Althouse: "Let’s have universal protests about the stupidity of school instead of universal pre-K."

February 18, 2013

"Let’s have universal protests about the stupidity of school instead of universal pre-K."

"Let’s enable lower-income kids to have the benefit of being told their time is too precious to sit in school all day."

250 comments:

1 – 200 of 250 Newer› Newest»

edutcher said...: Given that Head Start has been admitted to be a failure should be the best argument against another stupid Obama idea.

That said, Ms Trunk's claim about preschool, "This is why the rich don’t even bother with preschool—they know their kids will be fine without it", is also so much nonsense.

The school I attended, one of the best college prep schools in the East, still has preschool. And its tuition is not for the low-income.; 2/18/13, 8:15 PM
DougWeber said...: I always had problems with Rawl's axioms. It is interesting that we have been running tests of those axioms called state Lotteries. And Rawl's axioms have been proven wrong. Given the choice people will choose a small chance of a great reward over a small certainty(except in academia).

I have always seen Capitalism as the Exploitation of the Greedy.; 2/18/13, 8:24 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Save our kids. End the iron grip of the teacher's union, and the money laundering scheme that exists between the democrat party and the teacher's union. Do it for our kids. NOW.; 2/18/13, 8:27 PM
LilyBart said...: Headstart is an (expensive) failure. If it doesn't work, what makes them think this new program will work?

So, we'll put these kids through this program, which will have no long-term benefits for them. And when they grow up we'll present them with the bill for the worthless program. Great plan!; 2/18/13, 8:33 PM
Mark said...: I have twins, aged five. Tonight I introduced my little girl to the basic idea of algebra. According to the G&T testing done by New York City, she's the slow one, testing in at the 97th percentile. Her brother tested in at the 99th.

And I've never pushed a damned thing other than just talking to them, drawing pictures and reading. It makes a difference to be at home and engaged with your kids.; 2/18/13, 8:50 PM
kentuckyliz said...: The education being provided is the message to the parents from the all powerful state:

I can haz all yer children.; 2/18/13, 8:58 PM
m stone said...: April's right. This was another plum thrown at the teachers unions.

Trunk's points are solid.

"Education funding" is dem code for "we love our children-we care." Been working for years.; 2/18/13, 9:05 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Penelope Trunk has big balls- she reminds me a bit of Camille Paglia but Trunk can speak from her experience as a former bigtime lib [I assume she once was] AND as a working Mom. The libruls will soon re-group to take her down.; 2/18/13, 9:14 PM
Renee said...: Schools need to engage parents, not take the children away at a young age.

The pre-K is only 2.5 hours, and there are parent/child seminar on how to read/teach to your own child for parents who need a model if they didn't have one themselves growing up.

We don't need universal pre-K, we need parenting classes for those parents who may need/want a model from teachers.; 2/18/13, 9:28 PM
bagoh20 said...: It really is a scandal, a huge national scandal, a failure of imagination, a failure to love our children as much as some love theory.

"Love of theory is the root of all evil." ~ William M. Briggs; 2/18/13, 9:31 PM
bagoh20 said...: "If it doesn't work, what makes them think this new program will work?"

"Well, we have to do something!"; 2/18/13, 9:32 PM
Joe said...: Formal school should start at age 7 and end at age 16.; 2/18/13, 9:34 PM
Revenant said...: I'll consider universal preschool when the public school system figures out how to successfully teach universal kindergarten and universal first grade.; 2/18/13, 9:39 PM
kentuckyliz said...: Learning takes place in relationship. Emphasize the relationship first, then the learning. How to be a good parent, and then how children develop and learn and how to foster that.

I know some really interesting people who are unschooled and homeschoolers. Religious and atheist.; 2/18/13, 9:41 PM
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...: I teach preschool and I'll be the first one to say that no kid needs preschool. Kids need mature parents, lots of oral language, lots of time to play in interesting, inventive ways, and the damn TV kept off.; 2/18/13, 9:48 PM
Anga2010 said...: And, just to make sure, let's target this lack of education at the poor and minority population. Let's also provide free abortions for the same community. YAY!; 2/18/13, 9:53 PM
tim maguire said...: Pre-K is free daycare. Pretty much everybody knows that. But daycare is crushingly expensive. Plenty of parents can't afford to work and can't afford not to. Pre-K makes the financial juggling possible by cutting out a year of this big expense.

If Obama is pretending pre-K is something it isn't, you can be sure there's a useful supporter getting paid off.; 2/18/13, 9:56 PM
Aaron said...: But think of all the new, unionized teachers...I'm drooling just thinking of the political campaign donations!; 2/18/13, 10:01 PM
Methadras said...: So why are we dumping money into an institution that does not meet anyone’s needs?

Penelope misses the point entirely. Again. The point of this new tier of education to be absorbed into the current federal/state run educational institutions is to create more bureaucrats and to create another new influx of union teachers. Period. End of story.; 2/18/13, 10:07 PM
Methadras said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 2/18/13, 10:08 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: At least we have plenty of money to fund this ginormous new entilement...oh, wait. We don't. Gotta borrow it, then, I guess. For the children.; 2/18/13, 10:17 PM
Martha said...: If just one child is helped by free pre-school, we must pass a bill for umiversal pre-school!; 2/18/13, 10:29 PM
Martha said...: If just one child is helped by free pre-school, we must pass a bill for umiversal pre-school!; 2/18/13, 10:29 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Actually Methadras, I think Obama wants to start the brainwashing at an earlier age.; 2/18/13, 10:31 PM
bagoh20 said...: I didn't go to preschool, and look what happened. What am I supposed to do now?

"You don't understand. I could've had class. I could've been a contender. I could've been somebody instead of a bum."

I could've been a PhD.; 2/18/13, 10:35 PM
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...: Bag, what is that you're brandishing in your photo? Wonder Bread?; 2/18/13, 10:40 PM
SomeoneHasToSayIt said...: At this point, what does it matter?; 2/18/13, 10:48 PM
bagoh20 said...: "Wonder Bread?"

There was also wine, and cheese, and all of it top of the line, just like the Wonder Bread. I spared no expense. That was taken in the hills near Slippery Rock, PA where I was majoring in Environmental Engineering, which I would have completed had I not be denied preschool. You can see the dedication to conservative values even then.; 2/18/13, 11:06 PM
kimsch said...: I went to a meeting last week with the School Board and parents. The school board is talking about some restructuring they need to do because the district isn't meeting the NCLB standards.

The district just started to accommodate our gifted children with accelerated classes. Last year they started with fifth grade mid-year because enrollment required another classroom and they put together a class from all the five elementary schools at one of the schools. This year they added fourth grade to the fifth grade class and provided accelerated math and language arts classes at one of the middle schools.

At the meeting there was a parent of a couple of children in the district. She also is a day care provider. She said that she gets two-, three-, and four-year-olds who don't know their colors, shapes, numbers, or letters. These are things parents should be teaching their children. But they're waiting for the government to do it for them.; 2/18/13, 11:45 PM
Gahrie said...: It makes a difference to be at home and engaged with your kids.

Exactly. The secret to raising successful, happy children is to raise your children instead of allowing the television and internet to do it.

Needless to say, it is much easier to do this in two parent families.

You really want to make a difference in children's lives and their futures? Figure out a way to restore the traditional family.; 2/19/13, 12:00 AM
bleh said...: It's important to encourage women to continue working, right?

Come to think of it, wouldn't this worsen unemployment by increasing the labor force? Maybe we should, instead, make it easier somehow for one-income families to thrive. I guess if that worked it would lead to more of a 50s style dynamic, with dad working and mom staying home with the kids and managing the home. It was just awful, wasn't it?; 2/19/13, 1:22 AM
bleh said...: Also, it's very important for children to learn at a young age to take direction and absorb important state-approved lessons. Anyone who disagrees with that and would rather not spend more money on preschool education is either selfish or racist or both.; 2/19/13, 1:26 AM
Dante said...: Well, it seems the author has some stats to back up her views, as well as some common sense observations.

