[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
(Those noble fighters against monopoly.)
[/quote]
That’s not their purpose. They are one gang fighting another gang. Their common enemy is the INDIVIDUAL, the individual human mind.
Haven’t you figured that out yet?
[/quote]
Fighting for more money, more security, more benefits, and less work: but not fighting against the monopoly itself.
If you had written “fighting against poor offers from the monopoly” or after the first, fifth, or maybe tenth criticism of your statement clarified that you meant fighting against poor remunerative offers but not against the monopoly itself, then there would have been no need for people to repeatedly point out that the teachers’ unions do not fight the monopoly itself.
[/quote]
Bill, seriously, they’ve been extremely clear in this from the start. Start looking at yourself. This is why people claim your fighting the voices in your head.
I agree completely. He will be ignored the rest of this thread.
I’ve already agreed that inner city and poor rural distrcts are problematic. I have no solutions in the current model of public education. This model applies the same standards and methods to all schools (ie. tries to be equal, fair)-- and that is simply not the case. When we start talking about private alternatives, now we room for discussion.
Please, offer your ‘problems on the ground’ because I’d really like to understand them better. I’ve asked. Really, I have. Please do.
I agree completely. He will be ignored the rest of this thread.
I’ve already agreed that inner city and poor rural distrcts are problematic. I have no solutions in the current model of public education. This model applies the same standards and methods to all schools (ie. tries to be equal, fair)-- and that is simply not the case. When we start talking about private alternatives, now we room for discussion.
Please, offer your ‘problems on the ground’ because I’d really like to understand them better. I’ve asked. Really, I have. Please do.[/quote]
Honestly, if you have asked, I missed it with between the misunderstandings of HH and Orion’s posts, mouth foam, and name calling. I’m also almost positive that you told me at one point that it “didn’t relate to the thread” and that we should “go back to the start.” Or something close to that…
When we talk about merit-based pay, as we should, we run into a problem of standards. What are the standards we can apply to “rank” teacher performance? The reason the unions fight so hard is because they have a legitimate point that these standards can be mis-used, manipulated, and misinterpreted.
This is one of the reasons they fought so hard against NCLB (and why I suppored/support it). I think we SHOULD make standards by which we rank student performance. I also agree that it should be done at the state level. These are all positive parts of NCLB. But we can’t simply look at student performance as, well, all students (and parents) are not made equal. This is where we run into even more problems.
Assessments will, by their nature, be qualitative. So who is going to judge? The obvious answer is administrators, right? But as we’ve discussed, I think this group is more of a problem than teachers are. So that brings us to administration… that’s where I think people should focus their attention. …blah, blah, blah, it’s a complex issue. I’ll end my rant for the moment.
RE: private schools. If we’re talking about public funding going to private schools we run into lots of funding issues. Schools are primarily funded by districts/counties, then state funds, then federal funds (this is different for each states/district I think).
So if we are going to make vouchers, who will pay and where can they be used? Can a voucher with money from County1 go to a school in County2? As we mentioned federal funds pay for about 10%…should we just give that money equally to each student, or should we focus it on the poorer schools (as is basically done now).
Also, if we give vouchers equally, then we can’t “cross subsidize”…in other words, more money can’t be spent on poor schools at the expense of rich/“good” schools as is currently done.
IMO, there should be a limited voucher program given to a select group of the “poorest of the poor” done either by a district level or by some sort of application process. This would allow those kids, at least, to get an education… some would argue this will deprive schools of the few students who actually give a damn… IMO they’re right, but it’s still worth it.
Okay, I’ll end my rant for a bit. Basically, this shit is complex and I don’t think that blaming one group or “the government” is helpful in the least.
I don’t know. You’re still here.[/quote] I came back.
I underline and bold…
I said: [quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I’m bowing out. I don’t think this is a debate so much as it is people looking for one group to demonize rather than a way forward. [/quote]
Sorry, IMO we have to talk about the things I mentioned in order to move forward. Demonizing teachers Unions, calling names, screaming about “the government” won’t help… hence this response and my bowing out for a time. And why I probably won’t stay long when it starts again.
