January 5, 2021

"In city after city, from New York to New Orleans, charters have found ways to reach the children who have been most consistently failed by traditional schools."

"The evidence for their success has become overwhelming, with apolitical education researchers pronouncing themselves shocked at the size of the gains. What was ten years ago merely an experiment has become a proven means to develop the potential of children whose minds had been neglected for generations. And yet the second outcome of the charter-school breakthrough has been a bitter backlash within the Democratic Party. The political standing of the idea has moved in the opposite direction of the data, as two powerful forces — unions and progressive activists — have come to regard charter schools as a plutocratic assault on public education and an ideological betrayal. The shift has made charter schools anathema to the left. 'I am not a charter-school fan because it takes away the options available and money for public schools,' Biden told a crowd in South Carolina during the Democratic primary, as the field competed to prove its hostility toward education reform in general and charters in particular. Now, as Biden turns from campaigning to governing, whether he will follow through on his threats to rein them in — or heed the data and permit charter schools to flourish — is perhaps the most unsettled policy mystery of his emerging administration."

301 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 301 of 301
WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

Inga- a voucher is a voucher.

Joe Smith said...

@Inga

What about a rebate for parents like us?

We sent our kids to private school pre-K through college.

We paid a lot of taxes and never used any resources.

Shouldn't we also get a rebate?

Laughing Fox said...

Renee: The problem with charter schools is that they push students out, and if you're taking public tax dollars you can't do that. I have a son with a learning disability, no charter school will take him. And a lot of the students were probably in private schools, but they won their lottery slot for the charter.

Charter schools do take public tax dollars and they are allowed to remove students for bad behavior. A student with a learning disability is accepted in a charter school IF the school district sends the requisite funds for special education with the child. IF the school district has an anti-charter policy and does do this, the charter will no accept the child, knowing that it does not have the resources to help the child appropriately.

Chuck said...

Joe Smith said...
"We'll see how she does, at washing the Trump-stink off after 2020."

You're an ill-bred moron.

Trump stink?

She has two billion fucking dollars.

She gives zero fucks about what you or anyone else thinks.

Good for her.


Secretary DeVos is a very good, very careful political craftswoman. I've said that repeatedly on these comments pages. In 2016, I wrote that Jeff Sessions and Betsy DeVos were my favorite cabinet picks in the early Trump Administration. I've never really changed my mind.

But I assure you that she does care, because she cares about winning elections for Republicans, and she cares about Republicans doing a good job after they win. Nothing like Trump, who cares(ed) about Trump winning elections, and after that cares about little else.

The DeVos billions could not buy her husband Dick DeVos the Michigan governorship. (Although I enthusiastically voted for him.) Betsy knows that winning votes is not always about having billions, although good funding helps, and the DeVos family has been great, and generous with their time and finances.

See, I am trying to make valid points about the Republican Party winning elections, and you're just stuck in the TrumpCult stupidity.

Mike Sylwester said...

Left Bank of the Charles at 12:12 PM
Even if there is no difference in the educational attainment of the individual students, it's going to look like the charter school is providing a better education and the traditional public school is providing a worse education.

Supposing for the sake of argument that there indeed is no difference in the educational attainment, I do not perceive that anybody's education is being harmed.

mandrewa said...

"Why can't home-schooled kids participate in classes and activities at public schools?"

Well, I know the reason why for some of it. It's not hard to understand after the fact.

So in my area, it started off that kids that were being homeschooled were allowed to participate in extracurricullar activities that were after school like orchestra and sports. They weren't allowed to go to classes during the school day but everything else they were allowed to participate in.

It worked great. Except for the fact that it worked too well. Despite the huge disparity in numbers, the homeschoolers dominated everything they participated in. They were the best athletes and they were the best musicians.

I don't why that was the case. Well except for the obvious observation that most kids that are homeschooled seem to be really highly motivated. Which begs the question of why that is true.

But anyways the comparison was intolerable as far as the public schools were concerned. And so the homeschoolers were banned.

I Callahan said...

Which is self-defeating because if they swallow anything you tell them, they're just as likely to swallow whatever someone else tells them and that can lead to you losing control.
Tell me again how the Democrats are the smartest people in the room!


Well, they're not smart, but that aside, they know they're the ones in charge of passing out information. Which is why in addition, they're censoring conservatives so we can't tell them something they need to hear.

It's all well-planned and orchestrated.

Inga said...

“Inga- a voucher is a voucher.”

Bimbo, a voucher for homeschooling is NOT the same thing as a voucher to a Charter school. Even you should be able to understand that. If Charter schools don’t have better outcomes than public schools, how are parents like Omaha 1 to be guaranteed their special needs child will get a better education than if they taught them at home themselves? (IF their special needs child would even be accepted at a charter school)

alan markus said...

Direct federal funds to the local school districts is not that much. In Wisconsin, 6.8% of the revenue is Federal, State aid and property taxes provide the lion's share. (2018 FY).

My school district (metro Milwaukee area) gets 5.7% of it's revenue from Federal. 45% from local property tax.

Milwaukee School District gets 15.7% of it's revenue from Federal. 21% from local property tax.

Metro Madison School District gets 6.8% of it's revenue from Federal. 67% from local property tax.

Comparative Revenue Per Member

robother said...

Between the devastation teachers unions have been wreaking on inner city Blacks chronicled in Chait's article and the Black death toll of the BLM defund the police movement starting 2013, it really seems like the Democrat Party of Orville Faubus has triumphed. Amazingly the Progressives and ANTIFA have joined the teachers union in keeping the N.....s down, far more effectively than anything dreamt of by Nathan Bedford Forrest. And they are rewarded for it, Blacks voted 90% for Democrats in every single one of these shithole cities that have the worst schools and the highest rates of Black murders. A plantation with voluntary slaves.

walter said...

