?



> 4. Parent/Teacher Associations.
> 
> These exist because concerned parents want to be involved in the education of their children. How do you intend to deal with this time consuming aspect of the business? These will occur after hours and you will be obliged to pay overtime in order to hear out what each and every concerned parent has to say.



Again, today's private schools have no problem involving their customers (parents) from the educational process.  There is no reason to suggest it would any different if more private schools competed for educational dollars.



> 5. Politics and Prayer in Schools.
> 
> Most businesses place a moratorium on the discussion of politics and religion in the workplace.



That is simply not true of today's private schools.  



> In schools children are taught about politics and religion. Many are encouraged to become politically active. Schools often have student led bible classes. As a for profit business you are going to have to deal with this minefield. How exactly do you intend to make a profit while dealing with these issues?



Same way current private schools do.  With a free market for education, there would be schools that encouraged political discussion and others that stuck to the basics of learning.  YOU get the choice that works for your kids.  How refreshing!



> Then there is the matter of the curriculum and whether or not you should be teaching "creation science" and allowing teacher led school prayers.



If a private school teaches something you don't agree with, choose another school for your child.  Problem solved.



> There are no right answers here so how will you deal with the inevitable lawsuits?



Again, the same way current private schools do.  Further, with greater choice in education, the frequency of lawsuits is diminished.  After all, if a school provides unsatisfactory service to a customer, that customer is far less likely to take on the time and costs of a lawsuit if there are more choices in the market.  They'll tend to simply pick a new provider.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 12, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > In response to eflatminor's "challenge" here are some of the issues his "solution" needs to address with viable and feasible options that will work in all circumstances.
> ...


The record of this thread clearly shows that you were the first to engage in incivility so once again I will ask you to refrain from projecting your own shortcomings onto others.


> No business model need address a "one size fits all" approach.  That's the point.  With the choice that only a free market can bring, you're free to choose the educational approach that works for YOU without worrying about other people's families.


You make the assumption that there will be the full range of these "free market" education providers (FMEP for short) in all possible locations where schools are necessary. In the real world markets those choices are restricted by geography. Certainly the best shops in the world can be found in places like Madison Ave and Riverside Drive but they don't have stores in Sayre, PA or Wittenberg, WI. So already your "free market" competition concept has stumbled at the first fence.


> > 2. Student Populations.
> >
> > One of the major issues in public education is dealing with the ebb and flow of student populations as they grow and shrink depending upon the economic factors of the communities that they serve. Optimal class size is 20 children per teacher. How will your business model cope when it has to deal with an unexpected influx or drop in student population? Will it be flexible enough to expand the number of classrooms or deal with a drop in income because of fewer student enrollments?
> 
> ...


Your cavalier attitude towards a business failing doesn't take into account that it leaves parents out of pocket and without the funds to put their children in another school and leaves their children bereft of the education they deserve.


> If you think 20 is the optimal class size, you get to seek out a provider that offers that class size, not what some bureaucrat thinks is optimal.


That you don't know what research has proven to be the optimal class size shows that you have not done your homework for your own concept. Investors look askance at anyone who is this lackadaisical when it comes to knowing their own product offerings.


> They pay now through property taxes and other assessments.  They have no choice in the matter.  I'm suggesting a voluntary approach will produce superior results with much better value for money.


You haven't demonstrated either "superior results" or "better value for money". In order to make that claim you need factual data to demonstrate that it will occur. The charter schools have not managed to do what you claim. What makes you believe that you can do any better?


> And again, there is nothing to stop charitable organizations from competing in the educational market, which are rarely 'corporations'.
> 
> 
> 
> Because if the provider doesn't meet or exceed your expectations for a 'necessary education', you get to take your money elsewhere, a choice you don't have with government run schools.


Do you have any idea how condescending that sounds? If the parents are too poor to pay for their children's education they will be forced to attend religious based charity schools instead?


> You have such guarantees with the status quo of public education?  Hardly.  At least with choice you get to choose another provider if they've failed your child.  Companies or even charities that don't meet the expectations of their customers do not last long.  Government agencies NEVER go away.