I’m not ‘simply labeling things’. I am listing things that are steps towards change. Orion and HH think that since you just can’t abolish “the government” outright, there are no solutions for change.
[/quote]
Nonsense.
As long as there is public education there are unions.
I’m not ‘simply labeling things’. I am listing things that are steps towards change. Orion and HH think that since you just can’t abolish “the government” outright, there are no solutions for change.
[/quote]
As long as there is public education there are unions.
[/quote]
You keep saying that.
Yes, I forgot the word “monopoly” after “government”.
Again, I think we agree, in this case on more than you might think, and I’ll try to help salvage this.
I started typing a response to ‘merit pay’ and it’s long, so I moved it to a text editor to finish. If you want to continue this, I will, but I’m not going to waste time typing this up for nothing.
And I agree here. However, I do not agree that this should be pushed from the Federal level to states with money/penalties attached. This should not go past the state level. Why? There are fundamental differences in expectations, lifestyles, demographics, ethnicity, wealth, problems, etc. between Washington state, Alabama, and Massachussetts. Of course there are similarities, but you must treat them differently. “Differentiate” is anathema in government.
We agree that affluent suburban schools are worlds apart from poor inner-city or rural schools. I honestly believe that the latter can’t be expected to perform at the same level. Well, let me clarify that-- they can be expected to, but not with the same methods. Education is warfare and you fight a desert war differently than you fight a naval war. Both have very different battles but the goal is the same (or something like that).
My whole contention with federal public education is that it tries to treat every school/region equally, and the reality is, they are not. The model, the paradigm is wrong.
Administrators, families, peers, and communities. Look, there is no ‘perfect’ answer here, but schools are community endeavors and everyone must participate. We can blame admins and teachers all day, but families and communities must be engaged. My kids don’t go to the school that’s 1000 feet from my house, but I’m damned well involved with it, at least aware of what’s going on there. If I can make that effort, then so can anyone else in my community. My money goes there. Graduates there will shape the community in the future. I have a stake in its success.
I know most people who read this thread skip right over the several times I’ve said “It’s not all the teachers fault”. In all failing schools, there is blame to spread amongst admin, teachers, parents, students, and frankly, local government (for example passing laws that drive out industry and therefore jobs, but, that could be a whole another thread). Point is, failing schools are indicators (actually results) of larger systemic community problems (THAT’S the root).
Florida seems to have a functioning (not perfect, but functioning) model of “school choice”.
Orion: Yeah, yeah, I know, get rid of goverment education and the teacher unions will go away. Brilliant!
Florida doesn’t have a generally-available voucher system so far as I know.
There are, or at some recent point there were, 18000 students with disabilities receiving vouchers, and 19000 students without disabilities receiving scholarships funded by corporate tax credits.
Not really a voucher system, though the politicians CALL it that and claim to lead the nation in school choice, blah blah blah.
And as for choice between the government schools, this is only allowed when it’s determined that a school that ordinarily would be assigned is “failing.”
And any choice for another government school won’t exactly be for a great school.
Where I live, all but one, if I recall correctly, of the county’s high schools recently had a graduation rate of less than 60%, and there’s no reason to think it would be different now, as an illustration of the sorts of choices available.
First, thanks for an honest response without the mouth foam.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Again, I think we agree, in this case on more than you might think, and I’ll try to help salvage this.
I started typing a response to ‘merit pay’ and it’s long, so I moved it to a text editor to finish. If you want to continue this, I will, but I’m not going to waste time typing this up for nothing.
And I agree here. However, I do not agree that this should be pushed from the Federal level to states with money/penalties attached. This should not go past the state level. Why? There are fundamental differences in expectations, lifestyles, demographics, ethnicity, wealth, problems, etc. between Washington state, Alabama, and Massachussetts. Of course there are similarities, but you must treat them differently. “Differentiate” is anathema in government.