Yeah..it's a big mystery.

I'm Not Sure said...

"We paid hefty property taxes that went (and now go) toward funding local public schools, yet we sent our kids to private school.

Why shouldn't parents like us be able to get a return on our investment?"

People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

No Inga- A voucher doesn't discriminate how the parent chooses to spend the education dollars.

walter said...

“poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids,"

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

Inga- your questions are poor.

Public Schools, including charter schools, cannot handle the education crisis for special needs children and young adults.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

The political standing of the idea has moved in the opposite direction of the data, as two powerful forces — unions and progressive activists — have come to regard charter schools as a plutocratic assault on public education and an ideological betrayal.

Neither force wants people to actually be educated.

Neither force wants people to be able to build functional lives, not dependent upon the government.

Therefore, both oppose charter schools, because that's what charter schools do

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

Inga - you are attempting to parrot Biden and the far left, when you assert that because YOU think charter Schools are worse or no better- that they should all be shut down - or be "cut off from federal funding".

Greg The Class Traitor said...

I'm Not Sure said...
People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?

We're supposed to get educated and functional human beings who will keep society going.

instead we get indoctrinated losers who hate America.

Which is a great argument for simply nuking the public school system, and telling every set of parents "you're on your own."

What does not exist is any valid argument for why our money should be going to any place run by the "teachers" unions

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

Inga-

I live in progressive Boulder and they cut off funding for special needs children. and they do it haphazardly. The public school system cannot handle children with autism or any severe learning disability.

It has nothing to do with charter schools.

Tina Trent said...

It seems to me that most of you have never seen exactly how bad things are at failing urban public schools. My guess is it would shock the crap out of you. Ten-year-olds pissing in their seats and beating their teachers; teachers chanting slogans from radical communist mass murderers to their violent, illiterate charges; illiterate and belligerently anti-white educators.

So whine about how your handicapped child has somehow not been pandered to enough because charter schools exist for others -- what a fine role model you are (the AMA is a wildly over-reaching bureaucracy that cripples more than it liberates). Keep confusing federal and state funding formulas, rather than read a few City Journal articles that clarify these issues succinctly.

None of this is rocket science.

Yes, many urban charter schools suck. That's because they-re the ones that have been captured as grantee money-sinks by precisely the same garbage-in, garbage-out precinct-mob-boss types that blight the local public schools too. But the success of well-run charters managed by normal people reaching into the worst communities is unambiguous.

FullMoon said...

iowan2 said...
Head Start has been around since the 60's In all that time, all the data generated in more than 5 decades, Zero impact on students past the 3rd grade.


Yep, it takes the other kids until third grade to catch up. Meanwhile, the headstart kid sits there bored and fidgity because she already knows the stuff.

Had a two and a half year old visiting, knows the difference between octagon and pentagon, can do simple addition and subtraction, count to a hundred in English and twenty in Spanish, identify colors in English and Spanish. Learning from his mom and the daycare provider Maybe that is common these days but I suspect kindergarten and first grade not going to be of much interest.

FullMoon said...

Gonna go out on a limb and suggest that less opportunity of getting beat or robbed in hallway or playground in ghetto charter school than public school in same 'hood.

Any stats available on that?

I'm Not Sure said...

Greg The Class Traitor...

You missed my point, perhaps it was not clear. In a discussion of public education, parents often want to know why they can't take their tax dollars and spend them on the sort of education they prefer for their kids.

I'm asking- if parents can spend their tax dollars as they choose, why shouldn't non-parents have the same option?

"What does not exist is any valid argument for why our money should be going to any place run by the "teachers" unions"

I'm in 100% agreement here.

Inga said...

“No Inga- A voucher doesn't discriminate how the parent chooses to spend the education dollar.”

The VAST majority of people who homeschool get NO vouchers. Am I mistaken? Any homeschoolers here getting a school voucher?

daskol said...

Chuck just admitted he likes dick.

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

WE do not really have an authentic or widely used voucher program in the US.

Vouchers are a theory and idea to help parents choose where their education dollars are spent. THE LEFT ARE VIOLENTLY OPPOSED. Most "voucher" programs are small, limited and so restrictive, as to be useless.


WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

So back to conflating all negative things to the dreaded CHARTER SCHOOL!

or learn something new and read Chait's article.

Skippy Tisdale said...

But trolls aren't big on learning from facts.

The projection is strong in this one.

Big Mike said...

Most public school teachers are good.

@exhelodrvr1, most public school teachers are mediocre on their best days, otherwise your analysis is good. One of the things that bothered me when I overheard my sisters and cousin* talking about it was that every teacher and administrator in any school know who the bad teachers are, and according to my relatives the normal response is to assign the best students to the classrooms with the worst teachers because those students are the only ones that have a chance at learning despite the teachers. My relatives were amazed at how vociferously disgusted I was with their whole profession.

* Two teachers, one of them award-winning, and one principal between the three of them.

Freeman Hunt said...

I assume people who are against charters and vouchers think that only those of us who can pay for it should have a choice in our children's education. Surprised they're willing to take that position in public! (Though I have heard people take explicitly that position in private.)

Dude1394 said...

“ Renee at 9:33 AM
The problem with charter schools is that they push students out, and if you're taking public tax dollars you can't do that. I have a son with a learning disability, no charter school will take him. And a lot of the students were probably in private schools, but they won their lottery slot for the charter.”

