To his credit Obama has called for tougher standards in public education, although I'm admittedly unfamiliar with his Common Core standards so I can't comment on that. New York was among the first to jump on the Common Core bandwagon and the first results are in.


Test Scores Sink as New York Adopts Tougher Benchmarks (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/nyregion/under-new-standards-students-see-sharp-decline-in-test-scores.html?_r=0)

The number of New York students passing state reading and math exams dropped drastically this year, education officials reported on Wednesday, unsettling parents, principals and teachers and posing new challenges to a national effort to toughen academic standards.

In New York City, 26 percent of students in third through eighth grade passed the tests in English, and 30 percent passed in math, according to the New York State Education Department.

I actually had to do a double take on that, um less than a third of 3-8 grade NYC students could pass math and English? Are you kidding me? And then I read this...


The exams were some of the first in the nation to be aligned with a more rigorous set of standards known as the Common Core, which emphasize deep analysis and creative problem-solving over short answers and memorization. Last year, under an easier test, 47 percent of city students passed in English, and 60 percent in math.

Well, that's comforting - about half can pass with easier standards. Really?

Apparently no one was too eager to share the results.


City and state officials spent months trying to steel the public for the grim figures.

But when the results were released, many educators responded with shock that their students measured up so poorly against the new yardsticks of achievement.

Chrystina Russell, principal of Global Technology Preparatory in East Harlem, said she did not know what she would tell parents, who will receive scores for their children in late August. At her middle school, which serves a large population of students from poor families, 7 percent of students were rated proficient in English, and 10 percent in math. Last year, those numbers were 33 percent and 46 percent, respectively.

I'm stunned. I knew public education was a joke but that's pathetic, and yes I lay most of the blame on the stranglehold liberals have on public education - you have reaped what you've sown. I am appalled especially that this is how the poor are being served in the education system.

But give me your canned talking points anyway about how it's all Republican's fault, if we'd only spend a gazillion dollars more and quit siphoning off dollars to send poor kids to schools that don't suck, blah, blah, blah.

No wonder Matt Damon is sending his kids to private school.

I wouldn't mind giving some talking points, but I would rather leave out the, "blah,blah,blah". Strange coming from a guy who likes to have an honest discussion about issues.

I think that's the point of being snarky about predictable answers, give us something besides DNC talking points, like honesty.

Forget most of the standardized testing and bring back

1. Palmer Method of Penmanship
2. memorizing times tables
3. Roman numerals to 1,000
4. recess twice a day
5. half-hour lunch with teacher (and aides?) in the room -- one adult reading a chapter a day from an age-appropriate classic while the students eat
6. geography
7. art and music appreciation with practical application
8. memorization of poetry, etc.

I think that's the point of being snarky about predictable answers, give us something besides DNC talking points, like honesty.

My answers generally are not predictable.

You usually complain when someone gets snarky. From you original posting I get the feeling you are going to give me your usual talking points on education. I am happy to have a honest conservation so long as we leave out the blah blah stuff.

Well speech you want an honest answer, I think the point of education has been lost in much of the western world. There is too much reliance on technology and not enough on conveying basic skills

We've gone back to basic skills and having students work on solving problems from the beginning to an end in common core. It's much needed in various parts of the country. It keeps teachers accountable.

Forget most of the standardized testing and bring back

1. Palmer Method of Penmanship
2. memorizing times tables
3. Roman numerals to 1,000
4. recess twice a day
5. half-hour lunch with teacher (and aides?) in the room -- one adult reading a chapter a day from an age-appropriate classic while the students eat
6. geography
7. art and music appreciation with practical application
8. memorization of poetry, etc.

That's a start. :)

My answers generally are not predictable.

You usually complain when someone gets snarky. From you original posting I get the feeling you are going to give me your usual talking points on education. I am happy to have a honest conservation so long as we leave out the blah blah stuff.

Trust me Tut, I know you're answers are unpredictable and I like that about you. The blah blah blah is directed at someone else and I love snark, I employ it often. It's the self- righteous condescending snobbery coupled with repetitive bullsh*t I don't care for.

We've gone back to basic skills and having students work on solving problems from the beginning to an end in common core. It's much needed in various parts of the country. It keeps teachers accountable.

I'm all for that, I've documented too many times how too many teachers and their unions are more concerned for themselves than the children... while claiming "it's for the children." Let's have some accountability again and give parents a choice.

I'm all for that, I've documented too many times how too many teachers and their unions are more concerned for themselves than the children...while claiming "it's for the children." Let's have some accountability again and give parents a choice.

Parents do have a choice in many areas. My school is a school of choice. It has the highest test scores and students are chosen by lottery. It's an amazing place to work. :)

Parents do have a choice in many areas. My school is a school of choice. It has the highest test scores and students are chosen by lottery. It's an amazing place to work. :)

Awesome, now if we can end the attack against choice in other places.

Are there enough good schools where EVERY child has a choice? What happens to the ones that don't win the lottery?

Looking at math and reading scores, America is still behind many other nations on education. This years lists does not even have the US in the top 10 of nations at 8th grade or high school level.

When we lived in Atlanta, our friend who is on the school board there even told us, if we had any other choice, not to send our child to the public school, that they were on the school board of.

Are there enough good schools where EVERY child has a choice? What happens to the ones that don't win the lottery?

Our district has the highest scores out of every district within hundreds of miles. All of our schools are excellent--my school is a model being watched by all of California. We get lots of visitors.

I wouldn't worry you are just above the PISA averages on OECD measures. It isn't a contest some nations place a higher value on education

Are there enough good schools where EVERY child has a choice? What happens to the ones that don't win the lottery?

The answer to your question is 'of course not ' . Public education has been in a long period of rut and deterioration .But unlike your canned 'throw money at the problem' solutions ,school choice is the way out. It forces competition among the schools which in turn compels schools to perform better . You should be applauding that there are demonstrated proven results when choice is offered. But of course ,like a true 'progressive' ,the only choice you like is the choice to kill your baby.

the answer to your question is 'of course not ' . Public education has been in a long period of rut and deterioration .But unlike your canned 'throw money at the problem' solutions ,school choice is the way out. It forces competition among the schools which in turn compels schools to perform better . You should be applauding that there are demonstrated proven results when choice is offered. But of course ,like a true 'progressive' ,the only choice you like is the choice to kill your baby.


Tom, this is the same tired old rhetoric. It is the same old. "one solution fits all" approach. Your canned "choice" is no way out of the problems that have been specifically canvassed in this thread.

Competition is great for a sport or business but kids learning to compete in a tough world need skills and understanding that goes beyond just marketing them for private profit. While there are many private educational institutes that perform well there are many that do not.

My question was specifically what happens to the kids that lose the lottery and even beyond that what's left for those that have PUBLIC funds siphoned from PUBLIC schools to private schools that well off parents get subsidized for there child's education. Many urban cities are caught up in this shift of funds from public poor to private well to do so I think asking what happens when all the slots are filled and a voucher means nothing.

My point is while more may have choices, all will not. A majority will not. And then we have stories like this,

Bennett resigns over Ind. school grade change scandal (http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/indiana/bennett-resigns-over-ind-school-grade-change-scandal)


On the way out, Bennett said that he did the right thing last year when he changed the grade given to the Christel House Academy from a "C" to an "A." Nevertheless, he's out of a job and Indiana Gov. Mike Pence on Thursday called for a thorough review of the state's grading system.

I would hate to think our kids can become leverage for politically connected types to et federal money in there pockets. Until all the data is in though so we can see if indeed private schools are the answer I remain skeptical if this is the total answer.

Charter Schools vs. Traditional Public Schools: Which One is Under-Performing? | PublicSchoolReview.com (http://www.publicschoolreview.com/articles/123)


As CREDO, a national organization devoted to charter school research reveals, the Stanford analysts compared reading and math state-based standardized test scores between charter school vs. public school students in 15 states, as well as scores in the District of Columbia. In fact, in further evaluating the data, experts found that 37 percent of charter schools posted improvements in math scores; however, these improvement rates were significantly below the improvement rates of students in the public school classrooms. Furthermore, 46 percent of charter schools experienced math improvements that were "statistically indistinguishable" from the average improvement rates shown by public school students.

Are there enough good schools where EVERY child has a choice? What happens to the ones that don't win the lottery?

And where they do exist why deny them?

Tom, this is the same tired old rhetoric. It is the same old. "one solution fits all" approach. Your canned "choice" is no way out of the problems that have been specifically canvassed in this thread.
Teacherjenn is in the system and appears to disagree with you. But when you talk of "one solution fits all" approaches why don't you also speak of the demonstrably failed public school system that we have had since at least the 1960s ? The progressive solution is to tax more and throw more money into a failed system. My God ! You could put gold tiles in every school with the money wasted by the administrators of almost every district in the country ! Instead ,many schools are in serious state of disrepair... forget about their primary purpose ;which is to actually educate the kids.
I don't care if you or anyone else considers it tired old rhetoric. When put to the test ,it's worked.

the answer to your question is 'of course not ' . Public education has been in a long period of rut and deterioration .But unlike your canned 'throw money at the problem' solutions ,school choice is the way out. It forces competition among the schools which in turn compels schools to perform better . You should be applauding that there are demonstrated proven results when choice is offered. But of course ,like a true 'progressive' ,the only choice you like is the choice to kill your baby.

If this method worked you wouldn't have the problem, all the competition does is cause the better teachers to gravitate to the better schools and medocracy reigns everywhere else.. The problem of poor education lies in opportunity and disadvantage and when you don't have opportunity to go to anywhere but the school in the disadvantaged area what do you get, poor self esteem and poor grades. Have you ever wondered why a place like Russia has a better education system than you do, it is because education is valued. Do you remember no child left behind a republican initiative that went nowhere

The problem of poor education lies in opportunity and disadvantage and when you don't have opportunity to go to anywhere but the school in the disadvantaged area what do you get, poor self esteem and poor grades.
Duhhh.Why do you think I support choice ? Where poor kids are given vouchers to go to better schools ;their parents have the CHOICE to either send them to the local school ,or to a better school. Bottom line is that the public education system is a relic of the 20th century that needs an influx of innovation. But the libs are stuck in the 60s .


