Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[hack]

Good point, Jeff. This whole notion is stupid. It's not as if there's a sea change in the ease of firing someone in the private sector -- ask any HR manager how long it takes once you'd like to be rid of someone. These private/public distinctions are not either/or scenarios, and the similarties in organizational culture are greater than the differences. Even if they weren't, this is just academic bullshit anyways. These theories were fresh and untested decades ago, and they sure did make sense on paper. That's why I was a college objectivist. But we live in reality, not on paper.

Geezer seems to be just treating the forum as if he has a financial stake in getting people to agree with him.

[froot loops]

That's the one thing I was mulling over about this. Da Geezer makes such a big deal about being able to fire teachers and tenure, he overemphasizes the issue. It as if he thinks every corporation is a meritocracy and they are getting rid of nonperformers. A survival of the fittest, if you will. I have worked in a lot of different settings and this generally isn't the case. In most jobs you show up and do your job and you are good until the company has a bad earnings report and maybe you face layoffs.

I've had 3 kids in school and I can't think of one teacher that needed to be canned.

[Da Geezer]

Surely shouldn't be a paywall. Here is a google link and then the top item is the article

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=trump%27s-education-pick-a-win-for-public-school-parents

Jeff:

I'd like to read the whole thing but if you are advancing the argument that plenty of poor black folks send their kids to charter schools I don't think that makes irrelevant the point that some hold here that charter schools (1) are business operations with profit as the primary objective, (2) that alone makes it questionable that this particular public interest (education of American youth) can be placed in the hands of private ownership.

Well, we are advancing the argument at least.

I have never heard of anyone in the charter school movement, EVER, say that profit was one of their top 10 motives in supporting charter schools.

How would you like to put your money into a business which relies totally on a government license that is revocable at any time, depending on which way the political winds blow? That amount of risk is too extreme, and no self-respecting business person would put his company in such an uncontrollable situation. The only reason those of us who invest in or take part in charter schools is to try to stop the erosion of the education system, particularly as it affects poor and minority children. The WSJ article points out that we are now 31st out of 35 internationally while spending double what others spend. The only reason "profit" is mentioned by those of us that are concerned with education is that the left's solution is always to spend more money on the problem, so pointing out the enormous sums spent (wasted) in the current system is relevant. When schools are run like a business, the government is not going to allow you to make a profit anyway because, to the left, profit is a dirty word. That's why we receive 63 cents for every dollar spent on the government system.

Charters are a silly investment if monetary return is your goal. If there are publically traded firms doing charter schools, look up the return, but keep in mind that everything could be wiped out tomorrow by a Governor, President, or the SC. I am certain that the De Vos family views their involvement with charters the same way as their involvement with the several hospitals, auditoriums, and museums they have built. That is certainly why I'm involved (on a much smaller scale).

[Da Geezer]

Geezer seems to be just treating the forum as if he has a financial stake in getting people to agree with him.

Thank you!

[Da Geezer]

froot:

That's the one thing I was mulling over about this. Da Geezer makes such a big deal about being able to fire teachers and tenure, he overemphasizes the issue. It as if he thinks every corporation is a meritocracy and they are getting rid of nonperformers. A survival of the fittest, if you will.

That is a valid point. But later you say that, if a corporation has a bad quarter, then you face layoffs. Perhaps the layoffs are the result of someone higher up screwing up.

But your basic point that we are trending to fewer and fewer meritocracies. I surely see that too. I just don't think that trend is a good thing. It's like giving a trophy to everyone. To me, it signifies acceptance of lower achievement overall. I'm a believer in American Exceptionalism, so you can see why I would want a meritocracy.

My brother-in-law was a Superintendent of a government school, as were two of my cousins and two of my nephews. So you might say we have interesting discussions on Thanksgiving. I know that all of them kept files on the worst teachers, trying to get them fired, never with any success. Some of these teachers were harming kids.

One thing that tenure does is it guarantees that no teacher has any financial incentive to be exceptional. That is a lot to give up. Tenure is based on the premise that every teacher who is in the same school system for 4 years deserves a job for life, or at least for 30 part-time years. I find that unacceptable both in terms of cost and in terms of psychology. Then add the Teacher Unions' political activity which I consider detrimental at best and corrupt at worst, and you might see why I look for reasons why others defend tenure.

If I had my way, becoming a teacher would be far harder, and the pay would be far higher. But the expected outcomes would be far higher too.

[hack]

Surely shouldn't be a paywall. Here is a google link and then the top item is the article

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=trump%27s-education-pick-a-win-for-public-school-parents

Jeff:

Well, we are advancing the argument at least.

I have never heard of anyone in the charter school movement, EVER, say that profit was one of their top 10 motives in supporting charter schools.

How would you like to put your money into a business which relies totally on a government license that is revocable at any time, depending on which way the political winds blow? That amount of risk is too extreme, and no self-respecting business person would put his company in such an uncontrollable situation. The only reason those of us who invest in or take part in charter schools is to try to stop the erosion of the education system, particularly as it affects poor and minority children. The WSJ article points out that we are now 31st out of 35 internationally while spending double what others spend. The only reason "profit" is mentioned by those of us that are concerned with education is that the left's solution is always to spend more money on the problem, so pointing out the enormous sums spent (wasted) in the current system is relevant. When schools are run like a business, the government is not going to allow you to make a profit anyway because, to the left, profit is a dirty word. That's why we receive 63 cents for every dollar spent on the government system.

Charters are a silly investment if monetary return is your goal. If there are publically traded firms doing charter schools, look up the return, but keep in mind that everything could be wiped out tomorrow by a Governor, President, or the SC. I am certain that the De Vos family views their involvement with charters the same way as their involvement with the several hospitals, auditoriums, and museums they have built. That is certainly why I'm involved (on a much smaller scale).

Oh, ok. I believe you.

[CGVT]

Too bad you are eroding it further.

[Whitley]

If the DeVos family wanted charter schools to be about education, they would not be objecting (and essentially paying off the Michigan State Legislature) to having oversight in Detroit (where 79% of Michigan's charter schools are located) with regards to opening and closing schools. After all, it is all about educating the children right?

[CGVT]

Their ultimate goal is to push the Christian agenda

[froot loops]

There should be much stricter governance of the charter schools in Michigan, but then that would mean some of the gravy trains would be halted. The DeVos family has made the educational system much worse in Michigan.

[froot loops]

Their ultimate goal is to push the Christian agenda

Correct

[Whitley]

There should be much stricter governance of the charter schools in Michigan, but then that would mean some of the gravy trains would be halted. The DeVos family has made the educational system much worse in Michigan.

True and it started with Proposal A.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Their ultimate goal is to push the Christian agenda

Christian schools=awesome
Muslim schools=awful

[iam416]

Christian schools=awesome
Muslim schools=awful

Well, if you're a conservative. If you're a progressive you can go right and flip that. And, more generally:

Islam=wonderful religion we should all embrace
Christianity=evil religion hellbent on foisting its views upon others

This is fun.

[Dr. Strangelove]

We can say MERRY CHRISTMAS AGAIN!!! AT LAST!!