You miss the point entirely. When a child fails a grade in a public school there is usually a sound reason for that happening. Public schools will offer remedial classes during the Summer and work with the child to bring them back on track. With your FMEP the parents are SOL. They did not get what they paid for and they are told to go somewhere else. Talk about a recipe for disaster. The class action lawyers will have a field day.


> Like any business handles a lawsuit.  First and foremost, they seek to avoid them by satisfying their customers.  You can't sue a public school when a child fails to pass a grade...and we all know how that's working out.


So in order to avoid lawsuits your FMEP's will promote a child regardless as to whether or not they met the criteria for that grade? Isn't that what you are complaining that public schools are doing? How is your "solution" any different other than making you wealthy?


> There would be a contract between the parents and the school, just as with private schools today.  They have no problems with the issues you bring up here, why should affordable private schools be any different?


Have you ever read one of those contracts? 


> Again, today's private schools have no problem involving their customers (parents) from the educational process.  There is no reason to suggest it would any different if more private schools competed for educational dollars.


Have you done any research at all into how the business model works for private schools?


> That is simply not true of today's private schools.


See above.


> Same way current private schools do.  With a free market for education, there would be schools that encouraged political discussion and others that stuck to the basics of learning.  YOU get the choice that works for your kids.  How refreshing!


Once again your assumptions are on display. What if those kinds of schools are just not available in your area? 


> > Then there is the matter of the curriculum and whether or not you should be teaching "creation science" and allowing teacher led school prayers.
> 
> 
> 
> If a private school teaches something you don't agree with, choose another school for your child.  Problem solved.


You assume that everyone will have choices that simply won't exist in the real world. You don't have a solution. You have a pipe dream.


> > There are no right answers here so how will you deal with the inevitable lawsuits?
> 
> 
> 
> Again, the same way current private schools do.  Further, with greater choice in education, the frequency of lawsuits is diminished.  After all, if a school provides unsatisfactory service to a customer, that customer is far less likely to take on the time and costs of a lawsuit if there are more choices in the market.  They'll tend to simply pick a new provider.



Now we know why you didn't produce a feasible business plan initially. Because you haven't done even the most rudimentary of research into this topic. You are simply claiming that "free market competition" is the one-size-fits-all solution to every problem where government is involved. The reality is that is just not true. It takes creativity to find real world solutions. Wry_Catcher has produced more viable and feasible alternatives in 3 posts than you have in the sum total of all of your posts in this thread.



Spoiler: Prediction



This is where you return to calling me a "troll" and pretending that you still have something of value to offer.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



*That you would characterize the diversity of choice that only a free market can offer as "one size fits all" speaks volumes about your understand of basic economics and business.  I can help you no further.  Good luck with that.*


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 12, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...





Wry_Catcher started with the problem and found a viable alternative solution. 

You started with your "one-size-fits-all-free-market-solution" and keep insisting that it will work irrespective of the real world issues that it will face. 

Thanks for proving the veracity of this proverb. "*There's none so blind as those who will not see*." 

So no point in wasting any further time on someone who is trying to impose his failed fundamentalist capitalism dogma on education simply because he can't be bothered to do any research into the market first.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 12, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> ...failed fundamentalist capitalism...



Now we get the heart of your argument.  Thanks for the moment of honesty.  Speaks volumes.  Best of luck comrade.


----------



## DGS49 (Sep 12, 2013)

Regarding class size...

A few years ago I was thinking about running for school board in my school district (rich, suburban, white, expensive), while some of the then-current school board members were talking about a long-term campaign to reduce class sizes.  At that time I did quite a bit of research on the subject. California had announced a similar initiative but didn't have a lot of data yet to indicate how it was working (they subsequently abandoned it).

My findings were basically as follows:  (a) the concept of "lower class sizes" is an empty hole into which one can pour an infinite amount of money, with no tangible results.  If the results don't come, then proponents simply say, "class sizes aren't small ENOUGH yet," and demand more money.  It is, even if done prudently ENORMOUSLY expensive; going from 24 to 20 requires millions and millions of new dollars per year, in perpetuity.

(b) At the time, it appeared that small class sizes for very young students (up to about age 8) had measurable benefits, with the optimum class size being 12-14.