Do you remember no child left behind a republican initiative that went nowhere yes ;and it's failure is why the emperor's system will fail . We don't need a central command system . There is NOTHING in the constitution that gives the Federal Government the power to dictate national standards on the education systems of the nation.

I don't think its factual to lump good and decent performing schools into the same category as really bad ones just as its not fair to lump under preforming private schools in with success stories, but its obvious schools like firehouses, and public work require maintenance and that requires money. That's what makes or breaks any community, and as the school crumbles in disrepair, the whole neighborhood suffers greatly.

We bailout banks and build stadiums, but can't fix a leaky gym roof. Priorities are a bit screwed up I'd say. And it shows what kind of nation we have become. Keep the rhetoric, I would rather have results.

We bailout banks and build stadiums, but can't fix a leaky gym roof. Priorities are a bit screwed up I'd say. And it shows what kind of nation we have become. Keep the rhetoric, I would rather have results.

I gave you results and they speak for themselves.


In New York City, 26 percent of students in third through eighth grade passed the tests in English, and 30 percent passed in math, according to the New York State Education Department.


Last year, under an easier test, 47 percent of city students passed in English, and 60 percent in math.


Chrystina Russell, principal of Global Technology Preparatory in East Harlem, said she did not know what she would tell parents, who will receive scores for their children in late August. At her middle school, which serves a large population of students from poor families, 7 percent of students were rated proficient in English, and 10 percent in math. Last year, those numbers were 33 percent and 46 percent, respectively.

Are aiming low enough yet?

You see ,Tal would reward such performance with more money. Try even firing a teacher with tenure who's classes perform as badly. Good luck with that . Here in NY they can't even can pervert predatory teachers .

My state fights school vouchers and Fair tax. That's their backward thinking !

The results say that raising the bar for everyone makes performance go down, but that's not a bad thing at all in my view. Keep raising the bar and the results go up in time. Then we can compete with the higher standards that make us better. Making the numbers look good with shams for standards serve no one well in the long run.

And yes, I believe in fixing holes in the roof of the gym, a no brainer in my mind. I fail to see the point in compromising ciricculum safety AND maintenance and still call it a school. It's not. It's a sham.

Raising the bar a bad thing? Great excuse for dumbing down everyone!

Raising the bar a bad thing? Great excuse for dumbing down everyone!

Speech said it was bad, I said it was good.

Raising the bar a bad thing? Great excuse for dumbing down everyone!
Always keep the bar high -- and raise it even higher. Kids are competitive and want to succeed. I leaned fast as a new teacher, do not put students in various levels of reading groups. The poor readers pull down each other, and they all know instantly, no matter what you call the groups, that the "blue" or "elephant" group contains the poor readers.

Speech said it was bad, I said it was good.

Well now that's a total lie.

I gave you results and they speak for themselves.







Are aiming low enough yet?

Okay maybe I misunderstood.

Okay maybe I misunderstood.

Thanks buddy, that's better.

These are the people who run the NY state education system
Misspelled Road Sign Points Way to Popular "Jonse" Beach | NBC New York (http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Jones-Beach-Sign-Misspelled-Robert-Moses-Parkway-Transportation-Department-218976231.html)

.
teacherjenn is in the system and appears to disagree with you. But when you talk of "one solution fits all" approaches why don't you also speak of the demonstrably failed public school system that we have had since at least the 1960s ? The progressive solution is to tax more and throw more money into a failed system. My God ! you could put gold tiles in every school with the money wasted by the administrators of almost every district in the country ! Instead ,many schools are in serious state of disrepair .....forget about their primary purpose ;which is to actually educate the kids.
I don't care if you or anyone else considers it tired old rhetoric. When put to the test ,it's worked.

I would say that Teacher Jenn actually agrees with me. As far as I can tell she is saying that what is needed is a common core curriculum to lift standards. In other words, a more towards a national curriculum.

I am not saying that choice in education is a bad thing per se. What I have said, and will continue to say is that choice is a bad thing when it comes to lifting standards in the basics. I think it is pretty obvious that educational relativism hasn't worked for you. In this respect "choice" has had the opposite effect. You are now competing in the global market place.

It is not the private schools the home schools that are failing our children.

It is not the private schools the home schools that are failing our children.

Your whole system is failing you and it has nothing to do with public versus private.
Look at your universities. You have some of the best in the world and some of the worst in the world and this has nothing to do with private versus public.

Your whole system is failing you and it has nothing to do with public versus private.
Look at your universities. You have some of the best in the world and some of the worst in the world and this has nothing to do with private versus public.

Sure it does, private schools educate and public schools don't. College is a whole other subject, though many are plagued by the same problems on a greater scale and the left's answer is to double down on both. It's not an issue of standards, it's an issue of ideology.

.
teacherjenn is in the system and appears to disagree with you. But when you talk of "one solution fits all" approaches why don't you also speak of the demonstrably failed public school system that we have had since at least the 1960s ? The progressive solution is to tax more and throw more money into a failed system. My God ! you could put gold tiles in every school with the money wasted by the administrators of almost every district in the country ! Instead ,many schools are in serious state of disrepair .....forget about their primary purpose ;which is to actually educate the kids.
I don't care if you or anyone else considers it tired old rhetoric. When put to the test ,it's worked.

Yes, I am in the system. Our district is not wealthy by any means, but we took a hard look at the problems in education. We visited schools in fancy areas with all the resources present. Their test scores weren't much better than ours. We came up with a plan: build a new school staffed by teachers tired of mediocrity. We base every lesson on teaching our students to problem solve and we steer them toward careers in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. Next, we allowed students for all over the valley (population 200,000+) to apply, even if they were not in our enrollment area. It worked! We had a wait list of hundreds for the inaugural year and even more this year. If parents are willing to drive their children and purchase uniforms, this is a fantastic opportunity for a public school. We've had visits from all over the state with superintendents and other school groups. Our test scores just arrived yesterday, and I imagine they will be 100 points higher at this school. It is amazing and it shows that public education can work.

It also sounds like you've given them choice, which is what so many others are fighting against.

It also sounds like you've given them choice, which is what so many others are fighting against.
If I were younger and livelier, I would go to under-performing public schools to figure out why they are that way, and then find ways to change that. Is it the curriculum? The teachers? The lack of expectations? Poor parent involvement?

I had a friend who taught remedial English in a community college. He was horrified by the dearth of writing and grammar skills displayed by his students. No one (not even the bright students) knows how to create an outline any longer or can diagram a sentence. I remember being taught those two things in a NC public school's 3rd grade (Yay, Mrs. Moose! -- yep, that was her name). Those two skills saved the day for me many a time.

We aren't fighting against choice, at least I am not, just acknowledge that some have choices and some do not. My premise was in the question at the beginning, what of the kid who lose the lottery for those choice schools or fail to be accepted in those that are full?

But I also take issue with the broad premise that public schools don't educate, because even with the data that says some fall short on the tests there are still those that exceed in the not so great schools and many more with special, and specific needs, some outside the class room that cannot be addressed in the class room.

A voucher means little to those that have no where to use it, and is unfair without a fair means test either. To ignore the kids that don't win a lottery at a good school is making losers of them and they must be supported in some ways. How can we NOT?

And my question is unanswered, why deny choice to those who have a chance to do better? You say you aren't against choice but if everyone can't have it then no one should?

I am with WG, identify and solve the problems in public schools. I thought I was clear here (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3525577-post19.html).

Sure it does, private schools educate and public schools don't. College is a whole other subject, though many are plagued by the same problems on a greater scale and the left's answer is to double down on both. It's not an issue of standards, it's an issue of ideology.

Even if private schools education students to a higher standard. This so called higher standard is still not good enough. As pointed out by some people here you are way down the ladder when it comes to the basics. More private schools that teach to this a better standard still won't do enough to get you very far up the ladder.

In my view what is required is national and international benchmarks and this can only be achieved through some type of national curriculum. Educational relativism may have worked in the past but it is inadequate for the modern world.

We do struggle with states having different standards, procedures, policies, and approaches, and fiscal considerations.

Yes, I am in the system. Our district is not wealthy by any means, but we took a hard look at the problems in education. We visited schools in fancy areas with all the resources present. Their test scores weren't much better than ours. We came up with a plan: build a new school staffed by teachers tired of mediocrity. We base every lesson on teaching our students to problem solve and we steer them toward careers in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. Next, we allowed students for all over the valley (population 200,000+) to apply, even if they were not in our enrollment area. It worked! We had a wait list of hundreds for the inaugural year and even more this year. If parents are willing to drive their children and purchase uniforms, this is a fantastic opportunity for a public school. We've had visits from all over the state with superintendents and other school groups. Our test scores just arrived yesterday, and I imagine they will be 100 points higher at this school. It is amazing and it shows that public education can work.

Congratulations .I hope a similar model is adopted . I know that standardized testing is in part an attempt to make teachers accountable . I see no such effort on a national basis to make the school systems and the administrators accountable . I agree it is not a matter of wealth . I have seen innovation improve student performance in some of the poorest school systems . Michelle Rhee's efforts in the DC districts were very positive. I'm assuming that you are in a decentralized 'Magnet School'.

In my humble opinion ,school uniforms should be mandatory . If kids want to wear "colors " to help them identify then let them wear their school colors.

We do struggle with states having different standards, procedures, policies, and approaches, and fiscal considerations.

States with some of your so called higher standards are failing their students at higher rates .Did you not see the op ? NY spends as much per student and claims to have some of the highest standards in the country . Still stuck on this nation standards nonsense I see. If the problem is basal then we have a long way to go . Throwing money at it doesn't solve the problem We could start with teachers being educated in the subject matter they will teach instead of going to higher education to learn teaching concepts .
America's Teachers Are Sharing Their Low Grades With America's Children - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddavenport/2013/07/14/americas-teachers-are-sharing-their-low-grades-with-americas-children/)

teachers being educated in the subject matter they will teach instead of going to higher education to learn teaching concepts .

Back in the '60s, the teachers college I went to gave us a lot of theory courses, but little practical stuff. At least all of us had had good teachers ourselves and were very literate. We had asked for courses on classroom management and were told, "No, it will all come clear when you teach."