We agree that affluent suburban schools are worlds apart from poor inner-city or rural schools. I honestly believe that the latter can’t be expected to perform at the same level. Well, let me clarify that-- they can be expected to, but not with the same methods. Education is warfare and you fight a desert war differently than you fight a naval war. Both have very different battles but the goal is the same (or something like that).
My whole contention with federal public education is that it tries to treat every school/region equally, and the reality is, they are not. The model, the paradigm is wrong.[/quote]
Honestly I’m not sure what you mean by “federal public education.” I don’t think this exists. The only thing being “pushed” by NCLB is a mandate that the states come up with their own standards. What exactly do you think the feds are doing?
Basically, I think you are misunderstanding the issue.
Are we still talking about how to create merit-based pay? Or simply talking about some of the problems in education. If the later, we agree, but haven’t any movement on how to create merit based pay.
If most of these posters are like me, they probably got confused with all the names you called teachers.
[quote]
Florida seems to have a functioning (not perfect, but functioning) model of “school choice”.[/quote]
I’m not familiar with it, but I’m VERY surprised to hear any state has state-wide school choice. I’ve looked at Milwaukee and DC (which have a lot of charter schools). Please, elaborate.
[quote]
Orion: Yeah, yeah, I know, get rid of goverment education and the teacher unions will go away. Brilliant![/quote]
How is what he is saying different than what you are saying? Basically, he’s giving a more refined version of your argument.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
First, thanks for an honest response without the mouth foam.[/quote]
Ok, frankly, this is getting old. I’m not the one who escalated the tone of the comments in the thread. If you can please dispense with this, maybe we can have a very rare reasonable exchange in the Troll Nation PWI forum. If not, thanks but no thanks.
I moderate a political board where none of this type of dickery is tolerated and we have state officials, media personalities, news organziations, and candidates posting regularly. 99% of the TN-PWI threads would never make it there past a few posts, so, honestly, I’m used to a more reasonable posting environment.
Federal aid is tied to schools’ adherence to laws, standards, etc. According to US Dept. Ed. that’s about 10.5%. This is just a philosophical difference, but I don’t think this is a federal government issue or role.
Since NCLB mandates states school performance, it encourages schools to ‘teach for a test’ (for lack of a better description) rather than to teach what might be better for a given school in a given area. Poor/problem schools are disadvantaged here.
One may argue that the Fed has little impact on what schools do, but the reality is that schools have spent tremendous effort for better or worse to comply with these Federal NCLB recommendations for fear of losing funding or being forced to restructure.
Seems like a lot of effort is going into compliance to appease a federal mandate for something that you’re describing as having little impact.
Please enlighten further on your perspective.
Merit based pay and problems in education are not the same problem. We can talk about whatever you want to. I said in my previous post that I needed to type my thoughts on merit based pay elsewhere first because it will end up being a wall-of-text and I’m really trying to get my thoughts down clearly on this as I’ve been involved with education discussions in other forums. Typing my thoughts elsewhere (ie. not in the TNation edit box) on it helps me clarify my thoughts on it. Feel free to lead here.
[quote]
If most of these posters are like me, they probably got confused with all the names you called teachers.[/quote]
Whatever. For the love of God, my wife and family are mostly teachers who are at the beck-and-call of their unions. They do the best they can. Problems arise when an attitude of entitlement becomes more important than teaching.
[quote]
Florida seems to have a functioning (not perfect, but functioning) model of “school choice”.[/quote]
I’m not familiar with it, but I’m VERY surprised to hear any state has state-wide school choice. I’ve looked at Milwaukee and DC (which have a lot of charter schools). Please, elaborate.
Yes, which is redundant, and frankly, that’s as far as his contributions to the thread have progressed. OK, no public education, no teacher unions. Good. Got it. Brilliant. Now, let’s dig a little deeper.