(c)  Thereafter, the older the kids are, the less impact class size has, and OTHER FACTORS become more important than class size...factors like teacher competence, orderly environment, and parental engagement.  Therefore, it makes no sense to focus on class size, which is terribly expensive, when other factors that have much more palatable costs can be enhanced.

(d)  The only constituencies pushing for "smaller class sizes" are uninformed parents and teachers' unions.  Basically it seems like a good idea, but a good teacher can teach a class with 40 students while a weak teacher will have a problem with 10.

To anyone suggesting that there is scientific proof that 20 (or whatever number) of students is optimal, I ask, where's the proof?  Color me very, very skeptical.

When I was in school back in the Stone Age, I was in classes of a minimum of 40 students from 1st through 12th grade, and to my knowledge there was never any problem relating to overly large classes.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 12, 2013)

DGS49 said:


> Regarding class size...
> 
> A few years ago I was thinking about running for school board in my school district (rich, suburban, white, expensive), while some of the then-current school board members were talking about a long-term campaign to reduce class sizes.  At that time I did quite a bit of research on the subject. California had announced a similar initiative but didn't have a lot of data yet to indicate how it was working (they subsequently abandoned it).
> 
> ...



The math doesn't lie.

When you have a 40:1 ratio in a 50 minute period the teacher has at best 1 minute per student in that class. Then assume that it takes 20 minutes for a teacher to grade the homework for each student. That now totals 14 hours for a single class. How many classes does that teacher have in a day? The ratio of students to teachers has a direct impact on the quality of the education that the children receive. 

More than a Number: Why Class Size Matters


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 12, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Keeping kids interested, not making learning a chore but an adventure would, IMO, reap benefits far beyond anything we might imagine.




Yay! Let's make balloon animals all day! Doing "chores" is part of life - and work. There is nothing wrong with teaching kids that hard work (even on stuff you don't 'want' to do) is a fact of life and that the sooner you reconcile yourself to that fact the better off you'll be. This kumbaya approach to education shit was tried extensively in the 70s and was a big flop.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 12, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> When you have a 40:1 ratio in a 50 minute period the teacher has at best 1 minute per student in that class.




There's a reason it's called a "class" and not "private tutoring."


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 12, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> You haven't demonstrated either "superior results" or "better value for money".




I believe I've covered this at least twice now.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 12, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Keeping kids interested, not making learning a chore but an adventure would, IMO, reap benefits far beyond anything we might imagine.
> ...



Education is a serious issue, one you apparently lack the ability to discuss.  Why do you post?  If you need attention why not run aside naked?

Really, it's sad you are unable to understand and annoying you post babble.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 12, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...





"Whee! Let's just have fun!" is not a "serious" approach to pedagogy, Patch Adams.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 13, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Being glib doesn't pass the seriousness of the issue test.  It only proves you're unable to read, comprehend and consider alternatives solutions to complex issues.  Of course glib is a step up from your usual babble.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 13, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...





And with that, you have added exactly nothing. Good work.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 13, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



I have done what I needed to do, describe you accurately.  I've read many of your posts, few if any warrant a response.  Again, I'm not sure you're stupid but keep on going on and I'll be convinced.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

So, any better ideas than "Whee! Let's have fun!"?


----------



## Bleipriester (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> So, any better ideas than "Whee! Let's have fun!"?


No. I want fun.


----------



## editec (Sep 14, 2013)

People are more misininformed than ignorant...in part much THANKS to Sandra Day O'Connor

As in for example 

McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93 (2003)
This ruling upheld the constitutionality of most of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance bill regulating "soft money" contributions.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000)
O'Connor joined with four other justices on December 12, 2000, to rule on the Bush v. Gore case that ceased challenges to the results of the 2000 presidential election (ruling to stop the ongoing Florida election recount and to allow no further recounts). This case effectively ended Gore's hopes to become president. Some legal scholars have argued that she should have recused herself from this case, citing several reports that she became upset when the media initially announced that Gore had won Florida, with her husband explaining that they would have to wait another four years before retiring to Arizona.[31]




I believe lots and lots of the people are trying their very best NOT to be misinformed, but there are so many sources of misinformation out there that most of us are ignorant about our world, and how it works.


