Republicans to target unions, expand school choice in states

[Ray From Cleveland]

Class size has a LOT to do with it. In fact, earlier in this thread I quoted an article that listed the 5 main reasons parents chose private schools and smaller class size was at the top of the list. How can one teacher effectively teach a class of 60 fifth graders? You're arguing against exactly what makes private schools successful. We need more teachers.

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Have you ever taught a class with 39 kids; I have. In such an environment, kids that need any extra help don't get. There is not enough class time to cover the material and have any interaction with the kids. Most teachers in that environment, hardly even know their students. On parent teacher night, a parent wants to discuss the problem Johnny is having in math and you can't remember which Johnny is their son. Thankfully, I only had to spend two years teaching in the zoo. Frankly, I wish every parent had the opportunity to teach an overloaded class of 3rd graders.

In private schools, larger class sizes may well be tolerable since the school has the opportunity to select their students, no special ed kids, no juvenile delinquents, no kids that can't speak English, no kids that are 3 grade levels behind. Public schools have to take whatever walks in the door.

The whining about private and Charter schools always takes this path. The perception the teacher's unions want to create is "it's the system from which we need protection. That will make for a better system"...
Bullshit.
Union or no union. its all the same everywhere.
Voters keep the school boards stacked with left wing do gooders who in turn keep hiring left wing educrats who care only about their careers, paychecks and platinum plus benefit packages.

It's the same thing with the public workers unions that the article touched on. While the pay is similar for what the jobs pay in the private market, the benefits are outstanding. Our company hires retirees to drive our delivery vans part-time. We only have a couple of them, but two of them retired from the government at the age of 55. Because I didn't work for the government, I have to wait until I'm 67 to retire unless I become disabled.

 

[initforme]

Its so very wrong anyone hard to work until 67....something is very wrong with that. But I guess a company uses and abuses a guy then cuts him lose when he's used up and then its a life pissed away working. But that's the way life is....work work work and then die. I retired at 60....5 years too latte. Wish I had those years back. Nobody is going to thank you for working hard.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Its so very wrong anyone hard to work until 67....something is very wrong with that. But I guess a company uses and abuses a guy then cuts him lose when he's used up and then its a life pissed away working. But that's the way life is....work work work and then die. I retired at 60....5 years too latte. Wish I had those years back. Nobody is going to thank you for working hard.

For many, retirement is based on when you can collect SS and Medicare. I hope by then I won't be in a position to rely on those programs in order to retire, but nobody can predict the future. However if I have to work until that age, I think everybody should, especially those who work for the government that can currently retire 12 years earlier on the taxpayers dime.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

given that Charter schools have worse record than public schools, and that's before all the protections to keep the scams out are eliminated, um, yeah, that would be a bad thing.

The thing about it is, no one wants to set up Charter Schools in the Cleetus states. There's no money to be made there. They want to get into LA and NY and Chicago, where there are big old pots of money to be had.

If public schools did SO well we would have the capacity to compete on a global level with kids who are already fluent in more than one language. Instead we are finding kids who need fractions written on tape measures, and the need for compliance programs like "no child left behind". Anyone who thinks public school is producing quality education today is obviously delusional and out of touch with the current system.

During the housing bubble we landlords went through hell. You couldn't find a good tenant for anything because lower income people were buying houses instead. I use CraigsList to get my tenants and I've had some pretty good luck with it. Anyway, during that time, I would get emails from people that looked like they were written by a six year old. Some of them I couldn't even make out what they were asking or telling me: misspelled words, no grammar at all, incomplete sentences.

Most of them I didn't write back based on their horrible writing skills. But having no choice, I had to interview some of them.

It didn't surprise me what kind of people I would be dealing with, what I was surprised at is these people had a high school diploma. How does one get a diploma from a public high school when they write like that? If I wouldn't interview these people for an apartment, how do they get employment?

Unfortunately, these are some people of the people who vote democrat, for reasons of allowing the federal government to provide for them because of their inability to acquire the skills to obtain a job to provide for themselves. Its the current education system in this country, and those choices of which priorities public schools need to focus on, which has failed them (passed them through) without the tools needed to establish a solid earning job to care for themselves. Your story is not unique, as I have seen it myself. We need to get all the liberal BS out of the way, and focus once again on those subjects that are necessary to best equip students to succeed in their careers later in life.