I've heard some are saying we need to look at things other than GDP as a determination of how well a country is doing. What would happen if those views are right, and things such as happiness, wellness, etc. (let's call it EDP), are more important than GDP?

And further, what would happen if the traditional family structure is better able to further EDP than the current feminist ideas?

It does seem two parent households are pretty important for raising kids.; 2/19/13, 1:31 AM
rcommal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 2/19/13, 1:41 AM
Achilles said...: My kids will go to school. Not to learn, but to interact. They will challenge everything. School will be where they go to learn critical thinking skills and develop their paradigm. Hopefully there will still be school sports by then also. If there are schools at all.

Sometime in the next 10-20 years the entire education system will cease to be. I am glad we are preparing for the technological advances that are already in development now that will completely reshape education. I am glad we are not trying to feed a bloated bureaucracy because it feeds politicians money, votes, and institutionalizes our kids to more readily accept authority.; 2/19/13, 4:02 AM
Robert Cook said...: "End the iron grip of the teacher's union, and the money laundering scheme that exists between the democrat (sic) party and the teacher's union."

I think you're living in a Fox News dream world. The nation's public school teachers don't have much or any say over how children or taught or what method of pedagogy will be employed or what will be the attendance requirements. This comes down from the local school boards and from school administrators.

And what is this "money-laundering scheme" of which you burble?; 2/19/13, 5:46 AM
Unknown said...: Robert
You couldn't be more wrong.; 2/19/13, 7:40 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Cookie:

You can't be that dense- money laundering refers to the hisytorical cycle where elected Dems lavish salaries and benefits on govt union employees and the union, in turn, makes bigass contributions to those pols. It has been a cycle for decades now. As dickhead Ritmo might say, read a book and get a clue.; 2/19/13, 7:47 AM
lincolntf said...: When I look at places like Detroit, with 7% graduation rates and 98% Teacher retention, I see the real values of the Unions/Democrat Party. They've long ago decided that the kids are collateral damage, and the primary mission is to enrich and empower the bureaucrats and pols. No Liberal should ever speak about education until they commit to disempowering the Unions that have destroyed it.; 2/19/13, 7:49 AM
madAsHell said...: I could've been a PhD.

....or a caveman in a GEICO commercial.; 2/19/13, 7:52 AM
Widmerpool said...: Sweet Jesus, Robert Cook, really?; 2/19/13, 7:54 AM
Wince said...: Recognize that "universal pre-kindergarten" is just another rhetorical fish Obama used to get the barking seals in his party to clap their fins at his SOTU speech..; 2/19/13, 7:55 AM
lincolntf said...: Obama was eating dogs in Indonesia when he was a kid, and he ended up President. Who needs Pre-K?; 2/19/13, 7:57 AM
Known Unknown said...: That was taken in the hills near Slippery Rock, PA

The Rock!; 2/19/13, 8:03 AM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: I can't figure out whether I think Penelope Trunk is good-looking or not.; 2/19/13, 8:11 AM
Larry J said...: LilyBart said...

Headstart is an (expensive) failure. If it doesn't work, what makes them think this new program will work?

Since when has failure been a disqualification for expanding government programs? Look at the government-ran health care programs like the ones on reservations, the VA, Medicare and Medicaid. All of them are failures so naturally the Democrats pushed for expanding government control to all medicine.

At a time when birthrates are declining and schools are closing, this universal pre-K boondoggle is a sop to the teachers' unions. They'll bring in millions of new students to keep the schools open for a few more years. It has nothing to do with what's in the best interests of the children.; 2/19/13, 8:19 AM
garage mahal said...: And what is this "money-laundering scheme" of which you burble?

School choice proponents that cash whip politicians to enact school voucher programs that don't work and aren't wanted, and suck money from public schools and send it to wealthy suburbs to subsidize private school tuition?; 2/19/13, 8:22 AM
Brennan said...: President Obama is never going to yield from progressive mythology that subsidizing anything will expand access and lower the costs. He will double down on fraud because that is what it is.

However, it's not like he has much choice in the matter. GDP rules all. Head start, despite being massive failure, adds to GDP growth.; 2/19/13, 8:26 AM
Hagar said...: Cookie being Cookie has his own view of the world, but on this he is largely right, except that he needs to look a bit higher than just the local school boards and administrators.

John Dewey is supposed to have said, "Give me the children of a generation, and I will change the world!"
Now, nobody voted to give Dewey control of their kids, but this idea had resonance you might say in college education departments across the country, and going on a 100 years later, there is quite a movement behind it.; 2/19/13, 8:32 AM
AHL said...: LilyBart said...

"Headstart is an (expensive) failure. If it doesn't work, what makes them think this new program will work?"

My sister-in-law is a Headstart teacher. She personally cannot do third-grade math or higher, constantly makes fun of the kids she teaches, and complains that she only makes an hourly wage ($13/hour). She is not a bright person at all and cannot handle her own life affairs without her Daddy's money. The sad thing is, she is the best teacher they have at that particular Headstart.

On the other hand, my church has its own preschool that was extremely successful until the government started taking over the preschool system. Our preschool had a waiting-list every year and kids from the brightest families attended.; 2/19/13, 8:38 AM
carrie said...: Pre-K is a dream of the unions to bump the pay scale for preschool teachers from day care rates to public school rates and to make the job easier for kindergarten teachers by have the kids come to kindergarten socialized. However, that will be an endless cirle because the pre-k teachers will then complain about the 4 year olds who come to pre-k without having been in day care or some other situation that socialized them for school, so we will soon have 3 year old kindergarten with teachers with 4 year degrees.; 2/19/13, 8:39 AM
carrie said...: Pre-K is a dream of the unions to bump the pay scale for preschool teachers from day care rates to public school rates and to make the job easier for kindergarten teachers by have the kids come to kindergarten socialized. However, that will be an endless cirle because the pre-k teachers will then complain about the 4 year olds who come to pre-k without having been in day care or some other situation that socialized them for school, so we will soon have 3 year old kindergarten with teachers with 4 year degrees.; 2/19/13, 8:39 AM
Brian Brown said...: If it doesn't work, what makes them think this new program will work?

When has that ever stopped Democrats before?; 2/19/13, 8:40 AM
Brian Brown said...: Robert Cook said...

And what is this "money-laundering scheme" of which you burble?

You must enjoy walking around being so dumb.

You understand that your IQ relates to you being poor and always bashing "the rich" and "corporations" right?; 2/19/13, 8:42 AM
Hagar said...: Oh, this program would work, all right.

Read Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World," which is what this is about.; 2/19/13, 8:43 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Ugh. Corrupt progressive neo-marxists love to front everything with the word "universal".
It's gross.

Looks! - the left won the Miss Universal Pagent!; 2/19/13, 8:44 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Robert Cooke - If you don't understand or if you fail to recognize reality -- that there is indeed a money laundering scheme between the Teacher's Union and the democrat party - you are indeed clueless.; 2/19/13, 8:49 AM
Bayoneteer said...: Low IQ people with poor impulse control just can't be helped. Grave yards, jail cells, or festering slums are where they'll always end up. Denying this sad fact is the modern left's own form of faith-based social policy theory and which is every bit as nutty as the faith based stuff they attribute to conservatives.; 2/19/13, 8:51 AM
Shanna said...: That said, Ms Trunk's claim about preschool, "This is why the rich don’t even bother with preschool—they know their kids will be fine without it", is also so much nonsense.

Yeah, I don't know that universal preschool is necessary or wanted (and her points about women with small children needing some kind of part time work are very well taken - I was just having the same conversation with my cousin about what she was going to do when the kids went to school).

