4 ms·

This is absurdly problematic. Your solution is basically handicapping the schools with kids that perform worse and then potentially closing them? That doesn't s

This is absurdly problematic. Your solution is basically handicapping the schools with kids that perform worse and then potentially closing them? That doesn't solve the problem, this is just pro-Charter School propaganda that ignores the real-world effects of these positions. You've identified a real issue with the 'equality' vs 'equity' concept, that doesn't lead to 'Close public schools and switch everything to Charter schools', that's an absurd conclusion.

f13f1f1f1 4mo ago
[flagged]
- empath75 4mo ago
  It sounds like you have some particular groups in mind.
- watwut 4mo ago
  The actual alternative is to provide resources to schools that are in bad areas. And to provide resources for people in those areas themselves.
  - pelagicAustral 4mo ago
    Because there is such good precedents that providing unlimited resources to troubled areas actually fix problems.
  - JCTheDenthog 4mo ago
    The results from Abbott Districts in New Jersey would suggest that increased funding and resources does little if anything to improve results. Abbott Districts in New Jersey have been getting funding at roughly the same level or higher as the wealthiest districts in the state since 1990, and they have nothing to show for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district The difference in math proficiency for Abbott students vs. non-Abbott students has stayed roughly the same, while thr language proficiency gap has actually increased.
    - ninalanyon 4mo ago
      Resources != funding Resources means teachers qualified, able, and willing to teach in those areas. That probably means paying them more than a similarly qualified teacher in an area that is currently doing better and hence more attractive. But it also means finding head teachers (principals in the US?) who can inspire the whole school, staff, pupils, and parents. Such people are not thick on the ground. And then you have to have stability. Mere money will not do it, everyone has to work for it.
      - Levitz 4mo ago
        >Resources means teachers qualified, able, and willing to teach in those areas. Then the culture in those areas has to change. It feels like every single other option has to be tried before considering that there's real, settled cultural issues that society ought to tackle. It is insane, and I mean "nobody who ever holds views like these should have access to power or authority on these matters" type of definition of "insane" that there is more concern about equality, or equity, or whatever the last brand of discrimination, than about the problems around not respecting authority and not valuing an education. It is utterly dysfunctional regarding societal growth. It's not just being poor. It's not just racism. Yes those are absolutely issues in society, but equality of that degree is an affordance you can work on when you have a functional system. There is no magic teacher, no magic principal, no magic anyone that's going to walk through the door of a school and "set them kids right" with a biblical amount of kindness and understanding. That's a fairy tale, it's utterly detached from reality and a pathetic refusal to look at the problem.
  - TMWNN 4mo ago
    As others have told you, there is no evidence that increased school funding in and of itself results in better results. Contrary to what is often said, there is no shortage whatsoever of funding for public schools in urban areas. New York City spends more per student than anywhere else in the US. <https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-city-spend-on-each-student.html https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-c...> Baltimore, an incredibly poor and run-down city, spends the third most. #4-6 and #8 are all wealthy suburbs of Washington DC, but their schools are all far better than those of Baltimore or NYC on average, despite Baltimore spending slightly more per student and NYC spending 60-70% more.
- NewsaHackO 4mo ago
  Wow, what a position
  - bmn__ 4mo ago
    [flagged]
- footy 4mo ago
  > though there isn't really any serious dispute about it factually citation sorely needed
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
CGMthrowaway 4mo ago
What is your issue with redirecting funding from sucky schools towards ones that deliver results, while allowing school choice for students at the same time? I may be naive but that sounds fairly good
- j_w 4mo ago
  Because the "sucky" schools are statistically where poor people go to school, which statistically is where minorities go to school. School choice is bad because the only people who benefit from school choice are already wealthy - they can afford to transport their child to the school of their choice.
  - nradov 4mo ago
    False. Charter schools are public schools and often served by school bus routes or other public transit. Walking or cycling can also be options for some students. The real differentiating factor isn't wealth but simply giving a shit about your children. Parents have to take some minimal effort to enroll their children in a charter school and many simply don't bother.
    - organsnyder 4mo ago
      It's not just giving a shit: it's also the capacity to act on giving a shit. I'm exhausted at the end of the day after getting the kids to bed, and I'm fortunate to be in a stable marriage, live in a large home that my wife and I own, and work a well-paying WFH job. I can only imagine how tiring it must be to not have those advantages. There are the parents doing heroics that I can hardly imagine, and they should be celebrated. But we need to design a system that provides a sufficient level of support for those families that only have an average level of capacity.
      - GoblinSlayer 4mo ago
        How difficult is it? 1. give a shit 2. enroll 3. ??? 4. PROFIT!
throwaway5752 4mo ago
It's funnier because it's old, failed policy that they are recycling without being aware of it because they are ignorant. All old things really do become new again.
- Levitz 4mo ago
  Did that "old, failed policy" yield better results than the current one?
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
- wagwang 4mo ago
  It's the current set of policy that is failing. All literacy and math score are down across the entire country and theyve been going down for the past 10 years.
  - throwaway5752 4mo ago
    It is smartphones and social media. The decline is across demographics, across geographies, and correlated with an increase young mental health issues. The answer is staring us in the face, quite literally, as we type this. We put a cheating and dopamine producing machine in the hands of children without any regulations. Of course it is harming their academic performance. Ask a football coach if there kids are going to play tackle football and you'll be surprised how often you they won't let them. Ask an educator or psychologist at what age they give smart devices to their kids, and I'd guess it is 3-4 years above the median. The policy doesn't matter when we're actively damaging the brains of children, which are not fully developed.
adrr 4mo ago
Everyone blames the school. Its the mentality of parents and kids at the schools. Kids go to charter school. 90% of the kids in my 10 years class meet or exceed grade level on the state test. She is surrounded by kids who push her up and parents that push their kids. Teachers care because the parents and kids care. My wife had half hour call last night with my daughters special project teacher because they want showcase the kids work and have the kids give speeches on it. You don't get that dedication unless you're at private school. It democratizes private education for the masses. Also have lots of volunteer teachers and student teachers from local universities so the ratio is 1 instructor to 10 students. Special project teacher is a volunteer who is earning her masters at Harvard.
freediddy 4mo ago
You don't live in the Bay Area. Schools around the Bay Area are closing, especially in rich areas like Saratoga and Cupertino. That's because parents who can afford it are moving their children to private schools because of exactly what the OP was saying. Schools are incentivized to focus on struggling kids because test scores are how teachers and schools are evaluated. The kids at the high end of the class are literally ignored. I know this because in my old neighborhood many parents were complaining about this. And then on top of it, the superintendent was begging parents for donations because they didn't have enough money.
- Catloafdev 4mo ago
  I'm not saying it isn't in your personal best interest to consider switching your kids out of public schooling. The problem is that the public schools need to be fixed, not abandoned. There's a difference between "I choose to send my family to Charter schools because the public schools are in bad condition" and "we should close down public schools rather than fix them to make room for more profit in the child education industry" Fixing public education is the boring, slow, difficult, real-world answer. Privatizing education further is just adding fuel to the fire.
  - freediddy 4mo ago
    You fix public education by kicking out the fascist left agenda, that believes that high achievement is only from white supremacy, and lowering standards for Black and Brown kids so that they pass but leave high school completely uneducated. For reference, over 50% of Black and Brown kids that graduate from high school in San Francisco Unified School District can't read properly. That is about as racist an outcome as you can imagine, creating generations of undereducated citizens, however this was completely promulgated without a single right-wing influence, it was completely an outcome from pure left-wing educators. They also believe math is white supremacy so they restrict high achievers from taking it at lower grades, which caused many of the Asian families to move to private. And yet, they spent $2 million renaming schools because I guess they thought that was money better spent than educating Black and Brown kids. That is the zenith of hypocrisy and racism.