----------



## jasonnfree (Sep 14, 2013)

eflatminor said:


> jasonnfree said:
> 
> 
> > eflatminor said:
> ...



It seems like many other countries doing better than USA also have government funded schools.   In one article in which I post a link to, areas of China that have problem schools get more attention and funding.  Maybe it's what the national will and goal is.  In USA it seems to me anyway that  sports get too much  attention.  Also, much has to do with the home.   My ex spends (too much) on nintendos and trips to disneyland for the grandson.  I fund microscopes, chess lessons,  and trips to observatories and marine aquariums and the like.  At least he gets a balance.  But yeah if a free market could do the job better let's go for it.  How to make the transition, keep the best and brightest teachers etc.  and weed out the clockwatchers would be the challenge.

Darling-Hammond: U.S. vs highest-achieving nations in education - The Answer Sheet - The Washington Post


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> So, any better ideas than "Whee! Let's have fun!"?



You're not only dumb (yep, now I'm convinced) you've become totally dishonest.  No part of any of my posts on this issue suggested let's have fun.  I guess being dumb you somehow comported teaching to a student's interests and talents fun even when my post framed core subjects like math, science, reading, history and geography within said interests.  In this way fewer kids will be turned off by being told "sit down, don't talk, don't touch, don't, don't don't".

I suppose that is too abstract for you.  That's sad.


----------



## eflatminor (Sep 14, 2013)

jasonnfree said:


> eflatminor said:
> 
> 
> > jasonnfree said:
> ...



Yet they spend less per student than we do.  Either way, I'm suggesting there may be a better way than any current government run experiments, especially for the diversity of the American educational market.  



> In one article in which I post a link to, areas of China that have problem schools get more attention and funding.  Maybe it's what the national will and goal is.  In USA it seems to me anyway that  sports get too much  attention.



Were there not a government monopoly on affordable education, you could choose to send you kids to a school that offered no sports programs...or a different one that had the balance of sports v scholastics that appealed to you.  Consumer choice is the key.



> Also, much has to do with the home.   My ex spends (too much) on nintendos and trips to disneyland for the grandson.  I fund microscopes, chess lessons,  and trips to observatories and marine aquariums and the like.  At least he gets a balance.



That's a good example of the power of voluntary choice.  Isn't it a good thing that government doesn't control the market for microscopes and chess lessons...or video games for that matter.  YOU get to choose, not a nameless bureaucrat.



> But yeah if a free market could do the job better let's go for it.  How to make the transition, keep the best and brightest teachers etc.  and weed out the clockwatchers would be the challenge.



In some ways, I think that would be the easiest part.  The best teachers and administrators would garner the highest compensation/perks in a free market while the clockwatchers (good term!), would find it difficult to remain employed if they didn't bring value to their customers.

Appreciate the honest exchange.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > So, any better ideas than "Whee! Let's have fun!"?
> ...




Whee! Let's have fun!" was intended to be taken as a condensation of your silly, indulgent, impractical attitude towards education. If you had some yourself you might have figured that out on your own.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



It was not your intention, it was a stupid glib comment which you are now desperate to spin, yet you can only offer childish criticism sans any substantive and thoughtful thesis.
You conclude with a classic ad hominem and yet accuse me of not having an education.  

If you had ideas you would post them


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 14, 2013)

Spend some time tutoring kids in the public schools today--I do that now and then--and you will see up close and personal the hgh level of ignorance and non subjects that passes for public education these days.

Spend some time mentoring a group of recent highschool graduates and college kids who not one--count them, not ONE--had any clue who Karl Marx was, not one could name any key members of the President's cabinet, not one could provide anywhere close to an accurate definition for an unalienable right, not one had any idea what the annual deficit or the national debt was, andyou get an up close and personal microcosm of how much our kids are not being educated.

Google up some Watters World You Tube 'man on the street' videos and you get a further idea of how much kids and adults don't know about what is going on.