 

[JoeB131]

Not trying to dodge anything. It's not a private school, it's a charter school. Apply, do the paperwork, you're in.

Ain't that great for the kids?

This IS about the KIDS, right?

Charter implies they can select students.... so no.

But you keep pretending these scams are doing some good.... when your real goal is to break the teacher's unions.

Because, clearly, those teachers are going to work harder for less money and less job security. No, really!

 

[JoeB131]

Of course.

I would have been stunned if you folks believed or agreed with any of this.

Not my problem.

Why do you keep dodging the question.

Are these charter schools taking the problem kids, or just cherry-picking the ones that they want.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Its so very wrong anyone hard to work until 67....something is very wrong with that. But I guess a company uses and abuses a guy then cuts him lose when he's used up and then its a life pissed away working. But that's the way life is....work work work and then die. I retired at 60....5 years too latte. Wish I had those years back. Nobody is going to thank you for working hard.

For many, retirement is based on when you can collect SS and Medicare. I hope by then I won't be in a position to rely on those programs in order to retire, but nobody can predict the future. However if I have to work until that age, I think everybody should, especially those who work for the government that can currently retire 12 years earlier on the taxpayers dime.

Americans tend to be more instant gratifying, gravitating towards the latest technology phones or flat screen tvs, than hold a willingness to plan and set aside for the future. Which is why so more and more are caught having to depend on government and social security. Like you I would rather plan towards my own retirement than have to rely on the government.

 

[Mac1958]

Are these charter schools taking the problem kids, or just cherry-picking the ones that they want.

I already answered you. You just don't like the answer. They take all kids, first come, first served. Unfortunately they do have a waiting list because parents want their kids getting a good education.

But you keep pretending these scams are doing some good.... when your real goal is to break the teacher's unions.

And there it is. I care about the kids, you care about the unions. Politics.

Deny the good these schools do all you want. Parents and kids care about results, not partisan politics.

You, obviously, wouldn't understand.
.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not trying to dodge anything. It's not a private school, it's a charter school. Apply, do the paperwork, you're in.

Ain't that great for the kids?

This IS about the KIDS, right?

Charter implies they can select students.... so no.

But you keep pretending these scams are doing some good.... when your real goal is to break the teacher's unions.

Because, clearly, those teachers are going to work harder for less money and less job security. No, really!

It's the teachers union that helps keep those bad teachers in school. It's the teachers unions that call for strikes during the season that screws everybody simply because the great money they get paid isn't enough.

Why are you so focused on schools picking students? Don't they do the exact same thing in colleges?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

given that Charter schools have worse record than public schools, and that's before all the protections to keep the scams out are eliminated, um, yeah, that would be a bad thing.

The thing about it is, no one wants to set up Charter Schools in the Cleetus states. There's no money to be made there. They want to get into LA and NY and Chicago, where there are big old pots of money to be had.

If public schools did SO well we would have the capacity to compete on a global level with kids who are already fluent in more than one language. Instead we are finding kids who need fractions written on tape measures, and the need for compliance programs like "no child left behind". Anyone who thinks public school is producing quality education today is obviously delusional and out of touch with the current system.

During the housing bubble we landlords went through hell. You couldn't find a good tenant for anything because lower income people were buying houses instead. I use CraigsList to get my tenants and I've had some pretty good luck with it. Anyway, during that time, I would get emails from people that looked like they were written by a six year old. Some of them I couldn't even make out what they were asking or telling me: misspelled words, no grammar at all, incomplete sentences.

Most of them I didn't write back based on their horrible writing skills. But having no choice, I had to interview some of them.

It didn't surprise me what kind of people I would be dealing with, what I was surprised at is these people had a high school diploma. How does one get a diploma from a public high school when they write like that? If I wouldn't interview these people for an apartment, how do they get employment?

Unfortunately, these are some people of the people who vote democrat, for reasons of allowing the federal government to provide for them because of their inability to acquire the skills to obtain a job to provide for themselves. Its the current education system in this country, and those choices of which priorities public schools need to focus on, which has failed them (passed them through) without the tools needed to establish a solid earning job to care for themselves. Your story is not unique, as I have seen it myself. We need to get all the liberal BS out of the way, and focus once again on those subjects that are necessary to best equip students to succeed in their careers later in life.