Exactly why vouchers solves this problem. You increase the voucher for someone who has disabilities. Then they go to a school that can specialize in it. If you need to supplement that voucher to find a better school then so be it.

If your kid stays in public school, it will be child abuse.

Todd said...

GingerBeer said...

He'll do what Dr. Biden tells him to do. She is, after all, a member of the NEA.

1/5/21, 12:09 PM


Do you mean "Doctor of Education Jill Biden"? That one?

Hauptfrau said...

To those commenter's arguing against charters ("their success is overstated," "they cherry pick kids," etc.), as someone whose kids went to a (non-magnet) inner city public high school, white and Asian enrollment approx 43% (full disclosure, our kids aren't white), my question is: What the heck is wrong with parental choice? As opposed to white progressives telling me I can't choose the school I believe would be the best fit for my kid (even though we pay a lot of state and local taxes).

Our experience (will just talk about our son; our daughter probably would've been ok regardless of her school -- this is my point -- for some kids (e.g., my son) school choice matters; test score comparison really isn't most relevant):

After moving around the country (active duty military), we as parents actually had formed opinions about what type of school would work best for our son. He did fine in Catholic schools (99th percentile on the Iowa tests), until the last one, which didn't have enough discipline; by 7th grade he was going adrift. We would have preferred a Catholic high school but couldn't afford it. Our first choice was actually a public charter School (STEM focused). We didn't win the lottery on that.

Turns out, it wasn't much of a lottery. I later found out, from getting to know a very nice public school employee, that regular taxpayers have almost no chance of winning this lottery: mainly because, unbeknownst to the peasants, ALL public school employees get first dibs for the charter, before there is a real lottery.

So we adjusted our attitudes and decided to send our kid to the neighborhood public high school. (We wanted our kids to be in a racially diverse school.) We were willing to put up with a certain level of gang violence. What I stressed about was the fact that this school is open campus, there are numerous weed dispensaries nearby, and it soon became apparent that most of the teachers didn't give a rat's butt whether the kids were in class, whether they played on their phones the whole time, etc. Being semi-regular in attendance was enough to get you a B in an "honors" class.

So my son spent most of his first 2 years of high school, not in school but out looking for trouble, and finding it. His getting arrested fortunately corresponded to my husband being able to retire and we moved back to WI to be closer to family (after I finished my efforts to get the juvenile records expunged). This move was 6 years ago. Last year when mentioning that we decided to get him out of this diverse HS (without the this lengthy explanation), a few of my former law school classmates, the progressive ones (whose kids were schooled either privately or in expensive lily white burbs), insinuated that I was racist. (they were unaware of what my family looks like).

When I had gone to the administration at the local HS and expressed concerns about not keeping track of kids, etc., I was told (literally) that if my kid couldn't handle all this freedom, that was my problem; I should've done things differently as a parent.

So Ferdinande, Howard, Renee et al. please tell me again how I'm racist and how I should be more supportive of public education.

Mark said...

Create conditions and impose obstacles that make it extremely difficult for anyone BUT the wealthy to go to a non-public or charter school, then refuse to open the public schools or otherwise refuse to provide a quality education.

And as they inflict ignorance on entire generations, they propagandize as to how great they are.


If nothing else, the COVID emergency has exposed the public school tyrants as the frauds that they are who care next to nothing about the young people they are supposed to educate, and whose primary concern is money and power for public administrators, teachers and their unions.

Rusty said...

Joe Smith said...
"@Inga

What about a rebate for parents like us?

We sent our kids to private school pre-K through college.

We paid a lot of taxes and never used any resources.

Shouldn't we also get a rebate?"
You should not be forced to pay that portion of your property tax that goes to public schools.

Original Mike said...

"I assume people who are against charters and vouchers think that only those of us who can pay for it should have a choice in our children's education"

Actually, many don't think you should have a choice even IF you can pay for it.

alan markus said...

@ I'm Not Sure

I'm asking- if parents can spend their tax dollars as they choose, why shouldn't non-parents have the same option?


There are other situations where one can choose:

Health care programs like (Title 19/Medicaid/Medicare) to a certain extent provide choices where one goes for their medical care.

Federal Housing Assistance (HUD) has a tenant choice voucher program (Section 8) where recipients take their assistance to private sector landlords. They are not restricted their local Public Housing Authority owned projects.

Rusty said...

"People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?"
They shouldn't have to pay.

Mr. T. said...

Duh Chait! Answer:

Whatever his teachr/child molester unions tell him.

Original Mike said...

So Inga's for vouchers until the icky word is explicitly attached to them.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

mandrewa,

[W]e can compare the parents/students who didn't get to go to a charter school but wanted to, with those that actually did.

Indeed we can, and that's the comparison charter opponents really, really would prefer we not make. The results of such lottery experiments demolish the idea that charter schools "only" win because they get all the motivated kids; there are many more motivated kids than are able to gain entrance, and those who do get in are chosen at random.

There are still differences; there are a lot of public school students who are not motivated at all, and the schools are forced to take them on anyway. But the gap between those accepted and rejected in such lotteries is the best way we have of gauging the effect of charter schooling.

Inga said...

“So Inga's for vouchers until the icky word is explicitly attached to them.”

No, I’m for a voucher for special needs children whose parents cannot work because they must stay home to educate their special needs child, like Omaha 1. She said that if she wouldn’t have had to work she could’ve taught her special needs child to read beyond a first grade level. She said if she could've gotten the funds that were spent on her son in public school special Ed program she could’ve stayed home to homeschool her child. I agreed with her.

bagoh20 said...