Here is just one short Watters World segment that sort of sums it all up:
Watters' World: Spring break edition | Fox News Video

And here's some more:


And here's Part II of dumbest moments:
http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/09/05/watters-world-dumbest-things-ever-saidpart-ii


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...





I just told you that it was. In the process, we have discovered something about your capacity for learning. It doesn't look good...


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Spend some time tutoring kids in the public schools today--I do that now and then--and you will see up close and personal the hgh level of ignorance and non subjects that passes for public education these days.
> 
> Spend some time mentoring a group of recent highschool graduates and college kids who not one--count them, not ONE--had any clue who Karl Marx was, not one could name any key members of the President's cabinet, not one could provide anywhere close to an accurate definition for an unalienable right, not one had any idea what the annual deficit or the national debt was, andyou get an up close and personal microcosm of how much our kids are not being educated.




Now do the same with a group of Jr High School kids attending decent private schools, and who have families that value education highly. See the difference, and draw your own conclusions.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Spend some time tutoring kids in the public schools today--I do that now and then--and you will see up close and personal the hgh level of ignorance and non subjects that passes for public education these days.
> ...



Anecdotes are not a substitute for facts.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...




I trust your comments were intended for me and foxfyre then?


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



True.  Anecdotal evidence should never be construed to be the way it is for everybody.  But our personal experience, viewed objectively, can inform us.  And my personal experience has been that far too many public schools are absolutely national disgraces in their utter failure to educate the kids.  They may brainwash them some.  They may indoctrinate them with all sorts of things.  But they are absolutely not educating them nor teaching concepts of logic, reason, and critical thinking that would help them to educate themselves.

Private schools and parochial schools are doing a better job.  Homeschooled kids are on average getting a far superior education these days.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Therefore it might be reasonable to look at the differences between failing public schools and thriving private schools and enact changes accordingly, might it not?


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Foxfyre spends a great deal of her time doing charitable work and was providing feedback from her own experiences. 

You were attempting to extrapolate that with your own anecdote and spuriously claim that it was somehow "conclusive" that "decent private schools" were superior to public schools.

Hence my comment was directed at your egregious intentions.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 14, 2013)

All private schools are not equal any more than all public schools are equally bad. And I am old enough to remember when the public schools were so good that most were far superior to what many of the private schools are now.

Step one:  Get federal and state government out of the public school systems altogether and return the schools to the parents, teachers--sans federal unions, and local school boards to administer.   I am guessing we would see an immediate remarkable jump in I.Q. scores of the students and their SATs within a year or two.

Step two:  The federal and state governments could help by reining in the ACLU and $ motivated litigation and giving the states and local schools cover and protection from frivolous or coercive lawsuits.  In other words there would be no grounds for lawsuit if the school institutes a dress code, a conduct code, and the schools would be free to utilize ANY form of security necessary to protect the students and staff from would be agents of mayhem or other crimes.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...





I was also providing feedback from my own experiences. Same thing viewed differently through the lens of your bias.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> All private schools are not equal any more than all public schools are equally bad...




That's true.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



It is not at all surprising that well funded private schools catering to the wealthy are outperforming beleaguered and underfunded public schools these days. After all you get what you pay for and taking money out of public education for children has had some dire consequences. Unfortunately the average parent is in no position to fork over tens of thousands of dollars a semester for each of their children to attend private schools. Especially so when the economy is weak, jobs are scarce and wages are shrinking. 

Once upon a time not so very long ago we placed a premium on ensuring that our children had the best possible education right from the outset. We funded programs like Head Start so that even underprivileged children could begin their schooling on an equal footing. Nowadays that all gets lumped together as being the evil of too much government spending. We have moved our core values from what is best for our children to what is best for our wallets.

That is not something that I am proud of as a taxpayer. To know that I could be paying just a few dollars more and a child would still be able to get the education they deserve seems like a small enough sacrifice to me. They have their futures still ahead of them but here we are turning our backs on their plight. Somewhere we have gone astray in my opinion.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Once upon a time not so very long ago we placed a premium on ensuring that our children had the best possible education right from the outset. We funded programs like Head Start so that even underprivileged children could begin their schooling on an equal footing. :





If there is some question as to the effectiveness of a program, is it not reasonable to consider the wisdom of further funding?