I’m trying to foster a deeper conversation here but it’s like herding cats.
OK… but actually, it seems like your point was teachers unionized because they were underpaid and exploited. And it sure sounded like you were pro-union.[/quote]
I’m saying that forming a union was the only option against the predominate public school system, a system which uses tax dollars to compete against all comers.
Other posters here are complaining about the unions but what do they offer regarding a system that caused the unions to spring up in the first place?
If all we do is hamstring or somehow abolish the unions without getting rid of the public schools, then we’re going to wind up in exactly the same situation as we have now.
We’re blaming the crops when what we really have is lousy soil.
[/quote]
This is bullshit and you know it. Teachers’ unions could exist without protecting bad teachers, keeping pay low for good teachers, limiting the supply of good teachers, and actively propping up the current education system. But we all know they don’t.
To suggest that we should accept this as a side effect of gov’t education, rather than criticizing the unions, is silly.
Excuses can be found for any bad behavior. That doesn’t mean you don’t punish bad behavior.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
First, thanks for an honest response without the mouth foam.[/quote]
Ok, frankly, this is getting old. I’m not the one who escalated the tone of the comments in the thread. If you can please dispense with this, maybe we can have a very rare reasonable exchange in the Troll Nation PWI forum. If not, thanks but no thanks. [/quote]
Frankly, it was old when you started doing it. A troll started/escalated the tone, and you played along.
Sounds great, let’s try.
[quote]
Federal aid is tied to schools’ adherence to laws, standards, etc. According to US Dept. Ed. that’s about 10.5%. This is just a philosophical difference, but I don’t think this is a federal government issue or role.
Since NCLB mandates states school performance, it encourages schools to ‘teach for a test’ (for lack of a better description) rather than to teach what might be better for a given school in a given area. Poor/problem schools are disadvantaged here.
One may argue that the Fed has little impact on what schools do, but the reality is that schools have spent tremendous effort for better or worse to comply with these Federal NCLB recommendations for fear of losing funding or being forced to restructure.
Seems like a lot of effort is going into compliance to appease a federal mandate for something that you’re describing as having little impact.
Please enlighten further on your perspective.[/quote]
1st, I think it’s important to agree that there are no federal standards mandated (as you seemed to believe earlier and seem to be implying here as well). There are no federal standards. States make their own standards.
2nd) I like having standards. Yes, some states have done a horrible job with this. However, before this, states often “hid” problem students… this is no longer as big an issue. Personally, I’d rather have states setting imperfect standards than not having any. I believe this helps to highlight problem areas and prevents some of the playing with numbers that occurs.
Certainly there are still multiple problems with this, but it’s better than what we had before.
Stop trying to herd anyone and focus on yourself. It took pages before you appeared to even understand his argument. Further, you posted what were either strawmen or misunderstandings of his argument. Focus on yourself.
[quote] I moderate a political board where none of this type of dickery is tolerated and we have state officials, media personalities, news organziations, and candidates posting regularly. 99% of the TN-PWI threads would never make it there past a few posts, so, honestly, I’m used to a more reasonable posting environment.
[/quote]
K. Good.
[quote]
Honestly I’m not sure what you mean by “federal public education.” I don’t think this exists. The only thing being “pushed” by NCLB is a mandate that the states come up with their own standards. What exactly do you think the feds are doing?
Basically, I think you are misunderstanding the issue.
Yes, states must make standards (ie. they are mandated) and submit them to the US Department of Education to have them approved. The standards must comply with rules (regulations) handed down from USDE. Indeed, USDE is dictating a set of mandates that states must be in compliance with and USDE monitors that performance. States set their own performance standards, but they still must be approved by the feds with reprecussions if they are not.
Title I schools really take the brunt of NCLB because really they’re the ones penalized for not achieving state standards.
Again, even at a state level, I don’t believe a broad brush can be used for all schools.
