Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

The institutional problem I consider overwhelmingly dominant is poverty and the attendant facts associated therewith -- single parent homes, if you're lucky; higher crime neighborhoods; a general culture of accepted failure/lack of faith in the educational system -- the so-called cycle of poverty.

I don't think addressing teacher unions does much to fix the problem because it does address what I consider the dispositive root cause.

So, while I probably generally agree with you that teacher's unions ought to be rethought, and I completely agree with you on minimizing administrative costs, I see this as a bandaid that maybe saves the schools some money which they can spend on students, but that will have little impact. I mean, my position is that that realistic increases in spending aren't going change outcomes in any real way. Whether the money comes from increased taxes or cost savings is irrelevant to me -- the conclusion is the same.

So, I mean -- it's something that ought to be considered in terms of best practices, but there's no way I think that changes much of anything.

As always, JMO.

[Da Geezer]

Talent:

Ohio spends money on education much more efficiently than does MI. Also, MI has a substantial over-supply of teachers, and has for the last 25 years or so. So, MI has instituted testing so a teacher becomes "highly qualified" in certain areas like math or English. The testing is also divided into "elementary" and "secondary", elementary being grades k-8. A Michigan degree with such an endorsement is highly sought after by other states, particularly Texas and Florida.

I've found that the best way to compare teachers compensation in the several states is to compare the median compensation to the median home price in a given area. I understand that home price is an inexact proxy for the cost of living, but CoL figures vary widely in closely proximate areas. Doing this, MI teachers are paid roughly 8% more than the next closest state. California pays the least.

I was writing this when you posted, and I don't mean this as reply to what you posted.

[entropy]

I'd break parents with school age kids into 3 categories:

1) Those who don't care. Kid gets in trouble at school, they do nothing. Kid is falling behind in their reading level, they do nothing. Kid shows up at school in the dead of winter in shorts and a tshirt.. they just don't care. There are varying degrees of this, but those who are preoccupied with everything but being a parent fall into this category. An Example: A child poured milk on another students head and when the parents were called to discuss the reason their son would be in private dining the parents told the assistant principle "we didn't see it so there's nothing we can do".

2) My kid is special parents. The kid gets in trouble at school, the parents yell at the teacher or principal. The Kid is falling behind in their reading level, the teacher isn't doing enough. Kid shows up in the dead of winter in brand new clothes and parent complains to school that they shouldn't go outside because Johnny's new pants might get dirty. There are varying degrees of this, but basically they're child can do no wrong and are at the center of these parents universe. An Example: During this past week students were being tested to determine reading and math levels and teaching plans would be adjusted accordingly. One parent entered her daughters classroom during the test with a fish in a bucket. Their youngest caught a fish and she wanted to share it with her siblings. So instead of taking a picture, she brought it to class and interrupted what was supposed to be a time of focus for the students. She was puzzled and furious when asked to leave.

3) Adults who try to parent: The kid gets in trouble at school, the parents address at home. The Kid is falling behind in their reading level, the parents read at home or get a tutor. Kid shows up in the dead of winter with appropriate clothes for playing outside. Parenting is tough.. you make mistakes.. you don't have perfect information. This group usually trusts the schools, probably worries too much about how their child is perceived but does want them to behave and do well. Sometimes they volunteer and other times they take off work to be at important events. This is the majority... but I'd say a shrinking majority. And that has nothing to do with wealth.. We collectively seem to be asking less and less of our kids with each passing generation.

jmo

[Da Geezer]

In reply, Talent, I'd say that it is not essential to address unions if tenure were eliminated. That would take care of itself.

I'd also agree that the "cycle of poverty" is the root cause of the poor performance of urban schools. What I propose are items that are possible politically. I think the Great Society, and the trillions of dollars wasted with no impact on poverty levels, speaks for itself.

[AlabamAlum]

CFB starts tomorrow and you people are arguing about inner city schools, charter schools, and Zeus knows what else.


Son, I am a disappoint.

[Da Geezer]

All true, Entropy. Now what? I say facilitate the parents in group # 3.

[Da Geezer]

CFB starts tomorrow and you people are arguing about inner city schools, charter schools, and Zeus knows what else.

Perhaps it is the thread. Or else it might be the difference in Michigan fans v. Alabama fans, lol.

[entropy]

All true, Entropy. Now what? I say facilitate the parents in group # 3.

I think it is more difficult than people think..

Those in group 2, for example, are often critical of others lack of involvement. Super mom or Super dad is the only way to raise a child. They don't see the brat they are raising. They see high involvement which means you are a good parent. (Yes, I'm generalizing.. but you get the point).

But I'd start with Schools should have more authority and school boards need to support them more and parents less. I think we've over compensated for problems in the past where we've neutered school officials.

[froot loops]

He'll yes I am focusing on the 47k because that's a lot of kids, the school district is a disaster and the problem gets excaberted when they lose the funds.

Do you take everyone who tries to escape? If you only take 25 percent of the apicants where do the other 75 percent go?

[Da Geezer]

I just received this today: Michigan teachers the highest paid in the nation.

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/22723

[Da Geezer]

But I'd start with Schools should have more authority and school boards need to support them more and parents less. I think we've over compensated for problems in the past where we've neutered school officials.

Good point. I found that, when having a disciplinary hearing, it was best for Grandma to be present. Grandmas almost universally employ corporal punishment and recognize the nexus between discipline and quality education. We are not going the right way on this as a country. I only remember being spanked in school 3 times. That is probably what is wrong with me!

[Da Geezer]

He'll yes I am focusing on the 47k because that's a lot of kids, the school district is a disaster and the problem gets excaberted when they lose the funds.

They lose students too, and don't have to "provide" services. Of course, for a system that you rightly call "a disaster", this means that the folks who caused the problem in the first place loose their cushy jobs. Not a market economy by any means, but rough justice in that it impacts most those who caused the disaster.

Tenure, froot, tenure. Why do you support it?

[froot loops]

I've not said one thing about tenure for or against so ask somebody else.

Answer the question, do you take everyone who "escapes" or do you cherry pick?

[iam416]

Froot:

Do spend as much money as it takes to "save" ALL 47,000 "left behind"?

[Da Geezer]

Elimination of tenure would have zero effect. Nada. Holding up one bad example per 1000 teachers is nothing more than hyperbole from the anti-educator echo chamber....

Well, I remember you were the guy who agreed with DSL's post that he said showed 14 cases of multiple registrations out of 82,000,000, when, in fact, the number from the posted article was 5,000,000. So you accepted a figure that is .00028% of the actual total in the article you agreed with. So you were off by about 350,000 times.

Of course, you are the fellow who never shows his ID when voting (in either Iowa or Michigan), and who sent his kids to a rural charter school that pays starting teachers $ 23,000. There are no rural charters in Michigan, unless you consider Canton to be rural. But you won't even hint at where you are located, and I assume that is because much of what you post is simply a lie and made up out of whole cloth. What is the name of the charter that, as you later claimed, increased its starting pay to $ 34,000 in the last 10 years. Pure fabrication. No voter ID in Michigan, again, pure fabrication.