However, my nephews both went to preschool at my parents expense because it is a good social outlet for them, with some education on the side. So I don't see preschool going away any time soon.; 2/19/13, 8:54 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Money laundering with unions dues.; 2/19/13, 8:55 AM
Widmerpool said...: Garage,

Thank you. I was unaware that voucher programs were limited to wealthy suburbs.; 2/19/13, 8:56 AM
Robert Cook said...: I'm told by several here that I'm wrong in my statement that teachers have little or no say in how children are educated, and no answer to my question regarding an alleged money-laundering scheme between the Democratic Party and school teachers...but given no specifics on how I'm wrong or how the teachers are involved with any laundering of money.

Not compelling refutation.; 2/19/13, 9:01 AM
TMink said...: Pre K cannot overcome parental indifference and incompetence.

There are no social or economic forces to avoid having children you cannot afford or raise.

Until that changes, we are in a heap of toruble.

Trey; 2/19/13, 9:02 AM
TMink said...: Heh heh, trouble!

Trey; 2/19/13, 9:03 AM
lincolntf said...: It's simple. Teacher's Unions fail to educate children, the children become dependent on welfare, the welfare recipients vote Democrat, the teacher's keep their jobs, produce more ignorant citizens, win elections, and on and on and on. The war on children being waged by the Left is a war of plunder.; 2/19/13, 9:03 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Robert Cooke: Hint - It's not the teachers. it's the NEA/Teacher's Union leaders and the democrat party.; 2/19/13, 9:04 AM
Bayoneteer said...: A real game changer would be to offer free government paid for abortions to women with IQs of 95 or lower and to offer one time cash payments of $10k to any low IQ males who get vasectomies. A science based social policy like that would immediately start to reverse our slide toward idiocracy.; 2/19/13, 9:07 AM
Robert Cook said...: April Annie...regarding the article you link to. How is this a demonstration of money "laundering." What money is being "laundered" and to what purpose?

It seems to report that some public employee unions in California, including but not limited to some teachers and school employees unions, contributed money to the Democratic Party.

Are political contributions now to be considered "money laundering?" Are the teachers hiding illegal funds by transferring it via political contributions? Where is the return to the teachers of "laundered" money?; 2/19/13, 9:08 AM
Robert Cook said...: April Annie...what evil nexus exists between the teacher's union and the Democratic Party? What is the goal of their conspiracy?; 2/19/13, 9:12 AM
lincolntf said...: Robert, it's not a conspiracy per se, as they openly admit it. The goal of Teacher's Unions everywhere is to lower the standards to which they are held (deliberately decreasing the quality of education), increasing the compensation they get, and perpetuating said system. The Democrats are fully behind this plan. For all the jibber jabber about how Academia vote Democrat (implying that intelligence = Dem),) they know full well that their electoral power doesn't come from Ivory Towers, it comes from large, failing, cities where ignorance, addiction and crime are the norm. They're not going to kill the golden goose of ignorance.; 2/19/13, 9:19 AM
I Callahan said...: School choice proponents that cash whip politicians to enact school voucher programs that don't work and aren't wanted, and suck money from public schools and send it to wealthy suburbs to subsidize private school tuition?

Well, garage, you accomplished something here. You fit more incorrect statements in a 4-line sentence than anyone in the history of man.; 2/19/13, 9:19 AM
Widmerpool said...: Put the thinking cap on Cookie: more money for teachers and more money for the politicians they support.; 2/19/13, 9:20 AM
garage mahal said...: You fit more incorrect statements in a 4-line sentence than anyone in the history of man.

How so?; 2/19/13, 9:21 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 2/19/13, 9:22 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: Extracted Union dues go to Democrat superpacs and to democrats with or without the knowledge or permission of union members.
Tax payers support public sector teachers through their property taxes. In essence, tax payers are forced to pay for democrat re-election campaigns.
It's a money laundering scheme.; 2/19/13, 9:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Julia?

Universal health care, Universal pre-k, why, the government can fill the entire universe!

3 1/2 more years and counting; 2/19/13, 9:25 AM
garage mahal said...: Extracted Union dues go to Democrat superpacs and to democrats with or without the knowledge or permission of union members

That's against federal law you nitwit.; 2/19/13, 9:25 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

That's against federal law you nitwit.

Really?
Which law? Name it. Cite it.; 2/19/13, 9:29 AM
Brian Brown said...: Robert Cook said...
Where is the return to the teachers of "laundered" money?

Their salaries and benefits.

Idiot.; 2/19/13, 9:30 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: It is against the law, Garage. Since when has that stopped the practice?; 2/19/13, 9:32 AM
Anonymous said...: You do realize The Dread Pirate Robert is sailing the socialist high seas, right?

This is the closest Captain Cook gets to the mainland, under the filthy capitalist puppet Obama.

Please don't venture into the Bermuda Triangle.; 2/19/13, 9:32 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @Robert Cook:

corporation:shareholders, employees, cusotmer::teacher's unions:teachers, students, parents, taxpayers

Why is this so hard to understand? An organization that claims to represent the interests of its members does not have identical interests as its members do. You easily see that in one case, but not the other.

It's the "principal-agent" problem.; 2/19/13, 9:33 AM
I Callahan said...: Garage:

1.School choice proponents that cash whip politicians to enact school voucher programs

Exactly where has this happened? I mean, how much money do school choice proponents have in comparison to the AFT & NEA? They have NO political clout like the latter.

2. that don't work

Private and home-schooled kids do better than kids in public schools in every category, and have for years. There are reams of reasearch on this.

3. and aren't wanted

Really? Explain that to the parents in DC who had their kids in voucher programs, only to have it yanked away by the people in your party. Many polls of people in inner-cities show a majority want school choice.

4. and suck money from public schools

As if the public schools own all the money for education, and it isn't the parents who should control it. In other words, you have it exactly backwards.

5. and send it to wealthy suburbs

See the above about the poor kids in DC.

6. to subsidize private school tuition?

I don't think that word "subsidize" means what you think it means. It's parents using their own money that they put in the system, to send their kid to where they think they should go.; 2/19/13, 9:33 AM
CWJ said...: Does anybody here remember Hillary's 2007 Christmas season campaign ad? Wasn't universal pre-K one of the gifts she was wrapping or putting under the tree?; 2/19/13, 9:38 AM
garage mahal said...: Guess I'm the nitwit. Citizens United changed how unions could spend from their general treasury. Oh well.; 2/19/13, 9:38 AM
Colonel Angus said...: April Annie...what evil nexus exists between the teacher's union and the Democratic Party? What is the goal of their conspiracy?

Well its certainly not the education of the children.

I suppose if the Democrat Party put half as much interest in ensuring a top notch education that our billions in tax dollars pay for rather than heaping largesee on the teachers unions, we might see some benefit.

But then again, kids are a means to an end for Democrats.; 2/19/13, 9:39 AM
Anonymous said...: When you talk to garage, pretend you're at a union rally for local pipe fitters #78. He's sitting in his lawn chair surrounded by his band of brothers, including Jimmy, who's giving you the stink eye and allegedly bashed some guy's head in last year.

It all makes much more sense.; 2/19/13, 9:42 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: garage is doing his thing, pay it no mind:

“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

Letting parents take the money that the State would have spent on their child's education, which belongs to the State by right! and spend it as they see fit! Anathema!; 2/19/13, 9:42 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @garage:Citizens United...

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=L1300

"As is true with unions in general, most of the money coming from this category goes to Democrats. Teachers unions contribute 95 percent of their funds to Democrats -- a rate that’s above average among labor unions across the board.

The AFT contributed $2.8 million during the 2008 cycle, with 99 percent going to Democrats. For its part, the NEA contributed $2.5 million, with 91 percent going to Democrats.