And, incidentally, I never said the Fed sets the standards (I went back and checked my posts). I’ve consistently used the words ‘federal mandate’ because that’s what it is. The Fed is essentially forcing the states to develop these performance measures (albeit each one individually) with penalties if those plans are not accepted (all were I believe) and met (ie withholding funds to Title I schools). It’s still power of the fed over the states.
The Fed allocates money. 10% of a really big number is still a big number. If states want Title I money, they must jump through USDE hoops.
To tie into the original topic, the Superintendent in RI fired those teachers as an option in compliance with NCLB. NCLB provisions allowed for this action.
[i]Central Falls, Rhode Island made national headlines when the school superintendent fired the entire staff at the high school. The principal, teachers and even guidance counselors, were all informed that at the end of the school year their employment would be terminated. The superintendent did this under provisions the No Child Left Behind law (NCLB) and in response to a poor graduation rate (52 percent) and poor standardized test scores (only 7 percent of 11th graders were proficient in math and 33 percent in reading). With its’ own poorly performing high schools, will the Pittsburgh School District follow Central Falls example and institute mass firings at the poorly performing schools?
Given the power of the teachers’ union, that seems like a stretch, but it may be a remedy for Pittsburgh’s ailing schools. Three of the District’s high schools (Oliver, Peabody, and Westinghouse) have fewer than 21 percent of eleventh graders scoring proficient or better in math. This performance certainly rivals that of Central Falls.
The superintendent of Central Falls was provided a list of choices under NCLB. They included; converting the high school to a charter school, lengthening school days and making other changes, firing all of the teachers, and shutting the school down. When the teachers’ union balked at the first two, she was left with no choice. But one option not considered is offering vouchers to the parents of students who wanted to learn. By bringing in choice and competition years ago, Central Falls could have avoided this situation. Maybe Pittsburgh needs to learn this lesson before its too late.
[/i]
[quote]Merit based pay and problems in education are not the same problem. We can talk about whatever you want to. I said in my previous post that I needed to type my thoughts on merit based pay elsewhere first because it will end up being a wall-of-text and I’m really trying to get my thoughts down clearly on this as I’ve been involved with education discussions in other forums. Typing my thoughts elsewhere (ie. not in the TNation edit box) on it helps me clarify my thoughts on it. Feel free to lead here.
[quote]
I took the lead with the last post. I’ll wait. I thought this was your response to that.
[/quote][/quote]
K.
[quote]
Florida seems to have a functioning (not perfect, but functioning) model of “school choice”.
I’m not familiar with it, but I’m VERY surprised to hear any state has state-wide school choice. I’ve looked at Milwaukee and DC (which have a lot of charter schools). Please, elaborate.
[quote]
???
[/quote] [/quote]
Admittedly, I need to dig more on this. Bill Roberts had some insight in a recent post.
Not really, but whatever. Done.
.
Now, after dealing with this editing interface and trying to keep track of quote and end-quote boxes, I have a headache.
OK… but actually, it seems like your point was teachers unionized because they were underpaid and exploited. And it sure sounded like you were pro-union.[/quote]
I’m saying that forming a union was the only option against the predominate public school system, a system which uses tax dollars to compete against all comers.
Other posters here are complaining about the unions but what do they offer regarding a system that caused the unions to spring up in the first place?
If all we do is hamstring or somehow abolish the unions without getting rid of the public schools, then we’re going to wind up in exactly the same situation as we have now.
We’re blaming the crops when what we really have is lousy soil.
[/quote]
This is bullshit and you know it. Teachers’ unions could exist without protecting bad teachers, keeping pay low for good teachers, limiting the supply of good teachers, and actively propping up the current education system. But we all know they don’t.
To suggest that we should accept this as a side effect of gov’t education, rather than criticizing the unions, is silly.
Excuses can be found for any bad behavior. That doesn’t mean you don’t punish bad behavior.
[/quote]
Well then go ahead and punish them.
After you have failed, maybe we could talk about the system.