3 ms·

Lately education has become a bit of a cause celebre, but a few years ago, when the numbers were just as bad, whenever this problem was mentioned there were two

Lately education has become a bit of a cause celebre, but a few years ago, when the numbers were just as bad, whenever this problem was mentioned there were two immediate responses: 1) It's the parent's fault, and 2) Need more money to get better results. At some point, the American public started believing that the cost of something purchased with public funds was directly proportional to the value it gave. So it was like "New aircraft carrier? That thing costs 2 Billion dollars! Must be really valuable to national security" But the amount of money you pay for something and the good that it provides -- especially in systems that are immune to the retooling and re-engineering effects of recessions -- are completely independent of each other. Especially with the U.S. budget crisis coming, maybe this issue will open some eyes, but I doubt it.

yardie 16y ago
1) It's always been the teacher's fault, then other people's kids, other parents, but never our snowflake. 2) I don't know if the money spend has actually increased. My state, Florida, used to use lottery profits to complement state spending, then used it to supplement state spending cuts. Luckily, I graduated before the bubble popped (the surplus years) because so much of the state and county budget was based around building fees, property taxes, title transfers, etc.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- wmil 16y ago
  Between 1985 and 1997 Kansas City was ordered by a judge to vastly increase spending. There was no educational improvement. http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html
  - yardie 16y ago
    With that money, the district built 15 new schools and renovated 54 others. Included were nearly five dozen magnet schools, which concentrated on such things as computer science, foreign languages, environmental science, and classical Greek athletics. Those schools featured such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room; a robotics lab; professional quality recording, television, and animation studios; theaters; a planetarium; an arboretum, a zoo, and a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary; a two-floor library, art gallery, and film studio; a mock court with a judge's chamber and jury deliberation room; and a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability. Looks like they were spending money just to spend it. What did they demand from the students? parents? teachers? Were disruptive students (what I consider the biggest problem) isolated and punished for bad behavior? Were the parents required to review the child's work, meet the teachers, provide a proper meal? Were the teachers asked to give feedback, meet goals, try new techniques? The main thing the report wants to speak about is the Imperial federal judge (typical for a CATO report) while the real problem lied in the way the district was run. Shitty management doesn't get better with more money. Money just makes it worse.
    - yardie 16y ago
      EDIT: I finally reached the end of that report and it asked the same questions I did. There was nothing demanded from the teachers, parents, or students. The district was top heavy and little of the money actually went to learning, instead it was funneled to more infrastructure, more computers, more administrators.
namdnay 16y ago
I wouldn't say they're "completely independent". There's still a correlation.

yardie 16y ago

1) It's always been the teacher's fault, then other people's kids, other parents, but never our snowflake. 2) I don't know if the money spend has actually increased. My state, Florida, used to use lottery profits to complement state spending, then used it to supplement state spending cuts. Luckily, I graduated before the bubble popped (the surplus years) because so much of the state and county budget was based around building fees, property taxes, title transfers, etc.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
wmil 16y ago
Between 1985 and 1997 Kansas City was ordered by a judge to vastly increase spending. There was no educational improvement. http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html
- yardie 16y ago
  With that money, the district built 15 new schools and renovated 54 others. Included were nearly five dozen magnet schools, which concentrated on such things as computer science, foreign languages, environmental science, and classical Greek athletics. Those schools featured such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room; a robotics lab; professional quality recording, television, and animation studios; theaters; a planetarium; an arboretum, a zoo, and a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary; a two-floor library, art gallery, and film studio; a mock court with a judge's chamber and jury deliberation room; and a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability. Looks like they were spending money just to spend it. What did they demand from the students? parents? teachers? Were disruptive students (what I consider the biggest problem) isolated and punished for bad behavior? Were the parents required to review the child's work, meet the teachers, provide a proper meal? Were the teachers asked to give feedback, meet goals, try new techniques? The main thing the report wants to speak about is the Imperial federal judge (typical for a CATO report) while the real problem lied in the way the district was run. Shitty management doesn't get better with more money. Money just makes it worse.
  - yardie 16y ago
    EDIT: I finally reached the end of that report and it asked the same questions I did. There was nothing demanded from the teachers, parents, or students. The district was top heavy and little of the money actually went to learning, instead it was funneled to more infrastructure, more computers, more administrators.

namdnay 16y ago

I wouldn't say they're "completely independent". There's still a correlation.