Teachers unions’ primary goals include decreasing class sizes, defeating proposals to offer public school students vouchers for private schools and improving student/teacher interaction. The unions also focus on issues of pay, tenure and the availability of classroom resources.

Another priority for these groups during the 111th Congress is passage of health care reform and passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, a measure supporters say will make it easier for workers to unionize. They also support President Barack Obama’s “Race to the Top” grant program for education reform, which passed as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

The AFT and NEA have butted heads in the past. But since July 2008, they’ve maintained a partnership -- NEAFT -- to collaborate on shared interests. An example of such an issue is state budget deficits that have forced states to cut teaching jobs, salaries and benefits.

The deficits come on top of problems meeting the requirements of President George W. Bush’s education initiative, No Child Left Behind. Many states contend that the federal government has not done enough to fund the measure.

During 2008, teachers unions spent about $2.7 million on federal lobbying. This is down from a record $10.2 million in 2007.

The NEA leads these groups in lobbying spending, doling out $1.5 million in 2008. The AFT also invests significantly on lobbying, spending about $960,000 in 2008."; 2/19/13, 9:44 AM
Colonel Angus said...: garage mahal said... Guess I'm the nitwit.

Identification that you're a nitwit is the first step in self enlightenment. Congratulations.; 2/19/13, 9:45 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

School choice proponents that cash whip politicians to enact school voucher programs that don't work and aren't wanted, and suck money from public schools and send it to wealthy suburbs to subsidize private school tuition?

You couldn't provide an actual example of this happening if the prize were $4,000,000.; 2/19/13, 9:49 AM
Brian Brown said...: The AFT contributed $2.8 million during the 2008 cycle, with 99 percent going to Democrats. For its part, the NEA contributed $2.5 million, with 91 percent going to Democrats.

Is this the part where Kookie furrows his brow and wonders what the expectations are for those contributions?; 2/19/13, 9:50 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: Anyway, nice to see garage coming around on Citizens United. You can't fight power without money. More voices against politicians are a good thing and incumbents-for-life like John McCain of course hated it.

The numbers I cited were 2007-2008, pre-Citizens United. Teacher's unions were spending a lot of money even then on Democrats and Democrats' causes.; 2/19/13, 9:50 AM
kimsch said...: There are about one hundred schools on the chopping block in Chicago alone because they are failing the children. Teachers and parents are up in arms over the closings.

One union hack said something like, "they want to close the schools only so they can reopen them as charters!"

Unions don't want the charters in Chicago to expand. Charter schools are consistently doing better even with the same students (no changes from previous student body - no "getting the best students into the charters" crap...)

Charter school teachers aren't in the union. They work longer hours. They have more flexibility to do what works for their students rather than being hogtied by the union to certain work rules.

Parents don't want to lose their free daycare.; 2/19/13, 9:52 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Formal school should start at age 7 and end at age 16.

That would be great.....IF they actually taught something to the students during those years.; 2/19/13, 9:59 AM
Hagar said...: That is not what the term "money laundering" means.; 2/19/13, 9:59 AM
garage mahal said...: You couldn't provide an actual example of this happening if the prize were $4,000,000.

I just need to look in my backyard. link. Taxpayers would be on the hook for vouchers if they want them or not.

Milwaukee charter schools have been a dismal failure. link.; 2/19/13, 10:00 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

I just need to look in my backyard. link. Taxpayers would be on the hook for vouchers if they want them or not.

Where garage beclowns self not understanding that a proposal is not law.
(Scott Walker proposes expanding voucher school program)

You can't make this level of stupid up, folks.; 2/19/13, 10:03 AM
garage mahal said...: A new report from the Public Policy Forum in Milwaukee found that the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, which enrolls about 25,000 students in private schools through the state's voucher program, has similar demographics and poverty levels as Milwaukee Public Schools, but students there perform slightly worse on standardized tests in math and reading link.; 2/19/13, 10:03 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @garage: "dismal failure"

Not compared to the PUBLIC schools.

"The higher expectations for performance similarly sank Milwaukee Public Schools' latest Wisconsin Knowledge and Concept Examinations scores: The adjusted results now show that about 85% of the district's students score below proficient in reading, and about 80% score below proficient in math."

nice selective citation, as usual. or did you even read it?; 2/19/13, 10:04 AM
SGT Ted said...: School choice proponents that cash whip politicians to enact school voucher programs that don't work and aren't wanted, and suck money from public schools and send it to wealthy suburbs to subsidize private school tuition?

Why shouldn't I have the choice to use the tax money spent towards my kids education to pick the school he goes to?

Tax dollars used to subsidize college education aren't tied to the college, they are tied to the student. Why should primary education be any different?

Union monopoly of schools, funded ultimately by taxpayers, along with the corrupt and self-serving Democrat Party/Goverment-Public Union Employees Complex is the only reason we don't have vouchers, like we do for college aid.

Oh the non-union parts of the school districts that can't let the money go is part of the problem too. The tax money used for education is supposed to be for the kids, not the PE Unions or any other government employee strap hangers.

There is no educational reason for the Public School monopoly of tax dollars spent on a childs primary education. There are only political ones that center around money, power, influence peddling and union corruption.; 2/19/13, 10:04 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

Milwaukee charter schools have been a dismal failure. link.

Where garage beclowns self not reading his own link. To wit:

The higher expectations for performance similarly sank Milwaukee Public Schools' latest Wisconsin Knowledge and Concept Examinations scores: The adjusted results now show that about 85% of the district's students score below proficient in reading, and about 80% score below proficient in math

You can't make this level of stupid up, folks.; 2/19/13, 10:05 AM
garage mahal said...: Not compared to the PUBLIC schools.

Ah, yes. Compared to public schools.; 2/19/13, 10:06 AM
Robert Cook said...: Political contributions to preferred political parties or candidates in hopes of a desired political outcome is not money laundering.

(As I believe Hagar points out above.); 2/19/13, 10:07 AM
Brian Brown said...: And of course the fat idiot comes back with another link after linking to things which do not say what he claims they do.

You can't make this level of stupid up, folks.; 2/19/13, 10:07 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @Garage:Compared to public schools.

Which are performing at essentially the same level of "dismal failure", according to your selectively cited link.; 2/19/13, 10:07 AM
I Callahan said...: Garage - I looked at that link from the Public Policy Forum. I found this little tidbit at the end:

Jim Bender, who leads the group School Choice Wisconsin, took issue with the report, saying that the per-pupil cost of educating students in Milwaukee Public Schools was higher than the amounts reflected in the report. He also said the percentage of students in poverty listed for the MPCP demographics was misleading because it includes private-pay students not participating in the voucher program.

Pardon me for not jumping on the bandwagon of a group that specializes in making sure government looks good.; 2/19/13, 10:08 AM
Brian Brown said...: Robert Cook said...
Political contributions to preferred political parties or candidates in hopes of a desired political outcome is not money laundering.

Except the money conviently comes from taxpayers and is sent to Democrats.

Which is a-ok with silly people like you.; 2/19/13, 10:08 AM
Brian Brown said...: Remember,

The adjusted results now show that about 85% of the district's students score below proficient in reading, and about 80% score below proficient in math

equals = NOT dismal failure!!!; 2/19/13, 10:10 AM
I Callahan said...: Political contributions to preferred political parties or candidates in hopes of a desired political outcome is not money laundering.

Except the difference is that those people are paid by taxpayers first. In other words, taxpayers not only contribute to their own choices for politics, but also indirectly pay for someone else's choices.

The latter is what makes it laundering.; 2/19/13, 10:11 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: See, the thing is garage can read, so when he cites half of something, and pretends it proves his point, he's not stupid. He's lying.

He tells you charter schools are producing 90% below proficiency, calls it a "dismal failure". All the while copying and pasting around the sentence that informs us that the PUBLIC schools are at 80% - 85% percent below proficiency.