f13f1f1f1 4mo ago

[flagged]

empath75 4mo ago
It sounds like you have some particular groups in mind.
watwut 4mo ago
The actual alternative is to provide resources to schools that are in bad areas. And to provide resources for people in those areas themselves.
- pelagicAustral 4mo ago
  Because there is such good precedents that providing unlimited resources to troubled areas actually fix problems.
- JCTheDenthog 4mo ago
  The results from Abbott Districts in New Jersey would suggest that increased funding and resources does little if anything to improve results. Abbott Districts in New Jersey have been getting funding at roughly the same level or higher as the wealthiest districts in the state since 1990, and they have nothing to show for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbott_district The difference in math proficiency for Abbott students vs. non-Abbott students has stayed roughly the same, while thr language proficiency gap has actually increased.
  - ninalanyon 4mo ago
    Resources != funding Resources means teachers qualified, able, and willing to teach in those areas. That probably means paying them more than a similarly qualified teacher in an area that is currently doing better and hence more attractive. But it also means finding head teachers (principals in the US?) who can inspire the whole school, staff, pupils, and parents. Such people are not thick on the ground. And then you have to have stability. Mere money will not do it, everyone has to work for it.
    - Levitz 4mo ago
      >Resources means teachers qualified, able, and willing to teach in those areas. Then the culture in those areas has to change. It feels like every single other option has to be tried before considering that there's real, settled cultural issues that society ought to tackle. It is insane, and I mean "nobody who ever holds views like these should have access to power or authority on these matters" type of definition of "insane" that there is more concern about equality, or equity, or whatever the last brand of discrimination, than about the problems around not respecting authority and not valuing an education. It is utterly dysfunctional regarding societal growth. It's not just being poor. It's not just racism. Yes those are absolutely issues in society, but equality of that degree is an affordance you can work on when you have a functional system. There is no magic teacher, no magic principal, no magic anyone that's going to walk through the door of a school and "set them kids right" with a biblical amount of kindness and understanding. That's a fairy tale, it's utterly detached from reality and a pathetic refusal to look at the problem.
- TMWNN 4mo ago
  As others have told you, there is no evidence that increased school funding in and of itself results in better results. Contrary to what is often said, there is no shortage whatsoever of funding for public schools in urban areas. New York City spends more per student than anywhere else in the US. <https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-city-spend-on-each-student.html https://www.silive.com/news/2019/06/how-much-does-new-york-c...> Baltimore, an incredibly poor and run-down city, spends the third most. #4-6 and #8 are all wealthy suburbs of Washington DC, but their schools are all far better than those of Baltimore or NYC on average, despite Baltimore spending slightly more per student and NYC spending 60-70% more.
NewsaHackO 4mo ago
Wow, what a position
- bmn__ 4mo ago
  [flagged]
footy 4mo ago
> though there isn't really any serious dispute about it factually citation sorely needed