If it came before the courts, the judges would say the kids have no standing. That's what you say when you know the facts say one thing, but Democrats want another. The victims of theft and fraud are unimportant in our system. "For the children!"

Greg The Class Traitor said...

I'm Not Sure said...
Greg The Class Traitor...

You missed my point, perhaps it was not clear. In a discussion of public education, parents often want to know why they can't take their tax dollars and spend them on the sort of education they prefer for their kids.

I'm asking- if parents can spend their tax dollars as they choose, why shouldn't non-parents have the same option?


For our society to survive, we need people to have children, and for those children to become functional adults.

If you chose not to have children, you're choosing not to invest in that future. And trusting that other people will do that investing for you.

Subsidizing that investment by paying for a good education is a reasonable exchange

Paying for the destructive parasite "teachers" is not

alan markus said...

In Wisconsin, re: Disabled students at private schools that become approved to accept choice vouchers:

Private School Choice Programs Frequently Asked Questions for Parents – 2020-21 School Year

Is a private Choice school required to enroll a student with special needs in the Choice program, and to provide the child with whatever services are required to allow the child to learn?

A private school may not discriminate against a student with special educational needs during the admissions process for the Choice program. However, as a private school, a Choice school is required to offer only those services to assist students with special needs that it can provide with minor adjustments. Parents should contact the Choice school during the admission process about the services the school is able to provide for their student. Parents should also contact the school district in which the private school is located for more information on the services the school district provides to students with special needs who are enrolled in the public schools and the lesser services that the school district provides students with special needs who are enrolled in private schools.


Local school districts are free to divert their sparse special needs funding to help private schools serve that population.

Joe Smith said...

"See, I am trying to make valid points about the Republican Party winning elections, and you're just stuck in the TrumpCult stupidity."

You missed the point entirely...she has the best life on earth WITHOUT politics.

Her husband will get over his loss.

I'm glad she's raising (and using her own) money for conservative causes.

The R's who didn't support Trump and run for office in the future will get buried.

Nobody will forget their weaselly ways...that's the opposite of 'Trump stink.'

P.S. Backing and voting for a man who fought against the incestuousness of DC does not make one a cultist. Tolerating the stench in DC, and doing nothing to change it certainly does.

Rick said...

ALL public school employees get first dibs for the charter, before there is a real lottery.


Aristocrats expect to be treated better than peasants. That's why Obama passed laws forgiving student loan debt for government and NGO employees.

Joe Smith said...

"People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?"

Good point...we all get rebates!! Better if read in an 'Oprah giving away cars' voice.

Rusty is also correct...but while we're at it, lower taxes across the board as well.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Temujin,

Just a day ago we had the comical Chicago area teacher posting instagram photos of herself poolside in Puerto Rico, while she puffed up a 'teachers movement' to allow teachers to continue to work remotely- for fear of the disease. This- while she's poolside at an island resort.

No, it's better than that. She was posting from an island resort in a COVID hot spot. And when called on it, revealed that she'd already had COVID-19, back in June, and that her doctor said she had a minuscule chance of getting it again. So, um, why shouldn't she get back to her Special Ed students, who obviously need her, then? No answer to that one.

I've been on record here as defending public school teachers, many times; I'm married to one. But this piece of work in Chicago does not deserve her job. Nor, for that matter, do union leadership who reflexively vote to keep their workers out of schools. There is simply no reason, beyond inflated self-regard, that a teacher is less "essential" than any grocery store clerk or trash collector. But far too many teachers are so puffed up with self-conceit . . .

bagoh20 said...

I don't want most people to have children, and I certainly don't want the kids who are born to be mal-educated, anti-American, anti-science, anti-logic parasitic burdens, but that's what we are forced to pay for.

I hire mostly young unskilled people every month. I've hired almost 2000 in my career. Very few of them understand fractions or decimals, can do basic math, read a tape measure, write a paragraph, understand the simplest financial principles, or tell you anything correct about history or civics. That's simply a complete failure of the education system of any nation in the 21st century.

I now conduct classes for my employees to teach these things that I already paid somebody to teach them. All I got for my money was comfortable retired teachers who get free medical care and a monthly check for life. Two things, that neither I nor their students will ever get.

Hauptfrau said...

Sorry for being verbose. When we decided where to settle in WI, our first priority was: closed campus; followed by STEM and Tech/vocational courses, followed by academics. We chose a public school that fit the bill (most inner city parents can't afford to do so; choice can be too expensive). I'm grateful to the fine taxpayers of this NE WI village for financially supporting this school.

Ironically, the school is diverse in its own way: offers robotics, shop, lots of AP courses, IB, and there is even FFA. Husband and I are convinced that changing schools saved our son. Turns out he did fine at a school with closed campus and no pot shops; also helped that his friends here are more down to earth and solid. That helped keep is THC addiction in check. (most of the friends' parents are trumpers, fwiw. Note: Less stuck up, elitist people than the other crowd.).

Due to his two lost years in Denver, he was never able to make up the math he missed; had to give up his stated goal of majoring in engineering. But he's doing fine. We pushed him into shop and tech classes, where he showed real talent. Then on to tech college, which he was embarrassed to go to, but we told him we would set university tuition for later, but AAS degree first. We were 100% sure he would flunk out if sent to a 4yr univ like he wanted to go to.

Right now - He makes $33/hr ($70k+/yr with OT). Fortune 50 company. Not bad for a 21 year old. Pays a lot of taxes. (Still worry about him because he is impulsive (still would be considered ADD by many teachers) and could of course still screw up again.)