So he read it. He had to, in order to skip the part that show him up.; 2/19/13, 10:15 AM
SGT Ted said...: Parents are too stupid to pick their own childs school until the kid is college age, then suddenly free choice in education is a good thing.

That's what makes garages assertions about the evils of school vouchers so silly.

Also, note his resentment of the choices made by the people most likely paying the taxes that also subsidize poor kids education as well as that of their own child.

garages argument asserts that if parent A uses the money set aside for his kid at a Catholic School that somehow parent Bs kid will have less, when the fact of the matter is that the amounts received for each child hasn't changed one bit. The only people cut out of the money loop are Public Employees and their Union.

This shows the ridiculousness and weakness of the anti-voucher argument.; 2/19/13, 10:16 AM
bagoh20 said...: "Political contributions to preferred political parties or candidates in hopes of a desired political outcome is not money laundering."

No, it's worse. Money laundering is just hiding money. This is laundering in the service of ruining kids. It's for the children, just not in a good way.; 2/19/13, 10:17 AM
garage mahal said...: He tells you charter schools are producing 90% below proficiency, calls it a "dismal failure". All the while copying and pasting around the sentence that informs us that the PUBLIC schools are at 80% - 85% percent below proficiency.

So tell me why I have to fund a voucher system that after 20 years of trial still doesn't perform better than the public school system?; 2/19/13, 10:19 AM
bagoh20 said...: Every public school teacher I know in Los Angeles sends their own kids to private school. They just like spending money for no reason, and what do they know about school anyway?; 2/19/13, 10:25 AM
Unknown said...: Why stop at pre school? Let's have government employees start monitoring and indoctrinating our kids in the nursery.

We might as well get them accustomed at an early age to life in post-Obama America.; 2/19/13, 10:26 AM
SGT Ted said...: Reading a pro-union socialist whine about wasted government money is rich.; 2/19/13, 10:26 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

So tell me why I have to fund a voucher system that after 20 years of trial still doesn't perform better than the public school system?

Hey dum-dum, if NOBODY WANTS those charter schools, how are those students getting there and sitting in those classes?; 2/19/13, 10:27 AM
President-Mom-Jeans said...: Manboobs Mahal sez:

"Guess I'm the nitwit" It's more than a guess there tubby, you have been proving you are a nitwit ever since I first started reading this blog, and for god knows how long before that.

I do quibble with the modifier "the". This implies singular, where on this very thread Cooktard has beclowned himself again. It should say "I guess I am one of the nitwits" to be more accurate.

Maybe if you said "I'm the fat nitwit" it would have been best. I have no idea what state of physical health Cookie is in, although for the sake of the world I sure hope it is poor and terminal.

Sending your children to public schools is child abuse in this day and age.; 2/19/13, 10:28 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

School choice proponents that cash whip politicians to enact school voucher programs that don't work and aren't wanted, and suck money from public schools and send it to wealthy suburbs to subsidize private school tuition?

By the way, to "prove" this silly drivel, he linked to stories about Milwaukee charter schools.

Hey dum-dum, is Milwaukee a "wealthy suburb" or what?; 2/19/13, 10:28 AM
SGT Ted said...: If parents are too dumb to pick what school their child receives primary education from, how can they possibly know what college their kid should go to?; 2/19/13, 10:29 AM
Hagar said...: Political contributions to preferred political parties or candidates in hopes of a desired political outcome is not money laundering.

Quite so, Cookie, but that is presuming it is your money, voluntarily given, and that the purpose indeed is a desired political outcome.

If the money is collected and given to politicians in order to obtain a preferential financial benefit from the government, that is called corruption. Makes no difference
if it is the NAM or the NEA/AFT that is doing it.

And it should be noted that Al Shanker is said to once have stated that "When the pupils begin paying dues, I will represent the pupils." (And presumably, not before.); 2/19/13, 10:29 AM
Drago said...: garage gets very upset when you threaten to empower poor inner city kids to attend the school of their choice.

garage does not want them to be able to choose the school they attend.

garage likes them just where they are.....; 2/19/13, 10:31 AM
Robert Cook said...: Redefining terms like "money laundering" to fit one's world view does not actually make the world over to fit one's world view.

This notion that teachers are not free to contribute their income or union dues freely to the party or candidates of their choice "because they're paid by the taxpayers" is laughable.

If it offers solace, you can bet the police unions "launder" (sic) their money by contributing to the Republican party and candidates, thus balancing the ledger.; 2/19/13, 10:33 AM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: It's fun to watch the left after they feel they have identified the villian. Why - it's the Koch brothers or Citizens United!; 2/19/13, 10:34 AM
Brian Brown said...: PS:

MPS is making deals with highly regarded companies that run “non-instrumentality” charters. One is Universal Milwaukee Community Charter School, from a Philadelphia company that already operates distant charter schools involving 4,000 students. Here it would start with 600 students and build each year into a full K-12, with 1200 students for MPS.

A big champion of Universal — also an inner city real estate development company headed by Rahim Islam — is MPS Superintendent Gregory Thornton, a Philadelphia transfer who saw firsthand its education successes.; 2/19/13, 10:35 AM
Brian Brown said...: The MPS Superintendent has embraced charter schools.; 2/19/13, 10:36 AM
garage mahal said...: garage gets very upset when you threaten to empower poor inner city kids to attend the school of their choice.

"The results of the Forum analysis clearly infuriated choice school organizations but are largely irrefutable based on the only evidence voucher schools allow. Travis Academy, for instance, which took taxpayer money for 33 students just before they switched into MPS schools, has only 2% of its students measured at proficiency. Moreover the study revealed the lack of special needs students, music, arts and gym programs, areas the public schools still struggle to maintain despite the revenue lost to the voucher blitzkrieg."

Very empowering.; 2/19/13, 10:41 AM
Jane the Actuary said...: Consider what would happen if the school system was required to provide schooling for 3 & 4 year olds, as well as add a full day for kindergarteners.

We'd spend a boatload of money, far more than the usual cost of a preschool program as it currently exists, with these being full-day programs at union pay rates, and with the massive construction costs of building new classrooms. Existing preschools (at churches, through the park district system, etc.) would be put out of business. Day care centers' 3 and 4 year old rooms would be emptied out, except maybe as "afterschool care" if the school itself doesn't provide it. The fact that these prekindergartens would be attached to the school would mean it would be very difficult to maintain the socialization emphasis and not turn this into very early schooling. Parents would ordinarily stay at home with their children would either look for work, enjoy spa days, or feel like suckers for keeping a kid at home and turning down free babysitting. Is this massive solution really necessary, rather than a targeted response to the sucky parenting skills of the poor?; 2/19/13, 10:43 AM
Brian Brown said...: Robert Cook said...
If it offers solace, you can bet the police unions "launder" (sic) their money by contributing to the Republican party and candidates, thus balancing the ledger

Bullshit.

Provide evidence, liar.; 2/19/13, 10:44 AM
Rachel said...: I'm tired of this lib-bashing obsession. It's like the Huffington Post of the Right.

This issue of education is NEVER about education, but ideological brainwashing (either right or left). I went to preschool and learned quite a bit (colors, numbers). My nieces and nephews went to Head Start, which was great for my sister who was a single mom. Today, they are in banking, and studying business and medicine in college.

Conservatives are (unfortunately) becoming a parody. The issue of parenting has always been important but it looks like they are romanticizing the 1950's.

The real undertone over education is that mom should stay at home while dad works and all vote Republican always. It's Eisenhower all over again.

The problem is that it is 2012, not 1954. Head Start may not work, but you still have parents that have to. Show a solution instead of using everything in a "Bash Obama" light.; 2/19/13, 10:46 AM
Brian Brown said...: areas the public schools still struggle to maintain despite the revenue lost to the voucher blitzkrieg."

Yes!!!