They pass these students through to make themselves look good. Depending on where you go, dropout rates are alarming, and that makes the union teachers look bad, so they want none of that. If a kid is willing to go through all grades, they pass them through even though they should have been held back a couple of years.

If a parent sees their kid is advancing to the next grade level, they likely don't question it. That doesn't go on in private school very much. If you don't pass the grade level, you have to take it all over again. You fail, that's it.

 

[Flopper]

Class size has a LOT to do with it. In fact, earlier in this thread I quoted an article that listed the 5 main reasons parents chose private schools and smaller class size was at the top of the list. How can one teacher effectively teach a class of 60 fifth graders? You're arguing against exactly what makes private schools successful. We need more teachers.

The reason I argue against that is because I went to a private school. This was during the baby boom era, and we had 39 kids in my class. I'd match that class against any public school that had much smaller class sizes.

Smaller classes is a union thing. They are not looking out for the kids, they are looking out for themselves. Perhaps some parents bought into that as well, I don't know. Smaller classes may help with an out of control room of kids perhaps, but that's about it.

Have you ever taught a class with 39 kids; I have. In such an environment, kids that need any extra help don't get. There is not enough class time to cover the material and have any interaction with the kids. Most teachers in that environment, hardly even know their students. On parent teacher night, a parent wants to discuss the problem Johnny is having in math and you can't remember which Johnny is their son. Thankfully, I only had to spend two years teaching in the zoo. Frankly, I wish every parent had the opportunity to teach an overloaded class of 3rd graders.

In private schools, larger class sizes may well be tolerable since the school has the opportunity to select their students, no special ed kids, no juvenile delinquents, no kids that can't speak English, no kids that are 3 grade levels behind. Public schools have to take whatever walks in the door.

The whining about private and Charter schools always takes this path. The perception the teacher's unions want to create is "it's the system from which we need protection. That will make for a better system"...
Bullshit.
Union or no union. its all the same everywhere.
Voters keep the school boards stacked with left wing do gooders who in turn keep hiring left wing educrats who care only about their careers, paychecks and platinum plus benefit packages.

If that were the case, I would expect red states to have substantially better educational systems than blue states. Certainly they're are not filling their school boards with Democrats and left wing do gooders.

 

[Flopper]

So is this such a bad agenda? I predict more snowflakes a falling.

given that Charter schools have worse record than public schools, and that's before all the protections to keep the scams out are eliminated, um, yeah, that would be a bad thing.

The thing about it is, no one wants to set up Charter Schools in the Cleetus states. There's no money to be made there. They want to get into LA and NY and Chicago, where there are big old pots of money to be had.

If public schools did SO well we would have the capacity to compete on a global level with kids who are already fluent in more than one language. Instead we are finding kids who need fractions written on tape measures, and the need for compliance programs like "no child left behind". Anyone who thinks public school is producing quality education today is obviously delusional and out of touch with the current system.

During the housing bubble we landlords went through hell. You couldn't find a good tenant for anything because lower income people were buying houses instead. I use CraigsList to get my tenants and I've had some pretty good luck with it. Anyway, during that time, I would get emails from people that looked like they were written by a six year old. Some of them I couldn't even make out what they were asking or telling me: misspelled words, no grammar at all, incomplete sentences.

Most of them I didn't write back based on their horrible writing skills. But having no choice, I had to interview some of them.

It didn't surprise me what kind of people I would be dealing with, what I was surprised at is these people had a high school diploma. How does one get a diploma from a public high school when they write like that? If I wouldn't interview these people for an apartment, how do they get employment?

Unfortunately, these are some people of the people who vote democrat, for reasons of allowing the federal government to provide for them because of their inability to acquire the skills to obtain a job to provide for themselves. Its the current education system in this country, and those choices of which priorities public schools need to focus on, which has failed them (passed them through) without the tools needed to establish a solid earning job to care for themselves. Your story is not unique, as I have seen it myself. We need to get all the liberal BS out of the way, and focus once again on those subjects that are necessary to best equip students to succeed in their careers later in life.

They pass these students through to make themselves look good. Depending on where you go, dropout rates are alarming, and that makes the union teachers look bad, so they want none of that. If a kid is willing to go through all grades, they pass them through even though they should have been held back a couple of years.