Really proud of this kid: immature, but he works his ass off; doesn't want a handout from us or the gov't; doesn't have an entitlement attitude. (Also, very annoyed with the goosed up unemployment incentivizing people not to go back go work.) He might go for a bachelors degree someday, but isn't interested in that right now.

Bottom line: without our drastic school choice measures, our kid would be (at best) a university flunk-out. By making a big financial sacrifice, we were able to choose a school for him. It shouldn't have been that hard! School choice that was difficult for us is impossible for others. But that's fine with today's progressives (keep'em on the democratic party plantations). How is this not morally wrong?



Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

A note on "learning disabilities," and disabilities, generally in the public-school context: When you hear statistics purporting to show that "disabled" students are disproportionately disciplined in schools, be aware that what is meant by "disability" is not, by and large, what we thought it meant, say, when the ADA was passed. The students facing disciplinary actions aren't blind, deaf, wheelchair-bound, or even "developmentally disabled" in the mental-retardation sense. They are, overwhelmingly, emotionally disturbed kids, often violent kids, always "difficult" kids. Doesn't mean they don't count; doesn't mean that we should neglect them or toss them out or pretend they don't exist. But "mainstreaming" them, as is the usual plan these days, is flat-out nuts; it's a way to guarantee that because one student can't be persuaded to sit down and stop swearing and yelling and throwing furniture, no one should learn anything.

One thing that has progressed alongside mainstreaming is "group learning," where students are put into small groups and assigned projects. Invariably, one kid does the large majority of the work, but all get credit for it, and all are assigned the same grade. The only reason this doesn't suck even more than it appears to at first glance is that at least the students can collaborate in the corner while the teacher deals with the one or two students in the classroom who demand all the teacher's attention, all the time.

Joe Smith said...

"No, it's better than that. She was posting from an island resort in a COVID hot spot. And when called on it, revealed that she'd already had COVID-19, back in June, and that her doctor said she had a minuscule chance of getting it again. So, um, why shouldn't she get back to her Special Ed students, who obviously need her, then? No answer to that one."

The answer to getting kids back in the classroom is blindingly obvious.

Line up all of the teachers in America and give them a Covid shot...not the vaccine, but the actual disease.

Most, like this woman, will live, and they can then go back to teaching again.

Some will die (it happens). This is known as 'churn' and is a good thing...new blood and all that.

Some will refuse the take the Covid shot, which means they're really not that dedicated in the first place, or are too old and should just be enjoying retirement anyway.

Maybe on a nice, sunny island. Like the lady teacher : )

wild chicken said...

What Michelle said. "Disabled" doin' a lot of work these days.

Great article. Very encouraging. I hope Biden's people take the hint.

Todd said...

Scott said...

We only have Charter Schools because they are useful for Democrats to steal energy from the really threatening innovation: School vouchers.

You want stronger charter schools? Campaign for vouchers.

1/5/21, 12:13 PM


This! Democrats and teacher's unions (redundant I know) use hobbled charter school plans in order to strangle school vouchers in their sleep. They would rather have a small charter school "plan" that they can control and keep small where as vouchers is "game over" for them.

Gahrie said...

When you hear statistics purporting to show that "disabled" students are disproportionately disciplined in schools, be aware that what is meant by "disability" is not, by and large, what we thought it meant, say, when the ADA was passed. The students facing disciplinary actions aren't blind, deaf, wheelchair-bound, or even "developmentally disabled" in the mental-retardation sense. They are, overwhelmingly, emotionally disturbed kids, often violent kids, always "difficult" kids.

One of the qualifying disabilities is something called Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD).

The fourth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual... stated that the child must exhibit four out of the eight signs and symptoms to meet the diagnostic threshold for oppositional defiant disorder. These symptoms include:

Often loses temper
Is often touchy or easily annoyed
Is often angry and resentful
Often argues with authority figures or for children and adolescents, with adults
Often actively defies or refuses to comply with requests from authority figures or with rules
Often deliberately annoys others
Often blames others for his or her mistakes or misbehavior
Has been spiteful or vindictive at least twice within the past 6 months.


In my experience this describes literally every teenager in the world.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Splanky... Hunter spent his school days dealin dope. His special kind of catastrophe was baking for a long time.

Rick said...

Really proud of this kid:

As you should be.

I Callahan said...

People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?

Refunds?

Gahrie said...

This! Democrats and teacher's unions (redundant I know) use hobbled charter school plans in order to strangle school vouchers in their sleep. They would rather have a small charter school "plan" that they can control and keep small where as vouchers is "game over" for them.

What the unions are starting to realize, but the vast majority of teachers haven't yet, is we aren't ever going back to pre-Covid normal.

A significant number of kids are simply doing better online. Less social pressure, no bullying, largely self-paced, and often personalized. These kids aren't coming back, and as word grows of their success, more will join them. I had been predicting a significant shift to online learning in twenty years pre-Covid. Now I believe it's happening right now.

A significant number of kids are doing worse online. Some of this is the lack of social interaction, with teachers and other students. The band kids are missing out etc.

Most kids are probably doing about the same. The dirty little secret is that academic success is much more about the student and parents then it is teachers and schools. A motivated student will learn no matter how good or bad the teacher and school is. An unmotivated student won't learn no matter how good or bad the teacher and school is.

A large number of families are going to want to return to a traditional environment. They want to go to football games on Friday nights, and to go see school plays.

Some families just won't give a shit, just like today. They'll pretend to enroll their kids in online schools to stop the hassles from the local school district.