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

CGMthrowaway 4mo ago

What is your issue with redirecting funding from sucky schools towards ones that deliver results, while allowing school choice for students at the same time? I may be naive but that sounds fairly good

j_w 4mo ago
Because the "sucky" schools are statistically where poor people go to school, which statistically is where minorities go to school. School choice is bad because the only people who benefit from school choice are already wealthy - they can afford to transport their child to the school of their choice.
- nradov 4mo ago
  False. Charter schools are public schools and often served by school bus routes or other public transit. Walking or cycling can also be options for some students. The real differentiating factor isn't wealth but simply giving a shit about your children. Parents have to take some minimal effort to enroll their children in a charter school and many simply don't bother.
  - organsnyder 4mo ago
    It's not just giving a shit: it's also the capacity to act on giving a shit. I'm exhausted at the end of the day after getting the kids to bed, and I'm fortunate to be in a stable marriage, live in a large home that my wife and I own, and work a well-paying WFH job. I can only imagine how tiring it must be to not have those advantages. There are the parents doing heroics that I can hardly imagine, and they should be celebrated. But we need to design a system that provides a sufficient level of support for those families that only have an average level of capacity.
    - GoblinSlayer 4mo ago
      How difficult is it? 1. give a shit 2. enroll 3. ??? 4. PROFIT!

throwaway5752 4mo ago

It's funnier because it's old, failed policy that they are recycling without being aware of it because they are ignorant. All old things really do become new again.

Levitz 4mo ago
Did that "old, failed policy" yield better results than the current one?
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
wagwang 4mo ago
It's the current set of policy that is failing. All literacy and math score are down across the entire country and theyve been going down for the past 10 years.
- throwaway5752 4mo ago
  It is smartphones and social media. The decline is across demographics, across geographies, and correlated with an increase young mental health issues. The answer is staring us in the face, quite literally, as we type this. We put a cheating and dopamine producing machine in the hands of children without any regulations. Of course it is harming their academic performance. Ask a football coach if there kids are going to play tackle football and you'll be surprised how often you they won't let them. Ask an educator or psychologist at what age they give smart devices to their kids, and I'd guess it is 3-4 years above the median. The policy doesn't matter when we're actively damaging the brains of children, which are not fully developed.

adrr 4mo ago

Everyone blames the school. Its the mentality of parents and kids at the schools. Kids go to charter school. 90% of the kids in my 10 years class meet or exceed grade level on the state test. She is surrounded by kids who push her up and parents that push their kids. Teachers care because the parents and kids care. My wife had half hour call last night with my daughters special project teacher because they want showcase the kids work and have the kids give speeches on it. You don't get that dedication unless you're at private school. It democratizes private education for the masses. Also have lots of volunteer teachers and student teachers from local universities so the ratio is 1 instructor to 10 students. Special project teacher is a volunteer who is earning her masters at Harvard.

freediddy 4mo ago

You don't live in the Bay Area. Schools around the Bay Area are closing, especially in rich areas like Saratoga and Cupertino. That's because parents who can afford it are moving their children to private schools because of exactly what the OP was saying. Schools are incentivized to focus on struggling kids because test scores are how teachers and schools are evaluated. The kids at the high end of the class are literally ignored. I know this because in my old neighborhood many parents were complaining about this. And then on top of it, the superintendent was begging parents for donations because they didn't have enough money.

Catloafdev 4mo ago
I'm not saying it isn't in your personal best interest to consider switching your kids out of public schooling. The problem is that the public schools need to be fixed, not abandoned. There's a difference between "I choose to send my family to Charter schools because the public schools are in bad condition" and "we should close down public schools rather than fix them to make room for more profit in the child education industry" Fixing public education is the boring, slow, difficult, real-world answer. Privatizing education further is just adding fuel to the fire.
- freediddy 4mo ago
  You fix public education by kicking out the fascist left agenda, that believes that high achievement is only from white supremacy, and lowering standards for Black and Brown kids so that they pass but leave high school completely uneducated. For reference, over 50% of Black and Brown kids that graduate from high school in San Francisco Unified School District can't read properly. That is about as racist an outcome as you can imagine, creating generations of undereducated citizens, however this was completely promulgated without a single right-wing influence, it was completely an outcome from pure left-wing educators. They also believe math is white supremacy so they restrict high achievers from taking it at lower grades, which caused many of the Asian families to move to private. And yet, they spent $2 million renaming schools because I guess they thought that was money better spent than educating Black and Brown kids. That is the zenith of hypocrisy and racism.