If a parent sees their kid is advancing to the next grade level, they likely don't question it. That doesn't go on in private school very much. If you don't pass the grade level, you have to take it all over again. You fail, that's it.

You don't think private schools pass kids to make themselves look good to perspective customers. Public school teachers and principals have a lot more job security than those in private school and less reason to worry about their jobs if they fail students and enrollment drops. I've had kids in private school. When paying over $15,000 a year per kids, I expect that school to do whatever is needed to make sure my kids pass.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

given that Charter schools have worse record than public schools, and that's before all the protections to keep the scams out are eliminated, um, yeah, that would be a bad thing.

The thing about it is, no one wants to set up Charter Schools in the Cleetus states. There's no money to be made there. They want to get into LA and NY and Chicago, where there are big old pots of money to be had.

If public schools did SO well we would have the capacity to compete on a global level with kids who are already fluent in more than one language. Instead we are finding kids who need fractions written on tape measures, and the need for compliance programs like "no child left behind". Anyone who thinks public school is producing quality education today is obviously delusional and out of touch with the current system.

During the housing bubble we landlords went through hell. You couldn't find a good tenant for anything because lower income people were buying houses instead. I use CraigsList to get my tenants and I've had some pretty good luck with it. Anyway, during that time, I would get emails from people that looked like they were written by a six year old. Some of them I couldn't even make out what they were asking or telling me: misspelled words, no grammar at all, incomplete sentences.

Most of them I didn't write back based on their horrible writing skills. But having no choice, I had to interview some of them.

It didn't surprise me what kind of people I would be dealing with, what I was surprised at is these people had a high school diploma. How does one get a diploma from a public high school when they write like that? If I wouldn't interview these people for an apartment, how do they get employment?

Unfortunately, these are some people of the people who vote democrat, for reasons of allowing the federal government to provide for them because of their inability to acquire the skills to obtain a job to provide for themselves. Its the current education system in this country, and those choices of which priorities public schools need to focus on, which has failed them (passed them through) without the tools needed to establish a solid earning job to care for themselves. Your story is not unique, as I have seen it myself. We need to get all the liberal BS out of the way, and focus once again on those subjects that are necessary to best equip students to succeed in their careers later in life.

They pass these students through to make themselves look good. Depending on where you go, dropout rates are alarming, and that makes the union teachers look bad, so they want none of that. If a kid is willing to go through all grades, they pass them through even though they should have been held back a couple of years.

If a parent sees their kid is advancing to the next grade level, they likely don't question it. That doesn't go on in private school very much. If you don't pass the grade level, you have to take it all over again. You fail, that's it.

You don't think private schools pass kids to make themselves look good to perspective customers. Public school teachers and principals have a lot more job security than those in private school and less reason to worry about their jobs if they fail students and enrollment drops. I've had kids in private school. When paying over $15,000 a year per kids, I expect that school to do whatever is needed to make sure my kids pass.

That may be, but when that doesn't happen, the parents get involved which you're less likely to see in the public school setting.

Private school has less to prove because they are not hurting for customers. I'm sure there are waiting lines for some. Public schools have to please the public because taxpayers are funding it. If they honestly pass or fail kids and show a considerable amount of kids failing, that's something that doesn't look good when they put a school levy on the ballot asking for more money. Even worse if private schools are a threat in their area.

Whether you're talking about public or private schools, parents have to get involved. Neither are successful if they don't. The difference is when you're paying that kind of money for private education, you make sure you're getting your monies worth.

 

[Papageorgio]

Joey lies charter schools perform as good as public schools.

Charter Schools: Average is still better than below average

He should find unbiased articles, except dishonest people don't really want to weigh two sides, they want their agenda, damn the facts.

 

[JoeB131]

I already answered you. You just don't like the answer. They take all kids, first come, first served. Unfortunately they do have a waiting list because parents want their kids getting a good education.

If you have a "waiting list", then you obviously are being selective about who you take..

So you have a school that isn't taking Jamal the gangbanger and Corky the retard.

And there it is. I care about the kids, you care about the unions. Politics.

Deny the good these schools do all you want. Parents and kids care about results, not partisan politics.

You, obviously, wouldn't understand.

I only have to look at who is sponsoring something to realize how little they care about the children.

The same people who want "Charter Schools" are the same ones who want to cancel school lunch programs to give tax breaks to billionaires.