Nowadays, too many teachers had an average to poor education (or they weren't paying attention). I remember some of the stories my younger son told me about some of his teachers who couldn't spell, didn't know parts of speech, didn't know how to assign material or write tests, and generally slacked off (probably just like they did as students). The questions that get posted on this site say a lot about education in general.

states with some of your so called higher standards are failing their students at higher rates .Did you not see the op ? NY spends as much per student and claims to have some of the highest standards in the country . Still stuck on this nation standards nonsense I see. If the problem is basal then we have a long way to go . Throwing money at it doesn't solve the problem We could start with teachers being educated in the subject matter they will teach instead of going to higher education to learn teaching concepts .
America's Teachers Are Sharing Their Low Grades With America's Children - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddavenport/2013/07/14/americas-teachers-are-sharing-their-low-grades-with-americas-children/)


Tom, I looked back through the posts. Tal has said nothing about national standards. The only replies that make reference in this area have come from Teacher Jenn and myself. Especially me.

Are you trying to avoid our posts?

You are free to respond to my observation regardless of who I addressed them to.

you are free to respond to my observation regardless of who I addressed them to.

Thanks.

I though that might get your attention.

I am appalled as you are about how the poor kids are treated in the bastion of liberalism, but it's a national problem not confined, or unique to just New York, or liberals. Seems to me the income disparities has more to do with having better choices than the politics of education. Privatizing education is just the latest right wing idea that makes commodities of kids, and shifts the money from poor kids to rich guys with no better results.

Matt Damon is too rich to send his kids to public school as are all the rich and famous and a lousy example of the choice debate. Feeding the idealogical divide does nothing to find the collective solutions.

Even if private schools education students to a higher standard. This so called higher standard is still not good enough. As pointed out by some people here you are way down the ladder when it comes to the basics. More private schools that teach to this a better standard still won't do enough to get you very far up the ladder.

In my view what is required is national and international benchmarks and this can only be achieved through some type of national curriculum. Educational relativism may have worked in the past but it is inadequate for the modern world.

I believe that was the point of the thread, national standards have only resulted in even lower scores. The problem is much more than that, public schools are a 'liberal bastion' as even Tal acknowledges and the usual answer is to throw more money at it and fight choice tooth and nail keeping kids in failing schools.

Damon is the perfect example, choice for me but not for thee.

Chicago Public has closed 49 schools, making students walk farther (through bad neighborhoods) to new schools, creating larger populations in those schools, causing all sorts of anxiety in students and their parents, and did not even think to address the problems in the closed schools (many of which were borderline and had potential for being fixed and were not always financial problems).

And why is Chicago broke?

I believe that was the point of the thread, national standards have only resulted in even lower scores. The problem is much more than that, public schools are a 'liberal bastion' as even Tal acknowledges and the usual answer is to throw more money at it and fight choice tooth and nail keeping kids in failing schools.

That's NOT what I said, or even implied. Try to be accurate even if you have to reread it. It's more complex than just National Standards because as we have seen how its implemented is different in every district, and state. City, or rural.

And why is Chicago broke?
Because the politicians of both parties put money in their own pockets and in business connections' pockets instead of where it should go. Thank goodness I don't live in Cook County!

Damon is the perfect example, choice for me but not for thee.

He has money and more choices, you get a voucher, and hope you can use it. If you can't..?

And why is Chicago broke?


Don't think democrat and republican, think rich and poor. Which are YOU?

That's NOT what I said, or even implied. Try to be accurate even if you have to reread it. It's more complex than just National Standards because as we have seen how its implemented is different in every district, and state. City, or rural.

A national control of curriculum is highly suspect of becoming a national control of ideas. One size doesn't fit all ;even at the local level. To try to gage performance on a nation level has been proven to be impossible even though it has been tried repeatedly . It didn't work with GHW Bush's America 2000 plan.It failed with Clintoon's America 2000 plan. It failed under GW Bush's NCLB... and the Emperor's Common Core has now been demonstrated to equally be a failure. All we have to do is look to the North. Canada routinely outscores the US in international exams ;but has no national standards .

And what happens to states that have tougher standards than Common Core ? Are they to abandon them for the promise of Federal funding ? Seems to me the goal of Common Core is uniformity instead of excellence.

I see no evidence that higher standards means less federal money.

Nonetheless it's true . States like Massachusetts or Virginia that have standards that exceed the national standards in Common Core will lose out in Federal Funding (not that the Federal Government has any business funding education anyway) .

How? Why?

That's NOT what I said, or even implied. Try to be accurate even if you have to reread it. It's more complex than just National Standards because as we have seen how its implemented is different in every district, and state. City, or rural.

Then the NYC 'bastion of liberalism' if that's what you meant, is just a microcosm of public education as a whole which seems to be worse in the most liberal areas.

How? Why?

You know the feds work, money has strings attached. Do it their way or lose out on funding.

I believe that was the point of the thread, national standards have only resulted in even lower scores. The problem is much more than that, public schools are a 'liberal bastion' as even Tal acknowledges and the usual answer is to throw more money at it and fight choice tooth and nail keeping kids in failing schools.

Of course they have resulted in lower scores that's the whole idea. Exactly the same thing happened here. The first response is to show the inadequacy of educational relativism. The second response is to recognize the work you have to do to bring yourself up the ladder.

It IS the OP I have been addressing with all my posts

How? Why?

Because the so called 'Race to the Top is in fact a Race to the Trough of gvt give aways. States with already higher standards will lose out . In truth however ,Federal money should not be dolled out for education. There is no mandate for it in the constitution.

Because the so called 'Race to the Top is in fact a Race to the Trough of gvt give aways. States with already higher standards will lose out . In truth however ,Federal money should not be dolled out for education. There is no mandate for it in the constitution.

That's only in relative terms. The reality is that you don't have adequate standards.
You have an ideological objection and this is why you are in the position you are at the moment. Time to up skill.

On the contrary... I've seen the progressive ideology in action for the last 50 years. If you are looking for causation it is there where you can start.

Because the so called 'Race to the Top is in fact a Race to the Trough of gvt give aways. States with already higher standards will lose out . In truth however ,Federal money should not be dolled out for education. There is no mandate for it in the constitution.

Doesn't matter, its up to the people that live under the constitution to define what our mandates are, and not the few, but all of us.

on the contrary .... I've seen the progressive ideology in action for the last 50 years. If you are looking for causation it is there where you can start.

Ok then. I'll go along with that being the cause in the last 50 years. That was then, this is now. Time for a fresh approach in a competitive local and international market. As I keep saying, time for private and public sector education to up skill by way of higher common standards.

Good luck with getting the private sector to invest in workers for the future when they won't invest in them now. It a great idea but they rather profit and exploit, and export the talents and kill they need rather than invest in growing their own talent pools here.

Its cheaper with quicker returns. You see what the private sector did with its tax cuts the last 10 years. They invested every place but here. Be nice though if they partnered with the public sector to educate and train the future work force.

Ok then. I'll go along with that being the cause in the last 50 years. That was then, this is now. Time for a fresh approach in a competitive local and international market. As I keep saying, time for private and public sector education to up skill by way of higher common standards.

We've had standards, we had standards when I was in school in the 60s and 70s and I'm fine with higher standards. Standards are not the issue, liberal/progressive experimentation with our children in public schools is the problem.

We've had standards, we had standards when I was in school in the 60s and 70s and I'm fine with higher standards. Standards are not the issue, liberal/progressive experimentation with our children in public schools is the problem.

So, higher standards are really a liberal/progressive experimentation. If this is the case can you explain how this works?

So, higher standards are really a liberal/progressive experimentation. If this is the case can you explain how this works?

Failure to achieve those standards is the result of that experimentation. It's not difficult, you can raise the bar all you want but if you fail to teach the children and hold schools/teachers/administrators accountable standards are useless.

Having children sing odes to Obama instead of teaching them how to read is not good policy, but public education in America is chock full of multicultural, feminist, class-warfare and other propaganda. Ever heard of Raza Studies? Well it has no place in public education, but this liberal/progressive stranglehold on public education is committed to indoctrination instead of education. That is the problem.

P.S. Common Core and Race to the Top are designed to strengthen the federal death grip on education.

Failure to achieve those standards is the result of that experimentation. It's not difficult, you can raise the bar all you want but if you fail to teach the children and hold schools/teachers/administrators accountable standards are useless.

Having children sing odes to Obama instead of teaching them how to read is not good policy, but public education in America is chock full of multicultural, feminist, class-warfare and other propaganda. Ever heard of Raza Studies? Well it has no place in public education, but this liberal/progressive stranglehold on public education is committed to indoctrination instead of education. That is the problem.

The failure of you education system is due to ethnocentric attitudes towards education. Both sides are guilty of this. Ethnocentrism was your strength in the past, now it is your weakness. Time for a new start. May I suggest education as a good starting point.

The growing number of poor people are not all democrats, and the republican controlled enclaves of America seem to have the same problems, both with education, and local services. Ever see the places that a Walmart family have to live and raise families? Despite popular belief its not the feds who control the flow of money to a school, it's the local school boards through there state government. Teachers, fire fighters, and police are losing jobs in cash strapped cities, and that's the governor's keeping high end property taxes low while cutting municipal jobs and giving tax breaks to businesses for cheap jobs.

You wonder where the glitch in education is, look no further than states and local governments defunding education for the poor and redirecting assets and resources to those private institutions run by private for profit individual. Its been shown that it doesn't make education a better product, but it's a more expensive, and profitable one for a few well connected entrepreneurs.

I mean how do you expect to compete on a global stage when the local one is screwed up? Not a lot of hope with 31 states run by right wing governors who rather regulate a females reproductive system than create middle class jobs.

Well there you have it.

Amazing how no matter the issue Tal has the same rant.

Two recent events — one on the east coast and one on the west coast — raise painful questions about whether we are really serious when we say that we want better education for minority children.

One of these events was an announcement by Dunbar High School in Washington, D.C. that it plans on August 19th to begin "an entire week of activities to celebrate the grand opening of our new $160 million state-of-the-art school building."

The painful irony in all this is that the original Dunbar High School building, which opened in 1916, housed a school with a record of high academic achievements for generations of black students, despite the inadequacies of the building and the inadequacies of the financial support that the school received.