There's a chance the Democrats will push through a UBI in the next four years. If they do, all bets are off. We will quickly produce a large population that is illiterate, innumerate and totally unproductive. This population will have to be placated with ever increasing bread and circuses.

I'm Not Sure said...

Greg The Class Traitor said...

"If you chose not to have children, you're choosing not to invest in that future. And trusting that other people will do that investing for you."

How are those other people investing in the public schools that people without children in school are through their taxes, if the taxes the other people pay go somewhere else?

Or are you arguing that people with kids in school are excused from investing their tax dollars in other peoples' kids? You know- like people without kids are expected to?

John henry said...

Original Mike said...

if the money follows the student? They no longer have to expend resources to teach that student?

Because education is almost entirely fixed costs. Sometimes called overhead.

A school with 50 classrooms and 50 teachers costs almost the same to run with 20 students per class as 30.

Teacher cost stays the same. Building maintenance the same. Heat and light about the same. Heating cost probably goes up without those 10 student's body heat.

If enrollment is cut by a third you might need a few less administrators and books

Cafeteria food costs might go down but fewer meals means fixed cost per meal go up.

I'm in favor of charter and private schools instead of traditional public schools.

But the marginal cost per student in any of them isn't far from nil.

John Henry

Skeptical Voter said...

Exhelodrvr says that "most public school teachers are good". My sister, my sister in law, two maiden aunts and other relatives were all high school teachers in the public schools. And several of my fraternity brothers were high school teachers--and in one case a fifth grade teacher. But I can't agree that most public school teachers are good---I will agree that most of them are well intentioned. But good intentions do not necessarily make a good teacher.

I went through public schools in Washington State and in San Diego through high school graduation, then on to one of the California State colleges for undergraduate school and then Law school at Cal Berkeley. It was true all through that 19 years of education that I had a few great teachers--a very few. I also had some good teachers--a somewhat larger number. My wife and I were both involved with our children's education, with their schools and with their teachers.

But as in any other profession the skill levels run from "not so good" to good, better and best and then a very narrow slice of "great" at the top. Even some of the "not so good" teachers can "up their game" if they get help and support from the parents of their students.

I'd bet that a charter school environment helps teachers "up their game". If charter administration selects for "good" in their teacher hire, it's easy for the charter school teacher to reach the "better" level.

Howard said...

Blogger Rusty said...

"People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?"
They shouldn't have to pay.


Sure, then they should give up taking Social Security and Medicare that my kids are funding. It's not a all on the carte menu, it's a smorgasborg.

Gahrie said...

Or are you arguing that people with kids in school are excused from investing their tax dollars in other peoples' kids? You know- like people without kids are expected to?

This is a completely unnecessary argument. Public schools are necessary for a healthy society in which to live. It is your public responsibility as a citizen or a resident to ensure a healthy society by paying your taxes, among other things. This public obligation has nothing to do with your personal life.

Anonymous said...

"[W]ithin the Democratic Party [t]he political standing of the idea has moved in the opposite direction of the data." That sums it up for a lot of issues.

Jim at said...

This subject exposes the left for what they truly believe.

If everybody can't benefit, nobody should.

John henry said...

Why does it not surprise me that you are an enthusiastic supporter of dick deVos?

Pyrimid schemes are a scam. DeVos is the king of scamsters.

Do you sell Amway products?
Seems like something you would do.

Why are you still here? After all, you do take a lot of abuse and it seems to bother you.

Enough to alternately whinge and suck up to our hostess who has named you an official "dick"

John Henry

I'm Not Sure said...

Gahrie said...

"This is a completely unnecessary argument. Public schools are necessary for a healthy society in which to live. It is your public responsibility as a citizen or a resident to ensure a healthy society by paying your taxes, among other things. This public obligation has nothing to do with your personal life."

Ok, going with your argument- would you then agree that if parents want to send their kids somewhere other than the public school available in their neighborhood, they'll have to pay the cost themselves, not with tax dollars "refunded" to them for that purpose?

I pay taxes to support the local park system but they're overrun with people who let their dogs crap everywhere so I go to a local gym to exercise instead. Do I get a tax refund to help pay the gym fee because I'm not using the park?

tcrosse said...

"People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?"

I figure that I'm paying for my own education. Let other peoples' kids pay for theirs, eventually.

Gahrie said...

Ok, going with your argument- would you then agree that if parents want to send their kids somewhere other than the public school available in their neighborhood, they'll have to pay the cost themselves, not with tax dollars "refunded" to them for that purpose?

First off, for the record, I am a public school teacher.

The quick answer to your question is no, but it's closer to yes than you might think.

I believe in competition. I believe the best way to force that local public school to improve is to force it to compete. If the local community abandons a school, close it down, and re-open it with a completely new staff. I support both private schools and charter schools. I believe that parents should have more school choice in their districts. If a district is unable to provide for the specific needs of a child, I support vouchers.

Freeman Hunt said...

Vouchers and charters aren't tax refunds. The idea is to educate kids. Why wouldn't the money follow the kids?

boatbuilder said...

Should I be pleased that the truth gets told by a lib or pissed that he said nothing until the election put back in place the implacable opponents of charter schools.
Weasel Chait.

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

"Vouchers and charters aren't tax refunds."

Jeebus - did someone actually say this?

Leftist-democratics are clueless sheep when it comes to this stuff.
they don't care about reality, nor do they understand it.

wildswan said...