Because when students are removed from your school, and you don't get the same level of funding, despite fewer students, you face "lost revenue"

Hey dipshit, do you have any critical thinking skills at all?

Or do you just like pasting incoherent, silly bullshit on the Internet?; 2/19/13, 10:47 AM
Brian Brown said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 2/19/13, 10:48 AM
Brian Brown said...: Rachel said...
My nieces and nephews went to Head Start, which was great for my sister who was a single mom.

Great!

And we should totally continue wasting billions of dollars because your sister was a single mom!

Really, we should!; 2/19/13, 10:49 AM
garage mahal said...: Because when students are removed from your school, and you don't get the same level of funding, despite fewer students, you face "lost revenue"

Correct. And in many cases, kids are sent back to public schools because charters don't want to deal with them, and still get to keep the voucher money. Great scam eh?; 2/19/13, 10:55 AM
Colonel Angus said...: Milwaukee charter schools have been a dismal failure. link.

Fascinating. The same link also shows public schools dismal performance in math and reading.

Based on the foregoing, perhaps its reasonable to simply assume Milwaukee school kids are just stupid.; 2/19/13, 10:55 AM
Hagar said...: Labor unions are never "voluntary," Cookie, and the "political contributions" certainly are not when you have the union dues deducted from your paycheck by your employer.; 2/19/13, 10:56 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

Correct

Hysetical.

You realize you're a fucking idiot, right?

And in many cases, kids are sent back to public schools because charters don't want to deal with them, and still get to keep the voucher money

Complete & utter lie.; 2/19/13, 11:02 AM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

Correct

I love it.

In liberal dipshit land per pupil funding remaining exactly the same = "lost revenue"!!!!

For his next trick, garagie will reveal he doesn't understand more commonly accepted terms.; 2/19/13, 11:03 AM
Rusty said...: Robert Cook said...
Redefining terms like "money laundering" to fit one's world view does not actually make the world over to fit one's world view.

This notion that teachers are not free to contribute their income or union dues freely to the party or candidates of their choice "because they're paid by the taxpayers" is laughable.

If it offers solace, you can bet the police unions "launder" (sic) their money by contributing to the Republican party and candidates, thus balancing the ledger.

Comrade Bob is a fabulist.
Who knew.; 2/19/13, 11:04 AM
Colonel Angus said...: Conservatives are (unfortunately) becoming a parody. The issue of parenting has always been important but it looks like they are romanticizing the 1950's.

Probably because it was a time of intact families and an educational system that wasn't corrupted by the teachers union. Liberals aren't in danger of becoming a parody, they already are and have been for the last 40 years. The same people who decry 'family values' simultaneously moan over the poor single mom trying to raise her brood and how on earth can she do it without the Government.

The sad state of affairs in our schools is the direct result of failed liberal policies since the creation of the Dept of Ed and like anyone suffering from insanity, liberals keep trying the same failures hoping for a different result.; 2/19/13, 11:09 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: The real undertone over education is that mom should stay at home while dad works and all vote Republican always. It's Eisenhower all over again.

No, Rachel

The real undertone about education is that our "public" schools are failing in teaching students. MAJOR FAIL. And that it is costing the tax payers billions of dollars to pay for this union orchestrated fail.

The majority of those kids that actually do graduate, are functional illiterates. They have been indoctrinated.....NOT taught. The students who do go on to college need to take basic remedial courses in EVERYTHING.

The teachers themselves are barely sub standard in their abilities, but....hey...that's ok. They have permanent life time jobs, benefits and retirement funded by the tax payers. No matter HOW bad they are, they can't be fired.

I don't give a damn about whether the parents stay home, wear Donna Reed aprons, vote Republican or what. I just want the kids to be something other than functional idiots who are unable to get a job, can't add two and three together, can't read above a 6th grade level, don't have a clue about history or geography and have zero critical thinking skills

Idiocracy presented to you by the teacher's unions.

LEARN SOMETHING GOD DAMN IT!!; 2/19/13, 11:30 AM
garage mahal said...: "They have permanent life time jobs, benefits and retirement funded by the tax payers. No matter HOW bad they are, they can't be fired."

In Georgia, where 92.5% of the teachers are non-union, only 0.5% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired. In South Carolina, where 100% of the teachers are non-union, it’s 0.32%. And in North Carolina, where 97.7% are non-union, a miniscule .03% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired—the exact same percentage as California.

An even more startling comparison: In California, with its “powerful” teachers’ union, school administrators fire, on average, 6.91% of its probationary teachers. In non-union North Carolina, that figure is only 1.38%. California is actually tougher on prospective candidates....; 2/19/13, 11:35 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: The problem is that it is 2012, not 1954. Head Start may not work, but you still have parents that have to. Show a solution instead of using everything in a "Bash Obama" light.

And it is OUR responsibility to provide paid for 100% free babysitting?

How about YOU show a solution that doesn't require that WE pay for YOUR lifestyle choices.

And I can say this as having been also a single mom whose daughter also went to Head Start and Pre School that I paid for myself. Being a single mom does not confer sainthood on me our your sister. It shouldn't make everyone else have to cough up money to support me.

You make your own bed......YOU lie in it and don't expect me to change the sheets for you.; 2/19/13, 11:36 AM
Brian Brown said...: Head Start may not work, but you still have parents that have to.

I love that.

I guess we should have federal day care then?; 2/19/13, 11:40 AM
Brian Brown said...: In California, with its “powerful” teachers’ union, school administrators fire, on average, 6.91% of its probationary teachers. In non-union North Carolina, that figure is only 1.38%. California is actually tougher on prospective candidates

HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA

I guess it simply could not cross your mind that more qualified people seek out teaching jobs in a different state.

You're so fucking dumb it is kind of sad.; 2/19/13, 11:42 AM
garage mahal said...: Aww, poor Jay's stale wingnut talking points are getting crushed like a bug.; 2/19/13, 12:07 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @garage: Crushed like a bug

"In a stunning example of truth stranger than fiction, Democrats in the California Assembly killed a bill that would have made it easier to fire teachers accused of serious sexual offenses against children.
The bill SB 1530, had bipartisan support in the Senate, where it passed 33-4, but in a display of strength by the California Teachers Association, six Democrats on the Education Committee either voted against it (Tom Ammiano and Joan Buchanan) or didn’t vote (Betsy Butler, Wilmer Carter, Mike Eng and Das Williams).
The bill followed shocking incidents of sexual abuse in the Los Angeles Unified School District and elsewhere, the worst of which involved Mark Berndt, 61, who’s been accused of 23 acts of lewd acts against children at Miramonte Elementary in the LAUSD.
Under current law, it’s almost impossible to fire teachers facing even the worst of charges.
The bill was narrowly crafted to focus only on cases in which school employees are accused of sex, violence or drug use with children."; 2/19/13, 12:15 PM
garage mahal said...: Under current law, it’s almost impossible to fire teachers facing even the worst of charges

One of the more persistent talking point/lies perpetuated. I just showed the data that disproves it.; 2/19/13, 12:19 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @garage:One of the more persistent talking point/lies perpetuated. I just showed the data that disproves it.

liar.

"6.91% of its probationary teachers."

selective citation rides again; 2/19/13, 12:31 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 2/19/13, 12:33 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...
Aww, poor Jay's stale wingnut talking points are getting crushed like a bug.

Nice projection.

So far in this thread you have:

1. Claimed "nobody wants" charter schools. A silly, easily disproved lie.

2. Claimed that a zero net reduction in per-pupil funding is "lost revenue" to a school.

3. Claimed that poor performance by charter school students on state tests means charter schools are a "dismal failure" Yet the same scores in public schools are worhty of no comment.

4. Claimed that funding of charter schools are in "wealthy suburbs" then link to stories about charter schools in Milwaukee.