By contrast, today's Dunbar High School is just another ghetto school with abysmal standards, despite Washington's record of having some of the country's highest levels of money spent per pupil — and some of the lowest test score results.

Housing an educational disaster in an expensive new building is all too typical of what political incentives produce.

We pay a lot of lip service to educational excellence. But too many institutions and individuals that have produced good educational results for minority students have not only failed to get support, but have even been undermined.

A recent example on the west coast is a charter school operation in Oakland called the American Indian Model Schools. The high school part of this operation has been ranked among the best high schools in the nation. Its students' test scores rank first in its district and fourth in the state of California.

But the California State Board of Education announced plans to shut down this charter school — immediately. Its students would have had to attend inferior public schools this September, except that a challenge in court stopped this sudden shutdown.

Why such a hurry to take drastic action? Because of a claim of financial improprieties against the charter schools' founder and former head, Ben Chavis.

Ben Chavis has not been found guilty of anything in a court of law. Nor has he even been brought to trial, though that would seem to be the normal thing to do if the charges were serious.

More important, the children have not been accused of anything. Nor is there any reason for urgency in immediately depriving them of an excellent education they are not likely to get in their local public schools.

What Ben Chavis and the American Indian Model Schools are really guilty of is creating academic excellence that shows up the public school system, both by this school's achievements and by the methods used to create those achievements, which go against the educational dogmas prevailing in the failing public schools.

If it seems strange that there would be a vendetta against an educator who has defied the education establishment and thereby improved the education of minority students, the fact is that Ben Chavis is only the latest in a long line of educators who have done just that — and aroused animosity, and even vindictiveness, as a result.

Washington's former public school head, Michelle Rhee, raised test scores in that city's school system and was demonized by the education establishment and politicians. She has left.

Years ago, high school math teacher Jaime Escalante, whose success in teaching Mexican American students was celebrated in the movie "Stand and Deliver," was eventually hounded out of Garfield High School in Los Angeles. Yet, while he was there, about one-fourth of all Mexican American students — in the entire country — who passed Advanced Placement Calculus came from that one school.

Marva Collins, who established a very successful private school for black children in Chicago, doing so on a shoestring, was likewise the target of hostility when she was a dedicated teacher in the public schools.

Other examples could be cited of educators who produced outstanding results for minority students — in New York, Houston and other places — and faced the wrath of the education establishment, which sees schools as places to provide jobs for teachers, rather than education for students, and which will not tolerate challenges to its politically correct dogmas.

http://www.creators.com/print/conservative/thomas-sowell/are-we-serious-about-education.html

Well there you have it.

Amazing how no matter the issue Tal has the exact same rant.

No matter the issue its always the liberals fault.

No matter the issue its always the liberals fault.

No, conservatives have been wrong once or twice.

Here is another example of the ideological cesspool that is public education... instead of teaching math they're teaching the "Art of Zinn." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324769704579008453713889352.html)


In Zinn's telling, America is synonymous with brute domination that goes back to Christopher Columbus. "The American system," he writes in "A People's History," is "the most ingenious system of control in world history." The founding fathers were self-serving elitists defined by "guns and greed."

For Americans stuck in impoverished communities and failing schools, Zinn's devotion to history as a "political act" can seem appealing. He names villains (capitalists), condemns their misdeeds, and calls for action to redistribute wealth so that, eventually, all of the following material goods will be "free—to everyone: food, housing, health care, education, transportation." The study of history, Zinn taught, demands this sort of social justice.

Schools with social-justice instruction that draw explicitly on Zinn are becoming more common. From the Social Justice Academy outside of San Francisco to the four campuses of the Cesar Chavez Public Charter Schools for Public Policy, in Washington, D.C. social-justice academies relate their mission mainly in terms of ideological activism. At UCLA's Social Justice Academy, a program for high-school juniors, the goal is that students will "develop skills to take action that disrupts social justice injustices."

While social-justice instruction may sound to some like it might be suited to conflict resolution, in practice it can end up creating more discord than it resolves. Several years ago, the Ann Arbor, Mich., public schools faced complaints from the parents of minority students that the American history curriculum was alienating their children. At a meeting of the district's social-studies department chairs, the superintendent thought that he had discovered the cure for the divisions plaguing the school system. Holding up a copy of "A People's History," he asked, "How many of you have heard of Howard Zinn?" The chairwoman of the social studies department at the district's largest school responded, "Oh, we're already using that."

Zinn's arguments tend to divide, not unite, embitter rather than heal. The patron saint of Occupy Wall Street, Zinn left behind a legacy of prepackaged answers for every problem—a methodology that progressive historian Michael Kazin characterized as "better suited to a conspiracy-monger's website than to a work of scholarship."

Yet despite the lack of hard evidence in three-plus decades that using "A People's History" produces positive classroom results, a number of well-coordinated groups recently have been set up to train teachers in the art of Zinn. Founded five years ago out of a partnership between Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change, the Zinn Education Project offers more than 100 lesson plans and teachers' guides to Zinn's books, among a variety of other materials, including "Beyond Heroes and Holidays: A Practice Guide to K-12 Anti-Racist, Multicultural Education and Staff Development." Already, the project claims to have enlisted 20,000 teachers in its efforts.

I know this goes against all the "your children don't belong to you because it takes a village" logic, but it is not the role of teachers to indoctrinate your children.

Where does it say that that course replaces math?

Also they teach courses in all types of subjects, even those you disagree with. Sorry that doesn't fit your worldview.

Where does it say that that course replaces math?

It's a figure of speech, get over it.


Also they teach courses in all types of subjects, even those you disagree with. Sorry that doesn't fit your worldview.

Really? They teach different subjects in school? Wow, who knew?

They teach different subjects in school? Wow, who knew?Not you.

Not you.

As usual you have nothing to offer. You're like a gnat.

Standard conservative response.
So much for 'honest discussions' when a 'figure of speech' misrepresents the actual facts.

If I were allowed the latitude you have to flout the rules the insult would have been much less conservative.

Which rules do I flout?

Here is another example of the ideological cesspool that is public education...instead of teaching math they're teaching the "Art of Zinn." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324769704579008453713889352.html)



I know this goes against all the "your children don't belong to you because it takes a village" logic, but it is not the role of teachers to indoctrinate your children.


A good example of educational relativism at work. But that is fine, just keep ignoring my posts whenever I mention standards.

A good example of educational relativism at work. But that is fine, just keep ignoring my posts when ever I mention standards.

I don't recall having ignored you. There are others who deserve to be ignored, but I believe I offered my opinion (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3527560-post78.html) and this example fits right in.

I don't recall having ignored you. There are others who deserve to be ignored, but I believe I offered my opinion (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3527560-post78.html) and this example fits right in.

Sorry, must have been someone else. Yes, I agree there is no place in public education for this type of history. In exactly the same way there is no place for pseudo science in biology classes.

If it were possible to have an education system that reflects the opposite to liberal values then you still end up with educational relativism. There seems to be a general reluctance to addresses the actual problem. I think this reluctance is related to many other areas as well.

I think ideology gets in the way of both sides.

Sorry, must have been someone else. Yes, I agree there is no place in public education for this type of history. In exactly the same way there is no place for pseudo science in biology classes.

If it were possible to have an education system that reflects the opposite to liberal values then you still end up with educational relativism. There seems to be a general reluctance to addresses the actual problem. I think this reluctance is related to many other areas as well.

I think ideology gets in the way of both sides.

Absolutely ideology gets in the way on both sides. I don't know how to get rid of it all but I think we can agree there are certain absolutes like 2+2 and stick to those as standards. One doesn't need to eliminate private schools to have such requirements but public schools should at all times leave the ideology to the home. Parents should not have their values and rights undermined by the public system, we deserve the choice to raise our children our way responsibly free from government meddling.

Nah they wouldn't do that to innocent children. Opps. Yeah they would.

California's Transgender Student Bill Signed By Gov. Jerry Brown (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/california-transgender-bill-_n_3748262.html)

Nah they wouldnt do that to innocent children. Opps. Yeah they would.

California's Transgender Student Bill Signed By Gov. Jerry Brown (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/california-transgender-bill-_n_3748262.html)

This is what I mean by a reluctance to address the actual problem. Most people prefer to talk around the problem. Some type of transgender student legislation is nonsense. It is just one more example that comes out of educational relativism.

This is what I mean by a reluctance to address the actual problem. Most people prefer to talk around the problem. Some type of transgender student legislation is nonsense. It is just one more example that comes out of educational relativism.

I agree. But what is sad about this is that it has now become law. Young students risk exposure at a level unheard of in the past and are expected to deal with it. Under any other circumstance arrests would have been made. It is way out of hand.

I agree. But what is sad about this is that it has now become law. Young students risk exposure at a level unheard of in the past and are expected to deal with it. Under any other circumstance arrests would have been made. It is way out of hand.

I think we are in a no win situation when in comes to education. Going by the example you posted some states are creating an educational agenda that is getting out of hand. The irony is that we want the states to exercise their independence in educational decisions. This is why the problem tends to be talked around.

This is what I mean by a reluctance to address the actual problem. Most people prefer to talk around the problem. Some type of transgender student legislation is nonsense. It is just one more example that comes out of educational relativism.

To them that is the problem, inclusiveness is more important than education.

Nah they wouldnt do that to innocent children. Opps. Yeah they would.

California's Transgender Student Bill Signed By Gov. Jerry Brown (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/california-transgender-bill-_n_3748262.html)

Governor Moonbeam couldn't let Massachusetts out-PC them.

To them that is the problem, inclusiveness is more important than education.

Both sides are the problem. It called the blame game. This is why the problem will never be addressed.

I'm not calling for a conservative indoctrination instead, I'm calling for common sense.

I'm not calling for a conservative indoctrination instead, I'm calling for common sense.

I think we are starting to get closer to the core issue.

You won't get common sense because education is a political football. The common sense view would be an agreement whereby unacceptable education legislation is reviewed, modified or banned.

The irony is that you are would be stuck with a prospect of diminishing state rights. To me it seems that the independence of the state will always take precedence above any other issue. If this is true then there is no genuine solution.