The statistics on charter schools in Wisconsin are influenced by the fact that the authorities in Wisconsin refuse to close poorly performing charter schools. They want the bad schools to stay open so that their poor performance drags down the statistics for charter schools as a whole in this state. Chait actually mentions the fact that it's important for the authorities to monitor performance. Parents won't take their children out of charter schools that do no better or even do worse than traditional public schools at teaching because even those charter schools are often better for children in non-academic ways such as preventing bullying. Only the authorities will monitor actual academic performance. It was interesting that Chait documents an improving climate for charter school accountability as this will lead to an increase in success at charter schools.

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

Look - if someone on the left makes an argument that cuts thru the left's tired boilerplate "Only one-size fits all /only teacher's union public schools count" - that person should be praised - if only for the moment.

It's not about what the corrupt left want. it's about what WE THE PEOPLE want.

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

follow the money and the power.

The corrupt cream at the top of the D-party machine want to make certain that the Teacher's Union-democrat party gravy train is the only show in town.

Browndog said...

exhelodrvr1 said...

Most public school teachers are good.


Based on what???????

WWIII Joe Biden, Husk-Puppet + America's Putin said...

also - Teacher's union members get vastly outdated, unfair early retirement pay and perks that most of the rest of us will never see. The plans are all paid for by you and me - and there is not enough money in the kitty to fund it forever into the future.

here's where tax hikes on the middle class come in.. You can feel it coming in the air of the night.... oh Lord.

Unknown said...

I call B.S. Public Schools and their School Boards are so virulently against Charter schools that they will demolish empty school buildings and facilities that can still be used rather than lease them to local charter schools. Empty lots zoned for school use will sit idle for years bringing absolutely no money. Half empty schools will allow classrooms to rot and decay rather than allow charters to rent the available space. If money was really the issue, they would agree to lease the buildings and earn the money to defray costs.

Mr Wibble said...
What options? As to the money, how is the school system poorer if the money follows the student? They no longer have to expend resources to teach that student?

There are a lot of costs that are fixed/sticky. If your student population declines by 10%, your building doesn't get 10% smaller. You might be able to make some reductions to staff, but not as much as you'd like.

Schools are like hospitals: they have to operate close to capacity in order to break even.

1/5/21, 9:52 AM

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

wildswan,

The statistics on charter schools in Wisconsin are influenced by the fact that the authorities in Wisconsin refuse to close poorly performing charter schools. They want the bad schools to stay open so that their poor performance drags down the statistics for charter schools as a whole in this state.

I'm not surprised. If all the charter schools open were functioning well, where would be the argument for ditching them entire? You need some really bad examples to keep the mass of the public on the public-school track. And your pointing to charters' success in combating bullying is the sort of thing the stat-trackers are prone to miss. If you have a child bullied in school, generally the problem will be solved only if there is a proactive principal, very pushy parents, or both. In my case, it was both (thanks, pushy parents!), but even so I had to do a lot of the work myself.

todd galle said...

Regarding Special Needs students and progress, my Great Aunt operated what was called "Ms. Barr's School" on the Main Line outside of Philly for many years before she died in the early 1940s. The school was for mentally challenged young women (total of 8) in a residential situation. I have one of the promotional brochures somewhere, and by the standards of the day it wasn't cheap. She had to add additional fees on certain families who refused to pick up their children between terms. After she died, and the school was being disbanded, one family refused the return of their daughter. My grandmother took her in, and my mother, who was maybe 6 or so, remembers getting 10 cents to walk down to the Glenside, PA theater with the poor young woman to see a movie. She was at least 10 years older than my mom, but couldn't cross the street without a 6 year old's guidance. The theatre is still there (saw Barenaked Ladies and Asia there a while back), but our society's acceptance of special needs individuals has certainly improved.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Browndog,

[exhelodrvr1 said...

Most public school teachers are good.]

Based on what???????

Let's just say that no one complained about my husband's teaching when it was at private schools; it was only when he moved to Oregon and took a public school job that the much-admired, multiple-prize-winning conductor at a Catholic girls' school in CA suddenly turned into your basic incompetent union stooge. He's the same dude, doing the same work (well, adjusted downward a bit for output quality, because public schools don't generally have international students, nor parents who will pay something like college fees for high school), but, shall we say, the vibe has changed.

Sample of one, of course. But given that yours was based on a sample of nil . . . ?

Browndog said...

Sample of one, of course. But given that yours was based on a sample of nil . . . ?

Is this common core math?

You offer up your fricking husband to prove at least 50.1% of public school teachers are good?

Unknown said...

Blogger todd galle said...
Regarding Special Needs students and progress, my Great Aunt operated what was called "Ms. Barr's School" on the Main Line outside of Philly for many years before she died in the early 1940s. The school was for mentally challenged young women (total of 8) in a residential situation. I have one of the promotional brochures somewhere, and by the standards of the day it wasn't cheap. She had to add additional fees on certain families who refused to pick up their children between terms. After she died, and the school was being disbanded, one family refused the return of their daughter. My grandmother took her in, and my mother, who was maybe 6 or so, remembers getting 10 cents to walk down to the Glenside, PA theater with the poor young woman to see a movie. She was at least 10 years older than my mom, but couldn't cross the street without a 6 year old's guidance. The theatre is still there (saw Barenaked Ladies and Asia there a while back), but our society's acceptance of special needs individuals has certainly improved.

1/5/21, 5:14 PM

Even in today's more accepting view of the disabled a substantive number would turn over their disabled family members to state care immediately if given the opportunity. I honestly don't blame many of them. Caring for severely disabled individuals is emotionally/physically/psychologically exhausting. Aging parents/guardians can no longer handle the round the clock care. Psychological & health burnout is very common among caregivers. Public Institutions existed in the past not just due to the stigma; it also addressed the housing & care of disabled individuals.