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Once upon a time not so very long ago we placed a premium on ensuring that our children had the best possible education right from the outset. We funded programs like Head Start so that even underprivileged children could begin their schooling on an equal footing. :
> ...



Onus is on you to prove that Head Start and funding for public education was ineffective before you started harming the futures of innocent children. Furthermore the onus was on you to ensure that they would still be able to obtain an equivalent or better education before you threw them under the bus.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...




I didn't say it was my personal position. I asked you a question that you have conspicuously avoided answering.

In any case, isn't the onus on those running a program to demonstrate its effectiveness? Otherwise, you end up endlessly funding programs that may or may not be effective just because certain people (yes, you) perceive any critical examination or fiscal responsibility to be a rejection of the aims of any given program regardless of its actual efficacy.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Interesting that you suddenly deny that you were running down public education just a couple of posts ago. And that you deflect from your own agenda so as to avoid having to  deal with the consequences. But what is most egregious is your allegation that I failed to address your question when I did nothing of the sort. That type of dishonesty is why I stopped responding to your posts. The onus remains on you to deal with the questions in my previous post.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



Well, I generally am no fan of Unkotare's take on a number of subjects, but I will respectfully protest here as I do not see that he threw anybody under anything.  He is offering a very defensible reasoned argument suggesting that which has no proven track record of benefit or success should not continue to receive public funding.

There is no proof available that Head Start is living up to its advertising.  Even some, maybe many of those who promote and support the program admit it is usually little more than a different kind of child care service for low income families.

A good pro and con argument for Head Start can be found here:
Pros and Cons of Public Preschool: The Debate | PublicSchoolReview.com

Elsewhere I recently read, though I can't immediately lay my hands on the link, a comprehensive study showing that First Graders who had Head Start do usually have a leg up on their classmates in some areas.  But by Third Grade, that advantage has evaporated and there is no difference noted between those that had Head Start and those that did not.

And anecdotally, I refer back to my early education in a time that such things as kindergarten and preschool did not exist.  For me and essentially all my peers, our first day in First Grade was our first day in any kind of classroom or formal learning experience.  But we all received a Class A education that allowed us to compete with anybody.  And I am going to guess that 90% of us went on to get at least some college and we have a very high number of college graduates.

The title and advertising on many government programs, no matter how high minded and noble they might look, simply do not deliver on giving us our our money's worth.

In my opinion the government would utilize its limited resources much more effectively and altruistically by focusing on re-establishing the nuclear family, preferably two-parent homes, and promoting that as the national norm.  That and getting itself out of the education business altogether would do wonders for the education of our children.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...




I don't deny having issues with public education. You have a lot of trouble following along, don't you?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



In your last paragraph you touch on social engineering, do you really want our government to go there?


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



The benefits of Head Start were working exactly as intended according to the links you provided. Prior to HS underprivileged children were lagging behind their peers in those initial grades and never subsequently catching up. The HS program was intended to ensure that would not happen and it worked. Or at least it was working until the budget was slashed and now children who would have benefited are being denied the program because there is insufficient funding. 

As far as the government getting out of school funding that is already happening nationwide. The funding that schools relied upon from the Federal and State levels has all but evaporated. Districts are struggling and there are layoffs and school closings. Some districts are on the point of bankruptcy. Parents can't afford to pay higher taxes since their own incomes are shrinking. They most certainly can't afford to send their children to private schools either. 

While the existing public school system had problems primarily with inner city schools it was providing an education for about 50 million children nationwide. That is now in jeopardy because of people like unokatore who supported the sequester and slashing government funding of public schools. No provision was made to ensure that the existing public schools would still have funding. No provision was made for alternative schooling either.

50 million children are now facing a substandard education assuming that the public education system manages to remain afloat. This is a national disgrace in my opinion. If you thought that our public education system was bad before now it will drop to 3rd world standards without any government funding. The futures of our children and grandchildren are in jeopardy because we are literally throwing the baby out with the dirty bathwater because we are too cheap and stingy to pay for their education. This will be recorded as a shameful period in our history.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



50 million children are now facing a substandard eduction that is wholly controlled by state and federal governments.  Until the bleeding hearts and presumed do-gooders acknowledge that fact, there will be no solution as the federal government, most especially, has yet to competently and effectively manage a single social program that does not have more negatives than positives and/or is far more costly than it ever needed to be.