We need to include and educate at the same time. That's always been my point when I ask what of the kids who can't win the lottery, or there are not enough slot for their choices. Its controlled segregation I am against, be it a minority, gay, or transgender or whatever else.

Yes parents are the first line of education and we should have a very large say in what our kids are exposed to and taught, but hidden prejudices and veiled self interest has to be dealt with to be better than the separate but equal crap we have put up with for so long. I mean damn, now kids going to the bathroom is a bone of contention and derision? That's a bit crazy to me.

If airlines, busses and trains can solve the problem, why can't a school. Maybe a design upgrade is the simple solution, but the real issue is curriculum, and a safe secure healthy environment to grow productive kids. Seems you need more than just teachers and parents working together to bridge gaps. You need a whole host of people to support a school. More than just arming teacher, but segregating the poor and limiting their choices is unacceptable.

All kids are apparently not equal, and separate. So if anyone wants to get specific lets have at it.

We need to include and educate at the same time. That's always been my point when I ask what of the kids who can't win the lottery, or their are not enough slot for their choices. Its controlled segregation I am against, be it a minority, gay, or transgender or whatever else.

Yes parents are the first line of education and we should have a very large say in what our kids are exposed to and taught, but hidden prejudices and veiled self interest has to be dealt with to be better than the separate but equal crap we have put up with for so long. I mean damn, now kids going to the bathroom is a bone of contention and derision? That's a bit crazy to me.

I don't know why it's crazy to you, when you "include" by allowing any kid that claims they're really the other gender inside to use whatever restroom you open a new can of worms. Perhaps the first time some girl that claims she's a guy gets raped in the restroom while some other boys hold the door shut someone might get a clue, but I doubt it.

I addressed this previously here:

Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - It's for the children (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3410780-post19.html)

And cdad raised a good point here:

Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - Does Gay Marriage Infringe on Your Religous Liberty? (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3492095-post274.html)

Perhaps the first time some girl that claims she's a guy gets raped in the restroom while some other boys hold the door shut someone might get a clue, but I doubt it.

Or when one of these transformers walks into a girls room to gawk.

So transgender and gay people should go back in the closet and be 2nd class citizens because you don't like them? If YOUR kid breaks the law he goes to jail, so you better teach him at home how to behave, and not be a bully.

Jut curious if you had a better solution than segregation or discrimination and denial of equal protection under the law. Specifically where do gays and transgender's go to the bathroom?

or when one of these transformers walks into a girls room to gawk.
Actually, that's not what would happen. Gawk at WHAT?

Come on WG, some make up all kind of scenarios to justify their fears and dislikes and discriminate against those they hate.

All men are created equal if we say so. If you are not accepted as part of the we, then you cannot be equal.

So you see no potential issues with this policy?

Everyone should use communal crappers

everyone should use communal crappers


Problem solved. NEXT!!

Actually, that's not what would happen. Gawk at WHAT?

What do you think? Do kids typically shower with their clothes on?

everyone should use communal crappers

So we can go back to the days of public baths and latrines.

Problem solved. NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!

Jerry Sandusky approves this message

What's your solution then? OH... you don't have one.

There is no problem... men's bathrooms and women's bathrooms worked since the days of indoor plumbing .

What do you think? Do kids typically shower with their clothes on?
Women's bathrooms don't have showers. There are individual cubicles, and we have no idea what someone is doing in the next cubicle (except maybe talking on her cell phone).

Could monitoring and correcting the behavior of bullies be a possible answer? Not just in the bathroom and showers, but in school in general? Bullying and invasions of privacy has actually contributed to death in teens and college kids.

I think a country that can make adjustments for the handicapped can certainly make adjustments for gender identity. If not physically then socially. You can't just leave it at there is no problem because you have no solution because you don't consider it's a problem, because clearly it is to some.

Hell just redesign the damn bathrooms to afford individual privacy, and safety. Everybody else does. As I said before, you stand in line in trains, busses and planes.

Women's bathrooms don't have showers. There are individual cubicles, and we have no idea what someone is doing in the next cubicle (except maybe talking on her cell phone).

The Massachusetts example, probably Kalifornia also, includes locker rooms and showers.

The Massachusetts example, probably Kalifornia also, includes locker rooms and showers.
98% of public women's washrooms don't have locker rooms or showers. We're lucky if the sinks are clean (with no long black hairs clogging the drain) and there are paper towel available.

98% of public women's washrooms don't have locker rooms or showers. We're lucky if the sinks are clean (with no long black hairs clogging the drain) and there are paper towel available.

Wondergirl, I am familiar with what's in the typical women's restroom. As I said, the Massachusetts example, probably Kalifornia also, includes locker rooms and showers (and sports) - in addition to restrooms.


February 19, 2013, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Massachusetts Commissioner of Education Mitchell Chester has issued orders to the state's K-12 public schools requiring them to permit “transgender” boys and girls to use the opposite sex's locker rooms, bathrooms, and changing facilities as long as they claim to identify with that gender.

Many elementary schools in smaller Massachusetts towns include children from kindergarten through eighth grade, making it possible for boys as old as 14 to share toilet facilities with girls as young as five.

Under Chester's leadership, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) released an 11-page document on Friday outlining this and other new guidelines giving “transgender” students special status and privileges in Massachusetts schools. Some family advocates are calling the document, which was prepared with assistance from homosexual and transgender advocacy groups, “the most thorough, invasive, and radical transgender initiative ever seen on a statewide level.”

The policy does not require a doctor's note or even parental permission for a child to switch sexes in the eyes of Massachusetts schools. Only the student's word is needed: If a boy says he's a girl, as far as the schools are concerned, he's a girl.

“The responsibility for determining a student's gender identity rests with the student,” the statement says. “A school should accept a student's assertion of his or her gender identity when there is … 'evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held as part of a person's core identity.'” That evidence, according to the document, can be as simple as a statement given by a friend.

That means, according to the newly issued school policies, that boys who say they identify as girls must be addressed by the feminine pronoun and be listed as girls on official transcripts.

They must also be allowed access to girls' facilities and be allowed to play on girls' athletic and club teams. The same is true for girls who say they are boys.

You foresee no problems with this? What do they do at a restaurant, a church, Home Depot? I know, before you know it the left will demand everyone including churches comply with this nonsense.

Wondergirl, I am familiar with what's in the typical women's restroom.
Wow! That's scary!

You foresee no problems with this?
Transgender -- "as long as they claim to identify with that gender."

And that means what? Self report only? Doctors' releases after a great deal of psychological testing? The first part would bother me. Testimony from a friend doesn't work for me.

Wow! That's scary!

Um, you think they're all designed, built and maintained by women? I cleaned restrooms at my first job and have been in the construction industry for the past twenty years. And comments like that are what leads me to respond to you with snark and sarcasm, I thought we had called a truce on that.


Transgender -- "as long as they claim to identify with that gender."

Exactly, any kid can claim anything.

Um, you think they're all designed, built and maintained by women? I cleaned restrooms at my first job and have been in the construction industry for the past twenty years. And comments like that are what leads me to respond to you with snark and sarcasm, I thought we had called a truce on that.
I was trying to be funny. And I actually LIKE you.

Exactly, any kid can claim anything.
Nope. I'm with you on that one. (Did I actually write that?? )

Back to the problem with public schools... and this whole "inclusiveness" bullsh*t.


A Pulpit for Bullies

By Anthony Esolen - August 14, 2013

To campaign against the bullying of LGBT people as if disagreement with the gay lifestyle were an evil is itself a form of bullying.

On June 19, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ruled in favor of a high school student named Daniel Glowacki, who had charged that his high school teacher, Jay McDowell, had violated his constitutional right to freedom of speech. He was granted one dollar in compensation. The court’s verdict, in vulgar terms, was that the pig had the right to say what he said.

The facts, according to the court’s judgment, are these.

On October 20, 2011, the Gay Straight Alliance at Howell High School planned to take part in a national “campaign aimed at raising awareness of the bullying of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered youth.” The court acknowledges that the day is also called “Spirit Day,” which, the plaintiffs contended, is so-called to foster acceptance in the public schools of the homosexual lifestyle. The Gay Straight Alliance made up flyers to be posted all around the school, urging students to wear purple on that day as a sign of their solidarity with homosexual teenagers. The principal approved the flyer.

Wendy Hiller, one of the teachers, printed a batch of purple T-shirts, reading “Tyler’s Army” on the front and “Fighting Evil with Kindness” on the back. She had, in the past, worn a black shirt reading “Tyler’s Army.” The name refers to Tyler Clementi, a freshman at Rutgers who took his own life after his roommate had secretly filmed him in a homosexual encounter. Hiller, says the court, in evident agreement, did not believe that the shirts would be controversial, since the topic was bullying and not homosexuality. Hiller sold some of the shirts to other teachers at cost.

Jay McDowell, an economics teacher, bought one of those shirts and wore it in class that day. McDowell then showed his students a video about a gay teenager who committed suicide, and devoted the rest of the class period to discussion.

Daniel entered McDowell’s classroom for the sixth period that day. McDowell noticed that one of the girls in class was wearing a belt buckle with the Confederate flag. He ordered her to take it off, because it offended him. Daniel then asked the obvious question. Why should it be all right for so many students and teachers to wear the purple T-shirts, but not all right for the girl to wear the belt buckle?

Consider the great difference here in boldness and specificity and intention. The belt buckle expresses a feeling of pride or affection for the American South. It is small. It does not demand to be noticed and read. It does not say anything. It is not a part of a school-wide campaign. It is not as if the student, together with others throughout the school, wore it on her shirt, with the words, “The South shall rise again.” It is also a private thing; she is just one student.

McDowell then, predictably, told Glowacki that the Confederate flag was a symbol of hateful things, like “the slashing and hanging of [African Americans].” It was discriminatory against blacks. Glowacki responded that the purple T-shirts were discriminatory against Catholics. This prompted a heated exchange. The young man is no theologian, and the teacher no moral philosopher. McDowell says that he told Glowacki that it was all right if his religion said that homosexual behavior was wrong, but that Glowacki could not say that in class. He also says, missing the illogic and the aggressiveness of his statement, that he told Glowacki that to say “I don’t accept gays” is like saying “I don’t accept blacks.” When Glowacki replied, “I don’t accept gays,” McDowell threw him out and began disciplinary action against him.