Amadeus 48 said...

Why, these charter school policies appear to be working. We can’t have that. It will make the incompetents who work in our public schools look bad.

Joe will fix it.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Unknown,

You are right. There are instances -- one I remember in NYC, where a charter was refused empty space in an existing school. The space is doing no good to anyone; it's empty; it's literally useless, without use; but better it be empty than used by a competing school that might perhaps be better than the one already there.

todd galle, the students you are talking about are "special needs" students in the sense that they are developmentally disabled. They are not what the "disabled" in the public schools currently are, for the most part. Your tale is desperately heartbreaking, but I doubt Ms. Barr's students would have been as foul-mouthed and violent as the current lot are. I can't imagine your mother, at six, being asked to escort a kid like that across the street. Because the developmentally disabled are almost always extraordinarily gentle and kind.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Browndog,

You offer up your fricking husband to prove at least 50.1% of public school teachers are good?

No; I "offer him up" in the hopes that you will reconsider your wholesale condemnation of everyone who has ever worked for a public school. You must have missed the bits in this thread where I said more or less what you are alleging, as to that Chicago teacher in particular and union leadership in general. But if your goal is to drive every decent, hard-working, and talented teacher out of the public schools, do keep going; you're nearly there.

Gahrie said...

todd galle, the students you are talking about are "special needs" students in the sense that they are developmentally disabled. They are not what the "disabled" in the public schools currently are, for the most part.

I don't know about the most part, but yes a significant number of students receiving special education services are the same ones who were labeled juvenile delinquents in the past.

Owen said...

I think this debate would be enriched if everybody were to read Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron."

Amadeus 48 said...

Yeah, but subsequent developments showed that Kurt Vonnegut didn’t believe a word of “Harrison Bergeron”. That was a so-called “Michael Kinsley moment”, where a lefty accidentally blurted out the truth.

Narr said...

I'll bet almost everyone here HAS read "Harrison Bergeron"!

OK, almost 300 comments and with all due respect there's not much new to say (not by me anyway).

We want Cafe'! We want Cafe'!

Narr
What do we want?

I'm Full of Soup said...

One of Slow Joe Biden's brothers was very involved in some charter schools in Florida called Maverick.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Federal govt should have no say at all in schools and how they are run.

Rusty said...

Howard said...
Blogger Rusty said...

"People who don't have kids in the school system pay those same hefty property taxes. What should they get?"
They shouldn't have to pay.

Sure, then they should give up taking Social Security and Medicare that my kids are funding. It's not a all on the carte menu, it's a smorgasborg.\
Try not to be a moron. I know it's difficult for you.
State and local vs federal. Try and stay on topic.

Owen said...

Amadeus @ 6:03: I didn’t know that about Vonnegut. Amazing! ...Is that proof of a writer’s talent, that s/he can write a truly compelling parable in which s/he does not believe?

Hauptfrau @ 1:49 and 2:32: Major respect for your comments, giving useful detail of how you and your family worked through a difficult situation. Stuff like that brings the policy debate into better focus. Especially in a complex “squishy” field like education, the plural of anecdote is data...

One other point: “ALL public school employees get first dibs for the charter, before there is a real lottery.” Excuse me for being so dumb, but that sounds like, well, fraud. A rigged game with a secret priority list. In other words, the non-public school applicants to the lottery are being used as window dressing on a theft by the priority applicants of an opportunity being provided at public expense. Simply put, a con.

By public school employees. Why am I not surprised?

Joe Smith said...

"Federal govt should have no say at all in schools and how they are run."

Winner.

Kirk Parker said...

MDT,

You and browndog have some history or something?

All human experience, even if we haven't studied stats, tells us the average teacher is going to be... wait for it... average.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Kirk Parker,

You and browndog have some history or something?

Not that I know of. Yes, of course, the "average" anything is going to be average. But browndog didn't say "average"; he said "good." And when he says most teachers are not good, I suspect that what he means is that most teachers are driveling morons, which isn't true.

We agree, as I said, a lot more than you'd suspect, because many (not most) teachers are, in fact, driveling morons, so we're just arguing percentages. It seems to me that teachers sort themselves into three groups:

(1) Those whose goal in teaching is to make it into administration. Apparently, e.g., we are supposed to be happy that Becerra, the prospective new Ed. Sec., went from teacher to principal to county administrator in a remarkably short time. That, IMO, is the sign of a "teacher" who wants to live as far from actual students as possible. Not good. Again, there are good administrators out there; I've met some. But in general the rush to administration -- fueled, of course, by our plethora of manufactured credentials, about which I haven't the strength to be sufficiently vituperative this morning -- is a bad sign.

(2) Those who, on the contrary, just want "a job": They get into the classroom, then teach the identical course for the next thirty years, doing their required "professional development" but otherwise altering nothing. Clock-punchers. I've met a number of these, too.

(3) Everyone else. People who care about their students, are anxious to teach better wherever they can, are alert to changes in the social environment and their students' ways of life. People who want to work better, not always the same. (By which, btw, I do not mean that they want to change what they teach to this year's Entirely! New! Morals!; those are a separate and special set of bastards.) There are a lot of people in this group, and they are the ones who make school livable for students and for one another.

Sam L. said...

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, Democrats AGAINST democracy!

Narayanan said...

Has anyone seen "sociological" character study of people (parents and teachers) who favor alternative to public-school to compare with the sociology of the teacher-union - pta - child welfare and interests with tax financing?

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 301 of 301   Newer› Newest»