It is absolutely absurd to take the taxpayer's money away from the citizens, absord up to two-thirds or more of it into an ever more bloated bureaucracy, and then dribble whatever is left out to the schools along with a lot of nonsensical mandates  that further restricts the school districts from being able to utilze the funds in the most effective manner.

Get big government out of it and leave the money, resources, and incentives with the local school districts for the teachers, parents, and local citizens to manage.

As for what my links showed about Head Start, we'll just have to disagree about that.  I read the whole essay.  You apparently did not.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



We will have to agree to disagree on this topic but that won't alter the dire straights that the current fiscal policies are having on the education of our children and grandchildren. We the People have a responsibility for what is happening.

Peace
DT


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> And that you deflect from your own agenda so as to avoid having to  deal with the consequences.





And just what do you understand to be my "agenda"?


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> But what is most egregious is your allegation that I failed to address your question when I did nothing of the sort. .






You very clearly did so.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 14, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > And that you deflect from your own agenda so as to avoid having to  deal with the consequences.
> ...



Your agenda seems to be whatever the Tea Party Propaganda Machine tell you it is.


----------



## Foxfyre (Sep 14, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...



And with one short sentence you wiped out what could have been a thoughtful and positive debate on an important subject and transformed it into just another stupid partisan food fight.  Good job WC.  I honestly think it must be something in the water that you guys drink.  But I'll wish you a pleasant evening.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



I see.  BTW, have you read any of Unkotare posts?  Have you made comments as to their 'substance'?  Seems you may want to look in the mirror when making an accusation in re partisanship.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 14, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Since unkotare has refused to provide any "thoughtful and positive debate on an important subject" I have placed him on ignore. I simply don't have the time to waste on his endless deflections and dishonesty. WC's characterization of him is entirely consistent with all of his posts in this thread. It is also consistent with eflatminor's for that matter. 

The debate on education needs to be constructive in my opinion. Constantly denigrating the public school system does not meet that criteria (and to your credit you acknowledged that there are good public schools, Foxy). WC has come up with some workable suggestions. What is currently missing is how this is going to be funded. No one has provided a feasible and viable for profit free market alternative in spite of several requests.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Wry Catcher said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...




Oh, I know you were just dying to play the partisan shill there, but you're not even close. Too bad.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 14, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...




Some people don't want a discussion, they want an echo chamber. Barring that, they engage in hyperbole, assumption, dishonesty, petulance, and avoidance.


----------



## Derideo_Te (Sep 15, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



Ironic! Thanks for confirming that you deserve to be ignored. Have a nice life.


----------



## editec (Sep 15, 2013)

Foxfyre said:


> Spend some time tutoring kids in the public schools today--I do that now and then--and you will see up close and personal the hgh level of ignorance and non subjects that passes for public education these days.
> 
> Spend some time mentoring a group of recent highschool graduates and college kids who not one--count them, not ONE--had any clue who Karl Marx was, not one could name any key members of the President's cabinet, not one could provide anywhere close to an accurate definition for an unalienable right, not one had any idea what the annual deficit or the national debt was, andyou get an up close and personal microcosm of how much our kids are not being educated.
> 
> ...



These "on the street" videos proves exactly nothing.

Since purpose of these is to show how ignorant people are what one does is keep the interviews of the ignorant and toss the interviews of those who are not.


Americans are not quite so ignorant as some here would like us to believe, and if they are their education has very little to do with that.

Some people are interested in the world and therefore pay attention, some do not.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 15, 2013)

Derideo_Te said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Derideo_Te said:
> ...




Thanks for confirming that you are not interested in or capable of an actual discussion.


----------



## Unkotare (Sep 15, 2013)

editec said:


> Some people are interested in the world and therefore pay attention, some do not.





And those who are "interested in the world and therefore pay attention" just happen to be those who agree with _you_, right? Amazing how it works out that way...


----------