The parents complained, and McDowell was issued a reprimand: “You disciplined two students for holding and stating personal beliefs, to which you disagree. You disciplined them in anger under the guise of harassment and bullying because you opposed their religious belief and were offended by it. The students were causing no disruption.” Indeed, the reprimand specifically states that McDowell attempted to get Daniel to “recant,” and notes the irony that this should occur on a day devoted to fighting bullies.

What happened to Daniel after that is instructive, and does not enter the court’s opinion, though it easily might have, since it provides abundant evidence for the plaintiff’s contention that the Anti-Bullying Day was really a Pro-Gay Day, and that Jay McDowell was himself a bully. McDowell went on television claiming that Glowacki had entered the classroom spewing epithets against gays—a claim which, if true, the court would certainly have seized upon. Glowacki was (and continues to be) vilified across the nation. The lesbian Ellen DeGeneres featured a gay student on her television show who testified for McDowell in the disciplinary hearings.

There are two points I wish to make. The first is that the superintendent’s ironical insight did not go nearly far enough—the bullying was not limited to that incident in the classroom. The second is that the state is acting as a church, engaged in catechesis. The superintendent was correct; no student should be constrained to make an auto da fé. Those confessions, rather, ought to be procured over years of badgering, cajoling, wheedling, insinuating, urging, tempting, persuading, ridiculing, debating, by all means fair and foul, so long as the façade of “objectivity” and religious “neutrality” and “respect” for the students—but never for the parents!—be maintained.

On the bullying: the students know that what is going on here is the advocacy of homosexual activity. Many people are bullied, for all kinds of reasons—for being fat, or stupid, or poor, or ugly. If the school wishes to teach gallantry and kindness, why not do so with as broad a sweep as possible? But the teachers and students chose Tyler Clementi as their cause célèbre.

Homosexual activists do not say that Clementi was merely the victim of a nasty roommate. Their point—as the students at Howell High School no doubt were made well aware—is that Clementi was the victim of a general disapproval of his behavior. That is, any disapproval of the homosexual life is to be construed as homophobic, without regard to reasons or persons. That is precisely the message conveyed by the purple T-shirts.

The message may be unfolded thus. If you do not wear this shirt, or if you do not approve of the life it celebrates, you are evil. You’re a bully. You want people like Tyler Clementi to die. The superintendent, but not the court, notes that Glowacki was held up to opprobrium in the classroom.

Neither the superintendent nor the court expresses any concern about the massive contradiction that McDowell could order a student to remove a belt buckle because it might create a hostile environment for some other students, while not noticing that the entire school bristles with hostility against Catholics, evangelical Protestants, orthodox Jews, and anybody else who holds that sexual intercourse is to be bound within marriage, between a man and a woman.

Which brings me to my second point. If I hire a man to teach my son economics, I’d be shocked to learn that he’d been using his position to run down my faith. Granted that students, because of their age and the special circumstances, do not possess complete freedom of expression in school, it is equally true that teachers and schools must not capitalize upon their strength, their numbers, and their separation from the home, to advocate what is essentially a religion, with its (peculiar and incoherent) set of universal demands and condemnations.

Suppose it were not a Confederate belt buckle that McDowell had ordered removed, but a placard reading “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” That commandment—nowadays not controversial, though we obey it no better than any generation ever has—would be proscribed, as “religious” speech. But “thou shalt not disapprove publicly of the homosexual lifestyle,” which is what “Tyler’s Army” means, and in an aggressive and accusatory way, with the aim of silencing those who might disagree, and humiliating those who might express that disagreement—that is plastered all over the school and on the bodies of the teachers themselves, the masters, whom the students are supposed to respect or at least tolerate, since their future in part rests in those teachers’ hands.

What gives these schools the right to engage in that catechesis? The business of the public school is akin to the business of a group of tutors hired by a group of parents. It has become, instead, the business of a group of self-imagined forward-thinking missionaries introducing students to their new and enlightened world, against the supposed inertia and ignorance of parents, pastors, and the great majority of moral philosophers and theologians older than yesterday.

Anthony Esolen is Professor of English at Providence College in Providence Rhode Island, and the author of Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child and Ironies of Faith. He has translated Tasso’s Gerusalemme liberata and Dante’s The Divine Comedy.

Read more: A Pulpit for Bullies | RealClearPolitics (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/08/14/a_pulpit_for_bullies_119593.html#ixzz2byxJ7g4C)
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter

I was trying to be funny. And I actually LIKE you.

Nope. I'm with you on that one. (Did I actually write that????)

That's better :)

Back to the problem with public schools...and this whole "inclusiveness" bullsh*t.
If you were the teacher and a kid showed up wearing a buckle featuring the Confederate flag, what would you do?

If bullying is going on in your line of vision, what would you do?

If you were the teacher and a kid showed up wearing a buckle featuring the Confederate flag, what would you do?

Say "nice buckle?"


If bullying is going on in your line of vision, what would you do?

I would do what Daniel Glowacki did, stand up to the bully - ESPECIALLY if it's a teacher.

Say "nice buckle?"
I'd turn it into positive teaching moment.

I would do what Daniel Glowacki did, stand up to the bully - ESPECIALLY if it's a teacher.
Whoever is doing the bullying, I would stop it instantly and also turn that into a positive teaching moment. If it's another teacher, that person would get reported.

I think a country that can make adjustments for the handicapped can certainly make adjustments for gender identity. If not physically then socially. You can't just leave it at there is no problem because you have no solution because you don't consider its a problem, because clearly it is to some.

Hell just redesign the damn bathrooms to afford individual privacy, and safety. Everybody else does. As I said before, you stand in line in trains, busses and planes.

So if a student wishs to do as the other students then there should be no limits right? What about the blind student that wants to drive a car and the school offers drivers ed ? Should we allow it? Under your rules it seems we should.

When making boundries there is a bellcurve to what is normal. If someone that is transgender isn't "normal" then accomedations like the teachers bathroom or one at the school nurses office should be allowed. I have no idea why you would want a naked male to be in a room full of impressionable young girls. Is it so wrong to teach your child not to hit women? By your standards that is the wrong thing to be teaching them or will it depend on if they are transgender or not? In a world without lines and boundries the anything goes attitude will expand into areas you might not want to go.

First off dad, don't subscribe me to your extreme fear theories. Second adjustments is not going over certain boundaries but those have to be set by the school, both parents and school officials, but the idea that nothing should be done at all is unacceptable and smacks of denial through the worse case scenario disturbingly similar to allowing gay marriage leads to bestiality.

And its not the wishes of the students to consider, but those of the parents and that's the missing ingredient to making good adjustments that benefit all concerned. Can't we have solution that preserves dignity and self respect of all the citizens? Accommodations on both sides have to be required. I am no crazy extremist and using the john is an important human function. Showers... we need to talk about.

I'm going to brag about my school. If you remember, this is a public school with a hands-on approach. We just received our test scores : 83% passed Language Arts and 89% passed Math. Not bad :)

I'm going to brag about my school. If you remember, this is a public school with a hands-on approach. We just received our test scores : 83% passed Language Arts and 89% passed Math. Not bad :)

Congrats jenn. Now if you wouldn't mind can you explain this new law and how it applies to the school system ?

Congrats jenn. Now if you wouldnt mind can you explain this new law and how it applies to the school system ?

Common Core is a set of standards that most states will use, although some have opted out. If used correctly, the lessons should hold each teacher and school district accountable. Basically, you have the students figure out where the answer comes from and work together to form opinions and answers. We teach this way already at our school.

TJ, If I can ask about class size, what's the curriculum, including any extra curricular activities, parental involvement, meal program after, and before school programs, teacher support systems and most important the average income for the students parents. Do you have individual counseling and tutoring or special needs program, and program for at risk students. I would just love to pick your brain for things that could work elsewhere.

I'd turn it into positive teaching moment.

Whoever is doing the bullying, I would stop it instantly and also turn that into a positive teaching moment. If it's another teacher, that person would get reported.

Positive teaching moments are subjective. This teacher I'm sure thought he was giving a positive teaching moment by telling Daniel his beliefs were unacceptable. That's not his place, his place is to teach the subject, not his values.

Positive teaching moments are subjective. This teacher I'm sure thought he was giving a positive teaching moment by telling Daniel his beliefs were unacceptable. That's not his place, his place is to teach the subject, not his values.
If there is an "un," it's not positive.

Guess I'm going to get out there and show how to teach positively.

Common Core is a set of standards that most states will use, although some have opted out. If used correctly, the lessons should hold each teacher and school district accountable. Basically, you have the students figure out where the answer comes from and work together to form opinions and answers. We teach this way already at our school.

I was hoping you would answer the question about the transgender law that was passed in California and the mandates that you may or may not have been advised of.

I was hoping you would answer the question about the transgender law that was passed in California and the mandates that you may or may not have been advised of.

OOPS, Sorry. Yes, we had a meeting about it last week. We were told that any child may choose which restroom they wish to use. So, a boy may use the girls, and vice-versa. It's not too popular, but who are we to decide? We are told that this is law and we must abide by it. There is a lot of anti-bullying attached to it, also. We're definitely on the lookout. I doubt it will happen too much in my grade, but I did have a 4th grade boy a long time ago who insisted we all call him Helen. I guess this new law was right up his alley.

I did have a 4th grade boy a long time ago who insisted we all call him Helen. I guess this new law was right up his alley.
Was there a staffing about this, or how did other staff handle it? Did anyone (children, adults) call him Helen?

TJ, If I can ask about class size, what's the curriculum, including any extra curricular activities, parental involvement, meal program after, and before school programs, teacher support systems and most important the average income for the students parents. Do you have individual counseling and tutoring or special needs program, and program for at risk students. I would just love to pick your brain for things that could work elsewhere.