5. Can't understand that more people being fired isn't an indicator of "tougher standards"

You are so fucking silly & stupid that if you had any common sense you would shut up.

But you'll persist.; 2/19/13, 12:34 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: I just showed the data that disproves it.

No you didn't. You have no ability to understand the information you cut and paste. It doesn't say what you want it to say.

You showed that 'probationary' teachers can be fired. This is what the term probationary means. Your data doesn't show anything about the quality of the probationary candidates nor the quality of the tenured teachers from State to State or between Charter schools and Public/Union schools.

Tenured teachers are almost impossible to fire. Even feeding your students your own cum, isn't enough to get you fired.

It is child abuse to allow your children to go to public schools. Mentally abused, physically abused and they waste WASTE years of their lives with substandard teaching and come out of the decade long incarceration.....stupid.; 2/19/13, 12:35 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: I'm glad that instead of sitting around arguing with the local bureacracy or trying to pick the closest-ish fit in a priavte school, I can just homeschool and provide exactly the sort of education I want my children to have.; 2/19/13, 12:37 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...
I just showed the data that disproves it.

The simpleton can't read.

In Georgia, where 92.5% of the teachers are non-union, only 0.5% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired. In South Carolina, where 100% of the teachers are non-union, it’s 0.32%. And in North Carolina, where 97.7% are non-union, a miniscule .03% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired—the exact same percentage as California.

Here is a hint for you garagie, firing .03% of teachers actually does mean it is almost impossible to fire them.

Again, you're so fucking stupid it is kind of sad.; 2/19/13, 12:39 PM
garage mahal said...: You showed that 'probationary' teachers can be fired

"And in North Carolina, where 97.7% are non-union, a miniscule .03% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired—the exact same percentage as California. "; 2/19/13, 12:40 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @DBQ: Garage's citations are deliberate. he understands exactly what he cuts and pastes, so he can paste only the part that helps his argument and leave out only the part that hurts his argument.

He's not stupid, he's a liar.; 2/19/13, 12:40 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: I will try to teach the children to spell "private" correctly.; 2/19/13, 12:40 PM
Brian Brown said...: It is child abuse to allow your children to go to public schools.

Quite literally:

Statistical sampling of the student population nationwide indicates that 4.5 million students currently in grades K-12 have suffered some form of sexual abuse by an educator, and more than 3 million have experienced sexual touching or assault.

Note: you are approximately 1,000 times more likely to get sexally assaulted by a public school teacher than you are shot in a school.

Why aren't the Democrats talking about this? I mean, they care about children, right?; 2/19/13, 12:42 PM
Brian Brown said...: Now garagie is actually claiming that .03% of teachers getting fired is some sort of indicator they can get fired.

Or something.

The incoherence is unending.; 2/19/13, 12:44 PM
garage mahal said...: Garage's citations are deliberate. he understands exactly what he cuts and pastes, so he can paste only the part that helps his argument and leave out only the part that hurts his argument.

I clearly laid out that teacher firings vary almost nil between union and non union states. Why not just admit your wrong?; 2/19/13, 12:46 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

I clearly laid out that teacher firings vary almost nil between union and non union states

Actually silly fucktard, you lied.

Yet again.

See, In North Carolina, after 3 years, public school teachers receive what's commonly called "tenure," a special employment protection that teachers unions defend; 2/19/13, 12:48 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @garage: a miniscule .03% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired—the exact same percentage as California."

"don't get fired" does not mean "can't get fired".

In California, they can't get fired. Even after years of sexual abuse.

"Records indicate that Berndt was pulled from the school on Jan. 6, 2011. And, then-L.A. schools Supt. Ramon C. Cortines, who has since retired, said he ordered Berndt to be fired when he heard about the photos.

The district’s legal staff warned Cortines that there might be complications for acting so quickly. Standard practice in L.A. Unified and elsewhere has been to “house” teachers in a district office, away from students, until a legal issue is resolved. But Cortines said he told senior staff that he didn’t want to wait, an account that was confirmed by a former Cortines aide.

By Feb. 15, the paperwork was ready for the elected Board of Education to dismiss Berndt formally and the school board ratified Cortines’ decision. As of Feb. 16, the district stopped paying Berndt, said Vivian Ekchian, chief human resources officer for L.A. Unified.

But the matter didn't end there. Berndt had 30 days to challenge his dismissal, which he did with the help of Trygstad, Schwab & Trygstad, a firm known for representing the teachers union, United Teachers Los Angeles. In this case, Berndt hired the firm privately; its specialties include defending teachers facing dismissal.

Berndt’s case was then set to go before an administrative hearing panel, a process that would take months. While awaiting a hearing, Berndt resigned from the school system in June 2011, six months after Deasy and Cortines determined to fire him."

He's still collecting his benefits, and will until he dies.

I know you read English, you just lie about what you read. Amply documented today, and many other days.; 2/19/13, 12:49 PM
Brian Brown said...: "And in North Carolina, where 97.7% are non-union

COMPLETE
AND
UTTER
BULLSHIT

The North Carolina Association of Educators represents about half of the teachers in the state.

Notice the fat fuck never presented a link to that bullshit claim.

Gee, I wonder why?

Oh, and the NCAE is merely one union. There are plenty of others.

You silly, fat dipshit; 2/19/13, 12:51 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: When pixels are on the screen, you know garage is lying. If you're not 100% sure, see if he includes a link.

Amply documented, here and elsewhere.; 2/19/13, 12:54 PM
Brian Brown said...: 49.5 percent of teachers are voluntary members of teacher associations in North Carolina.

That is a fact.

Garage is a liar.

Also a fact.; 2/19/13, 12:56 PM
Brian Brown said...: Fact: NCAE has 70,000 members.

Fact: Garage is either immensely gullible to silly bullshit he reads on left wing blogs or a propagandist.

Which is it garagie?; 2/19/13, 12:57 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @Jay: I had a Texas teacher tell me once that there was no teacher's union in Texas. I asked her what the American Federation of Teachers was and she admitted to being a member but said that because Texas is a right to work state then that meant she wasn't really in a union, even though that is what AFT's Texas chapter describes itself as.

garage can't use that excuse here, because he admitted some were in a union.; 2/19/13, 12:58 PM
garage mahal said...: In California, they can't get fired. Even after years of sexual abuse.

Apparently you didn't read your own link.; 2/19/13, 1:00 PM
Brian Brown said...: Even teachers not in a union in North Carolina have special legal protections regarding them being fired.

Note:
How long does it take to achieve tenure in North Carolina?

G.S.115C-325(c)(1) explains this process:

When a teacher has been employed by a North Carolina public school system for four consecutive years, the board, near the end of the fourth year, shall vote upon whether to grant the teacher career status. The board shall give the teacher written notice of that decision by June 15. If a majority of the board votes to grant career status to the teacher, and if it has notified the teacher of the decision, it may not rescind that action but must proceed under the provisions of this section for the demotion or dismissal of a teacher if it decides to terminate the teacher's employment.

Garage is a pathetic troll.; 2/19/13, 1:00 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @Garage:Apparently you didn't read your own link.

No, I read it. He was never fired. They stopped paying him, they didn't let him into the building--but they could not fire him without a lawsuit, which they never got to because he resigned six months later.; 2/19/13, 1:02 PM
Brian Brown said...: Gabriel Hanna said...
@Jay: I had a Texas teacher tell me once that there was no teacher's union in Texas.

Exactly.