Yes, I really do want teachers to be paid fair wages and have protections against capricious administrators.

 

[JoeB131]

Joey lies charter schools perform as good as public schools.

Charter Schools: Average is still better than below average

He should find unbiased articles, except dishonest people don't really want to weigh two sides, they want their agenda, damn the facts.

I love all the space I occupy in your head, but Charter Schools - even after they are allowed to cherry pick the kids they want - get worse results than Public Schools.

Charters not outperforming nation’s traditional public schools, report says

Researchers at Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes looked at test data from charter schools in 26 states and the District and found that 25 percent of charters outperformed traditional public schools in reading while 29 percent of charters delivered stronger results in math. That marked an improvement over a similar 2009 study by the same research team.

But 56 percent of the charters produced no significant difference in reading and 19 percent had worse results than traditional public schools. In math, 40 percent produced no significant difference and 31 percent were significantly worse than regular public schools.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Joey lies charter schools perform as good as public schools.

Charter Schools: Average is still better than below average

He should find unbiased articles, except dishonest people don't really want to weigh two sides, they want their agenda, damn the facts.

I love all the space I occupy in your head, but Charter Schools - even after they are allowed to cherry pick the kids they want - get worse results than Public Schools.

Charters not outperforming nation’s traditional public schools, report says

Researchers at Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes looked at test data from charter schools in 26 states and the District and found that 25 percent of charters outperformed traditional public schools in reading while 29 percent of charters delivered stronger results in math. That marked an improvement over a similar 2009 study by the same research team.

But 56 percent of the charters produced no significant difference in reading and 19 percent had worse results than traditional public schools. In math, 40 percent produced no significant difference and 31 percent were significantly worse than regular public schools.

The problem is you can dig up reports to support your claims as I can mine. The bottom line is it's parents that have to make the decision on where they send their children to school, and in most cases, parents choose private over public if they have that option.

You can't sit there and look at internet sites. You have to make these evaluations on a case by case basis. It depends on my factors such as where is your child currently going to school now? How the learning environment in that school? How safe is that school? How good are the teachers in that school? Then make the comparison to the schools you are considering the switch to.

 

[Papageorgio]

Fact is the average charter school is the same or better than most public schools according to your articles and their numbers. But nice try, Obama has helped push for more charter schools because he sees the benefit to poor communities. The number of kids going to charter schools is increasing every year. As the years pass we will see more and more charter school students and the regressive left is just plain wrong. Stats bear it out.

 

[Papageorgio]

I already answered you. You just don't like the answer. They take all kids, first come, first served. Unfortunately they do have a waiting list because parents want their kids getting a good education.

If you have a "waiting list", then you obviously are being selective about who you take..

So you have a school that isn't taking Jamal the gangbanger and Corky the retard.

And there it is. I care about the kids, you care about the unions. Politics.

Deny the good these schools do all you want. Parents and kids care about results, not partisan politics.

You, obviously, wouldn't understand.

I only have to look at who is sponsoring something to realize how little they care about the children.

The same people who want "Charter Schools" are the same ones who want to cancel school lunch programs to give tax breaks to billionaires.

Yes, I really do want teachers to be paid fair wages and have protections against capricious administrators.

Joe's real beef is he is Corky the retard and was snubbed. Also notice the gangbanger's name is Jamal, a name associated with black people, why not Bill or Joe? Seems like a racist statement to me.

 

[Mac1958]

I already answered you. You just don't like the answer. They take all kids, first come, first served. Unfortunately they do have a waiting list because parents want their kids getting a good education.

If you have a "waiting list", then you obviously are being selective about who you take..

So you have a school that isn't taking Jamal the gangbanger and Corky the retard.

And there it is. I care about the kids, you care about the unions. Politics.

Deny the good these schools do all you want. Parents and kids care about results, not partisan politics.

You, obviously, wouldn't understand.

I only have to look at who is sponsoring something to realize how little they care about the children.

The same people who want "Charter Schools" are the same ones who want to cancel school lunch programs to give tax breaks to billionaires.

Yes, I really do want teachers to be paid fair wages and have protections against capricious administrators.

Joe's real beef is he is Corky the retard and was snubbed. Also notice the gangbanger's name is Jamal, a name associated with black people, why not Bill or Joe? Seems like a racist statement to me.

It's who they are.
.