We have 30 to 1 in K. 32 to 1 in 1-3, and 4-6 is 35 to 1. No aides. Parents are involved if they care to be and many of them are super involved. We have lunch only and if the student qualifies, it is free or reduced fee. We have no before school programs, but after school we have the Boys and Girls Club for care. It is at a cost. We also have extra activities like Math and tutoring provided by outside companies for a fee. We have district counselors on site as needed. We have all of the special needs children housed at our school for the entire district. At risk students are at every site in our district.
The difference here is choice. We were interviewed and chosen for our positions. Normally, we place a transfer to move from position to position. Students are chosen by lottery. They can be from our district or outside of it. Parents must provide transportation and they also must purchase uniforms. This is new an innovative, and it works. Everyone has chosen to be here, from staff to students.

Was there a staffing about this, or how did other staff handle it? Did anyone (children, adults) call him Helen?

He told me about it and his classmates. It took place in my room and we all called him Helen. I wanted to inform his parents, but I thought they'd think I believed something was wrong with him. I just let it go.

He told me about it and his classmates.
And at bathroom-break time? (When I taught Pre-K and subbed in K, we had two one-toilet bathrooms, so "Helen" wouldn't have been a problem.)

And at bathroom-break time? (When I taught Pre-K and subbed in K, we had two one-toilet bathrooms, so "Helen" wouldn't have been a problem.)
He never brought it up, but we probably wouldn't have accommodated that type of thing in those days.

Back to the problem with public schools...and this whole "inclusiveness" bullsh*t.


Educational relativism has as an important element the need for inclusiveness. You cannot dismiss the problem with a one-liner that skirts around the problem.

In an odd sort of way you bemoan the very thing you want to defend. That is the right of the state to make their own educational agenda.

Most people who don't know just the costs of printing school books makes us slaves of the larger states. To be specific since Texas uses more book and revises them to the conservative point of view, smaller states adapt those books for themselves and learn the conservative views of Texas.

Rooting for a Uniform Nationwide Education Curriculum - Health Related Reading (http://www.healthy-reading.com/rooting-for-a-uniform-nationwide-education-curriculum-4293476)


See this together with how the Texas Board of Education has just decided that it doesn't want any federal money since refusing it gives it the freedom to bring religion into its education curriculum (they are making sure that Thomas Jefferson's writings are all excised from Texas schoolbooks), and you begin to see a very special occurrence taking shape.

How Texas Inflicts Bad Textbooks on Us by Gail Collins | The New York Review of Books (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/21/how-texas-inflicts-bad-textbooks-on-us/?pagination=false)


Texas is hardly the only state with small, fierce pressure groups trying to dictate the content of textbooks. California, which has the most public school students, tends to come at things from the opposite side, pressing for more reflection of a crunchy granola worldview. “The word in publishing was that for California you wanted no references to fast food, and in Texas you wanted no references to sex,” Quinn told me. But California's system of textbook approval focuses only on books for the lower grades. Professor Keith Erekson, director of the Center for History Teaching and Learning at the University of Texas at El Paso, says that California often demands that its texts have a Californiacentric central narrative that would not be suitable for anywhere else, while “the Texas narrative can be used in other states.” Publishers tend to keep information on who buys how much of what secret, but Erekson said he's seen estimates that the proportion of social studies textbooks sold containing the basic Texas-approved narrative range from about half to 80 percent.

Most people who don't know just the costs of printing school books makes us slaves of the larger states. To be specific since Texas uses more book and revises them to the conservative point of view, smaller states adapt those books for themselves and learn the conservative views of Texas.

Rooting for a Uniform Nationwide Education Curriculum - Health Related Reading (http://www.healthy-reading.com/rooting-for-a-uniform-nationwide-education-curriculum-4293476)



How Texas Inflicts Bad Textbooks on Us by Gail Collins | The New York Review of Books (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/21/how-texas-inflicts-bad-textbooks-on-us/?pagination=false)

Spot on.Yet another example of the argument I have been putting forward that has fallen on deaf ears. I know that most of us from time to time want to bury our heads in the sand, but this is getting to the stage whereby we just about have the whole body covered in sand.

Educational relativism has as an important element the need for inclusiveness. You cannot dismiss the problem with a one-liner that skirts around the problem.

In an odd sort of way you bemoan the very thing you want to defend. That is the right of the state to make their own educational agenda.

We've always had standards, SATs. etc. you seem to be under the impression there is only one road to get there. Does Australia use the same curriculum as France or the UK? Do your private schools mimic the public schools?

I see no conflict in having a goal to reach and having different methods of getting there. I am speaking specifically of public, taxpayer funded schools getting back to the basics of educating instead of indoctrinating, left or right. It's just like the IRS scandal, the government is supposed to be neutral.

We've always had standards, SATs. etc., you seem to be under the impression there is only one road to get there. Does Australia use the same curriculum as France or the UK? Do your private schools mimic the public schools?

I see no conflict in having a goal to reach and having different methods of getting there. I am speaking specifically of public, taxpayer funded schools getting back to the basics of educating instead of indoctrinating, left or right. It's just like the IRS scandal, the government is supposed to be neutral.

To try and answer all of your questions. I get all of my information about Australian schools from my wife.

Yes, you have always had standards. They were good enough in the past, but they are now inadequate in a competitive national and international market.

If I have given the impression that there is only one answer to education (federal dominance) then I have mislead you. In Australia there is a power sharing arrangement.

As to the exact nature of the overseas curriculum I am not sure. Apparently when we formulated the National Curriculum we contracted people from different nations to add to the input.

Indoctrination is bad. You probably don't realize this but the right has more to gain from a national curriculum than the left.

Almost forgot. In Australia public and private schools teach to the same curriculum

Removing Thomas Jefferson from school books isn't indoctrination?

In Australia there is a power sharing arrangement.

Same here... there is zero constitutional mandate for the Federal government to get involved . The power is shared by giving the power to the states. As for Tal's booohooo about text books... it's nonsense . There are many large states that also influence the market and I can assure you ;the text books my daughter brought home were full of progressive pablum.

Common Core in a nutshell (https://twitter.com/perchmommy/status/367631864061648896/photo/1)...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRoXO4nCYAArmlU.jpg:large

Common Core in a nutshell (https://twitter.com/perchmommy/status/367631864061648896/photo/1)...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRoXO4nCYAArmlU.jpg:large

So long as we can sum it up in some type of nutshell everyone can be rest assured. Now that this issue is solved we can more onto the next forum.

I though we had a tacit agreement that we were going to have an honest discussion and dispense with the canned responses? Apparently not.

So long as we can sum it up in some type of nutshell everyone can be rest assured. Now that this issue is solved we can more onto the next forum.

I though we had a tacit agreement that we were going to have an honest discussion and dispense with the canned responses? Apparently not.

A picture is worth a thousand words. If the shoe fits, etc. The question is, is the picture right or wrong? Let's get to the honesty about that.

is the picture right or wrong?It's wrong obviously.

A picture is worth a thousand words. If the shoe fits, etc. The question is, is the picture right or wrong? Let's get to the honesty about that.

It is not possible to have an honest discussion over clichés. Clichés are used for the purpose of exaggeration and dramatic effect. It show that I admire your persistence. Most people would have been prepared to drop the argument at this point.

It is not possible to have an honest discussion over cliches. Cliches are used for the purpose of exaggeration and dramatic effect. It show that I admire your persistence. Most people would have been prepared to drop the argument at this point.

And I was just having a little fun, I do that from time to time.

It is not possible to have an honest discussion over cliches. Cliches are used for the purpose of exaggeration and dramatic effect. It show that I admire your persistence. Most people would have been prepared to drop the argument at this point.Beautiful post. The subtlety is sweet. :)

I can't help but believe our kids don't suffer more or as much during an economic down turn than the parents do. TJ said something that stuck with me about parents at her school were responsible for getting their kids to school and picking them up, and without that basic function of transportation, many would be excluded from that opportunity. Maybe this is less a problem in rural areas than urban ones, but the benefit of having a car is one less obstacle to overcome.

Many older schools are being closed in large urban centers which to me translates to a lot of disruptions for the kids, and adjustments for parents. Economics often adds to the obstacles especially with those that don't have much flexibility in their work schedules, or budgets.

Many older schools are being closed in large urban centers which to me translates to a lot of disruptions for the kids, and adjustments for parents.
Many of those buildings would not quailify as animal shelters . Despite the fortune collected in revenues from taxes ,the public school system cannot provide safe and secure facilities ;and hire teachers qualifed to teach the subject matter .Yet most school administrators get a complete pass . Perhaps the reason is that they know how to get the job done ,but are handcuffed by regulations and union work rules. It's a good public works system if you just overlook the fact that they utterly fail where their primary role is measured .

Beautiful post. The subtlety is sweet. :)

Get a room.

Many older schools are being closed in large urban centers which to me translates to a lot of disruptions for the kids, and adjustments for parents. Economics often adds to the obstacles especially with those that don't have much flexibility in their work schedules, or budgets.
Chicago closed 49 schools and set up routes labeled with yellow "Safe Passage" signs so students will know where to walk to get to a new school that's farther away from home. Interestingly, a man was shot and killed the other day on one of these routes. So much for "safe."

Get a room.For what?
http://media.giphy.com/media/A8nLow7DRwluU/original.gif

Perhaps he means a schools can be set up in a room ah la two hundred years ago perhaps you could have one in every house

Time for another education update. Our illustrious Attorney General has sued Louisiana to block their school voucher program.


Give Eric Holder credit for cognitive racial dissonance. On nearly the same day the Attorney General spoke in Washington to honor the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I have a dream" speech, his Justice Department sued to block the educational dreams of minority children in Louisiana (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323407104579037020495325310.html?m od=trending_now_1).

Late last week, Justice asked a federal court to stop 34 school districts in the Pelican State from handing out private-school vouchers so kids can escape failing public schools. Mr. Holder's lawyers claim the voucher program appears "to impede the desegregation progress" required under federal law. Justice provides little evidence to support this claim, but there couldn't be a clearer expression of how the civil-rights establishment is locked in a 1950s time warp.

Passed in 2012, Louisiana's state-wide program guarantees a voucher to students from families with incomes below 250% of poverty and who attend schools graded C or below. The point is to let kids escape the segregation of failed schools, and about 90% of the beneficiaries are black.