I'm guessing garage thinks tenure is granted by unions.; 2/19/13, 1:02 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: in fact, garage, since you can read you know that the SOP in LAUSD is to put the teachers in a "rubber room" at full pay, similar to those they STILL have in New York City, even though they supposedly abolished them.; 2/19/13, 1:03 PM
Brian Brown said...: Note:

North Carolina: North Carolina did not grant a comprehensive set of legal employment protections to
public school teachers until 1971, and the word “tenure” did not appear in the title of an act dealing with public school teacher employment until 20 years later.2 Currently, North Carolina’s law on public school teacher employment protections is known as “System of employment for public school teachers”3, and teachers who acquire tenure are referred to as “career teachers.”
North Carolina’s tenure system requires teachers to teach for four years before being eligible to be granted career status. Once they have obtained career status, teachers can only be terminated on one of 15 specific grounds. Evidentiary hearings on career teacher dismissals are vested in a case manager before being brought before the full board for a final decision.

You've sunk to a new low garagie.; 2/19/13, 1:04 PM
Brian Brown said...: In South Carolina, where 100% of the teachers are non-union

Um, perhaps you then could explain why the South Carolina Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, has members, garagie?

Or do you just enjoy swallowing those Democratic Underground talking points uncritically?; 2/19/13, 1:08 PM
garage mahal said...: You've sunk to a new low garagie.

All I did was rebut a point upthread claiming unionized teachers can't be fired. I then showed data to support the rate of teacher firings didn't carry from union states and non union states. Teachers do get fired and some obviously should be fired.

I don't know what Gabriel Hanna was trying to show in his link, it looked like they did everything they could to fire that pervert on the spot. He hired lawyers, appealed, and then later resigned before he was fired.; 2/19/13, 1:11 PM
Brian Brown said...: No unionized teachers in South Carolina!!!

the South Carolina Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, says asking state employees to split the extra health insurance costs with taxpayers violates the new state budget, in which lawmakers intentionally decided “to fully cover the premium hikes as part of a larger compromise on worker pay,” reports CBS News.

The teachers union is joining the South Carolina State Employees Association and a University of South Carolina professor in a lawsuit against Gov. Haley to stop the insurance split.; 2/19/13, 1:12 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

All I did was rebut a point upthread claiming unionized teachers can't be fired.

Stupid shit:

You didn't rebut anything.

.03% of a group being fired proves the point, dumbass.

Further, your statistics on unionization were out & out lies.

Dumbass.; 2/19/13, 1:13 PM
Brian Brown said...: Um, given that this:

And in North Carolina, where 97.7% are non-union

Is a lie.

Why should we believe this:

a miniscule .03% of tenured/post-probationary teachers get fired

When you refused to provide a link, garagie?; 2/19/13, 1:16 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @garage:it looked like they did everything they could to fire that pervert on the spot.

My point exactly--and they couldn't do it because there was too much process.

They investigated him for over a year before they tried to do anything, and the process of firing him so long he could resign with full benefits.

So the Assembly tried to streamline the process--for perverts--and the teacher's union successfully lobbied against it.; 2/19/13, 1:17 PM
garage mahal said...: Jay, per the BLS:

Eight states had union membership rates below 5.0 percent in 2012. North Carolina had
the lowest rate (2.9 percent), followed by Arkansas (3.2 percent) and South Carolina
(3.3 percent).

That's total private and public sector. You tell me what percentage of teachers in North Carolina are unionized if not 97.7%; 2/19/13, 1:44 PM
garage mahal said...: * what percentage of teachers in North Carolina are non-unionized if not 97.7%; 2/19/13, 1:47 PM
Rusty said...: Freeman Hunt said...
I'm glad that instead of sitting around arguing with the local bureacracy or trying to pick the closest-ish fit in a priavte school, I can just homeschool and provide exactly the sort of education I want my children to have.

Just as an illustration my daughter, a middle school math teacher, suppliments her income by tutoring students in math. Lately she is tutoring college students.; 2/19/13, 1:51 PM
President-Mom-Jeans said...: Jesus Manboobs, you really are taking a beating today.

The stupid is especially strong with you today.

Was it your pigheaded insistence on digging yourself deeper after your ignorance has been exposed that caused your wife to divorce you?; 2/19/13, 1:54 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...
* what percentage of teachers in North Carolina are non-unionized if not 97.7%

Idiot:

The information was provided to you twice.

With links.

Fact: NCAE has 70,000 members.
That is North Carolina.; 2/19/13, 1:59 PM
Brian Brown said...: ge mahal said...
* what percentage of teachers in North Carolina are non-unionized if not 97.7%

49.5 percent of teachers are voluntary members of teacher associations in North Carolina.

Do you just conviently skip facts which illustrate you are a complete & utter liar and buffoon?

Why don't you tell us where you go that bullshit information?; 2/19/13, 2:01 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...
Jay, per the BLS:

Nobody cares.

You posted silly, utter bullshit.

Almost 50% of teachers in North Carolina are in a union.

Why don't you tell us where you got that bullshit assertion?; 2/19/13, 2:02 PM
garage mahal said...: The information was provided to you twice.

According to the BLS, which I trust more than you, North Carolina has a 2.9 percent union membership rate including both public and private.; 2/19/13, 2:02 PM
Brian Brown said...: In South Carolina, where 100% of the teachers are non-union

Complete
And
Utter
Lie.

Why don't you tell us where you got that bullshit assertion from garagie?; 2/19/13, 2:03 PM
Shanna said...: No unionized teachers in South Carolina!!!

Yeah, right to work state does not equal no unions. They are still very involved.; 2/19/13, 2:03 PM
Shanna said...: That 3.2% in Arkansas is bunk, I can tell you without even looking for stats.; 2/19/13, 2:04 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

According to the BLS, which I trust more than you, North Carolina has a 2.9 percent union membership rate including both public and private.

So fucking what?

The North Carolina Association of Educators has 70,000 members.

Idiot.; 2/19/13, 2:04 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...

According to the BLS, which I trust more than you

I've provided links 4 times now, fucktard.

Why don't you tell us where you got your bullshit assertion from?; 2/19/13, 2:05 PM
Brian Brown said...: garage mahal said...
* what percentage of teachers in North Carolina are non-unionized if not 97.7%

49.5.

Referenced 4 times.

Why don't you tell us where you got your bullshit assertion from, clown?; 2/19/13, 2:08 PM
Brian Brown said...: Notice this garagie?

49.5 percent of teachers are voluntary members of teacher associations (the 46th-highest rate among 51 jurisdictions).
As a result, the North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE) brings in a mere $111 in revenue each year per teacher in the state (47th). North Carolina teachers do, however, receive an unusually sizable slice of a small pie when it comes to expenditures on public education: While annual per-pupil expenditures amount to $9,024 annually per student (44th), 58.5 percent of those dollars go toward teacher salaries and benefits (4th).

Or are you happy looking so dumb?; 2/19/13, 2:11 PM
Brian Brown said...: Yes garagie, those "facts" you read about on left wing blogs are lies.

Lies that are trying to further a political agenda.

Why do you accept them so uncritically?; 2/19/13, 2:13 PM
garage mahal said...: The North Carolina Association of Educators has 70,000 members.

Is this the name of their union?; 2/19/13, 2:17 PM
garage mahal said...: I'm seeing the NCAE listed as a 501(c)6 tax-exempt lobbying and advocacy group.; 2/19/13, 2:28 PM
Shanna said...: That BLS data appears to be for total union membership not just teachers. So maybe 3.2% is right but has nothing to do with education or teachers.; 2/19/13, 2:36 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: That BLS data appears to be for total union membership not just teachers.

Innumeracy typical of garage. Just because it's 3% overall, doesn't mean every profession is individually 3%.

About NCAE:

"The NCAE Advocacy Center provides expert assistance to NCAE members for questions about employment and advocacy issues including discipline, evaluations, accusations of criminal conduct and grievances. Our goal is to respond within one business day.

In order to access the Advocacy Center, you need to fill out an easy form. It is imperative that you fill out the form completely, detailing your issue. Please be sure to hit "Submit" when you complete the form. Those with immediate job-threatening issues will be contacted first."

And you have to join and pay dues. Sure sounds like a union.; 2/19/13, 3:13 PM