But Justice is more worried about the complexion of the schools' student body than their manifest failure to educate. During the 2012-13 school year, about 10% of voucher recipients came from 22 districts that remain under desegregation orders from 50 or so years ago

So why does Holder hate black people?

http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20120814/OPINION/120814002/Another-View-Louisiana-voucher-program-motto-Details-come

Justice Department tries to block Louisiana's school voucher program | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/25/justice-department-tries-to-block-louisiana-school-voucher-program/)


The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled in May that the state could not use the allotted voucher money, resulting in Jindal finding about $40 million in other public funds to help the roughly 8,000 students already enrolled in the program this school year.

Even the folks in Louisiana have doubt about Jindal's voucher plan. Just curious have you done any analysis of the plan and its performance?

http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20120814/OPINION/120814002/Another-View-Louisiana-voucher-program-motto-Details-come

Justice Department tries to block Louisiana's school voucher program | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/25/justice-department-tries-to-block-louisiana-school-voucher-program/)



Even the folks in Louisiana have doubt about Jindal's voucher plan. Just curious have you done any analysis of the plan and its performance?

Even Obama has softened his stance on vouchers (whether sincere or not), but the question is what do the parents of these children think?

I have often questioned the wisdom of privatizing education because like private prisons have become just a for profit warehousing that may not be a better system for our kid in the long run. I can see where its attractive to cash strapped states to have private companies build new buildings for our kids, that makes fiscal sense, but I am not convinced the oversight is there for certification of teachers or even the standards required are being met.

As the data comes in for real results, private school are not out performing traditional school as a whole but all over the country, like public school some are better than other, some are great, and some are really as bad as the public schools.

Politics aside, we have a ways to go. Private, or public.


Even Obama has softened his stance on vouchers (whether sincere or not), but the question is what do the parents of these children think?

I would imagine if their kids get a good education that translates in further educational gains and a great job future they would be happy. I was/am. I guess the jury is out until that happen.

You act as if there are no standards for private schools. Give parents a choice.

That's not what I said, as a parent I would want access to whatever they are doing and access to those teachers. Just my own experience, and opinion, the PTA and how regularly they meet, and how involved parents are is a good indication of how successful the children will be. It an important interaction between parents, teachers, and school administration.

A shiny new building with clean hallways is great but teaching is done in a room with an adult, and without parental participation and interaction how do we address a students needs, and make sure we are making a difference. Now if the process of implementing a curriculum, and certifying teachers is open to parents/community/ and state oversight, okay we can go forward in the right direction, but if its purely in the hands of business men and their accountants, I have a problem.

I would hope every parent would take a deeper look into who, what, and how our children are educated. Just to make sure our children are not turned into some commodity to be profited from.

Here is Slate's idea of a "deeper look" into education.


If You Send Your Kid to Private School, You Are a Bad Person
(http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/08/private_school_vs_public_school_only_bad_people_se nd_their_kids_to_private.html)
You are a bad person if you send your children to private school. Not bad like murderer bad—but bad like ruining-one-of-our-nation’s-most-essential-institutions-in-order-to-get-what’s-best-for-your-kid bad. So, pretty bad.

Well, I guess all those libs better get their kids out of private schools and lead by example. More from this genius...


I am not an education policy wonk: I’m just judgmental. But it seems to me that if every single parent sent every single child to public school, public schools would improve. This would not happen immediately. It could take generations. Your children and grandchildren might get mediocre educations in the meantime, but it will be worth it, for the eventual common good. (Yes, rich people might cluster. But rich people will always find a way to game the system: That shouldn’t be an argument against an all-in approach to public education any more than it is a case against single-payer health care.)


Someone tell me this is satire, right? I want to believe it is but it's too much like the arguments I see here - even though Obamacare sucks we gotta go for it anyway, I mean sure it might suck for years, generations even, but eventually it's all going to pan out - that sort of thing.

You can't make this stuff up.

I think it was written to look at the question of when all the private schools are full what of the kids that aren't in private schools. They need good teachers and computers too don't they?

Do you believe in means testing for income, or do you believe rich well to do kids should get a subsidy for their kids going to private school?

Your thoughts because obviously every child won't be in private schools.

Tal, you're a bad person if you don't send you kids to public schools? Even if your kid gets a crappy education send them anyway? Is that really what the left espouses, mediocrity in hopes of something better through osmosis?

"Your local school stinks but you don’t send your child there?"

Uh, not if I can help it.

"I understand. You want the best for your child, but your child doesn’t need it."

That's not for you to say.

"If you can afford private school (even if affording means scrimping and saving, or taking out loans), chances are that your spawn will be perfectly fine at a crappy public school."

Take chances with your own kid. Here's the crux of her message:


Also remember that there’s more to education than what’s taught. As rotten as my school’s English, history, science, social studies, math, art, music, and language programs were, going to school with poor kids and rich kids, black kids and brown kids, smart kids and not-so-smart ones, kids with superconservative Christian parents and other upper-middle-class Jews like me was its own education and life preparation. Reading Walt Whitman in ninth grade changed the way you see the world? Well, getting drunk before basketball games with kids who lived at the trailer park near my house did the same for me. In fact it’s part of the reason I feel so strongly about public schools.

Right, they got to have that 'village' thing going, it's much more important than an actual education. Who cares if they learn anything useful as long as they get to party on and get all multicultural and all that.

I wonder how this is playing in Chicago (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/2-Shot-1-Fatally-Along-CPS-Safe-Passage-Route-219169831.html)?

Why can't anyone answer my questions?

When all the private schools are full what of the kids that aren't in private schools? They need good teachers and computers too don't they?

Do you believe in means testing for income, or do you believe rich well to do families should get a subsidy for their kids going to private school?

I don't want to argue about the opinion of one pundit. Can we get facts? Or at least show me the data that's says all the private schools are superior to the ones we have let fail for whatever reason.

Can we get back to the kids and not just the ones whose parents can get them into a private school?

Tal, you're a bad person if you don't send you kids to public schools? Even if your kid gets a crappy education send them anyway? Is that really what the left espouses, mediocrity in hopes of something better through osmosis?


Don't worry about the article it is satire.

Why can't anyone answer my questions?

When all the private schools are full what of the kids that aren't in private schools? They need good teachers and computers too don't they?

Yes, maybe you can find a way to utilize the gazillions in tax dollars they get and also fire bad teachers.


Do you believe in means testing for income, or do you believe rich well to do families should get a subsidy for their kids going to private school?

Since when are you a fan of means testing? Should those who actually pay taxes not benefit from them? Just asking.


I don't want to argue about the opinion of one pundit. Can we get facts? Or at least show me the data that's says all the private schools are superior to the ones we have let fail for whatever reason.

No, you just want to change the subject whenever some lib let's the truth slip out.


Can we get back to the kids and not just the ones whose parents can get them into a private school?

I have been talking about the kids, while your side is doing everything in its power to keep them in trapped in the system, even though "Your children and grandchildren might get mediocre educations in the meantime, but it will be worth it, for the eventual common good.”

And I started this thread, and this is what we're discussing, the new public school 'manifesto.'

Don't worry about the article it is satire.

I don't think so Tut, it's in the DOUBLEX section of Slate (of which she is the editor). She's serious.

I don't think so Tut, it's in the DOUBLEX section of Slate (of which she is the editor). She's serious.


This is not a serious attempt at justifying the unjustifiable. It is an attempt to examine how the wealthy Libs who espouse public education would fair if all school were to become public.

It isn't a serious proposition.

"What women really think about news, politics, and culture"

I'm telling you, it isn't satire. Though I don't take her seriously this is what she thinks.

"What women really think about news, politics, and culture"

I'm telling you, it isn't satire. Though I don't take her seriously this is what she thinks.

She is one woman, with one opinion, and a flair for over simplifying. To assign her opinion to anyone other than herself is crazy.

From what you wrote your whole frame of reference is to destroy the education system for many and turn it into a revenue stream for some companies. You hate the government and I get that but messing things up for those that don't share your own hatred is narrow and biased.

That's why you cannot address the simple questions asked of you because you just cannot be honest and say you hate it and want to destroy it, and nothing and nobody else matters.

I can appreciate the passion, but disagree fully with your premise, direction, and implementation. No I don't expect you to be a fan, or agree with my position either.

In a nutshell, I think you are so wrong!

She is one woman, with one opinion, and a flair for over simplifying. To assign her opinion to anyone other than herself is crazy.

I just said "this is what SHE thinks."


From what you wrote your whole frame of reference is to destroy the education system for many and turn it into a revenue stream for some companies. You hate the government and I get that but messing things up for those that don't share your own hatred is narrow and biased.

Tal my friend, that couldn't be further from the truth. You assign that whole evil corporations/profit motive/conservatives hate poor people BS to virtually every situation.

It isn't us playing games with the lives of our children. We aren't the ones using every means possible, including the courts, to force those who would otherwise be stuck in a failed school to stay in that school. It isn't us making it next to impossible to fire bad teachers.


That's why you cannot address the simple questions asked of you because you just cannot be honest and say you hate it and want to destroy it, and nothing and nobody else matters.

I did address your questions.


I can appreciate the passion, but disagree fully with your premise, direction, and implementation. No I don't expect you to be a fan, or agree with my position either.

In a nutshell, I think you are so wrong![

It's easy to find reason to disagree with someone when you're the one assigning their positions to them. And no, I don't expect you to see the irony in your post.

"What women really think about news, politics, and culture"

I'm telling you, it isn't satire. Though I don't take her seriously this is what she thinks.

OK, I'll believe you.

Schools in Illinois apparently don't have anything more pressing, like an actual education... It seems they want to be the parent, too.

‘What is Government?’ Elementary Students Taught It’s Your ‘Family’ | TheBlaze.com (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/30/what-is-government-elementary-students-taught-its-your-family/)

Yeah, it's just like that. And, I knew this was coming...

CPS Mandates Sexual, Health Education For Kindergarten « CBS Chicago (http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/08/29/cps-mandates-sexual-health-education-for-kindergartners/)

Yeah, yeah, what's wrong with teaching 5-year-olds about inappropriate touching? Nothing, I'm OK with that, but they don't stop there...


“Whether that means there’s two moms at home, everyone’s home life is different, and we introduce the fact that we all have a diverse background, “ said Whyte

I already know your arguments here, too. Of course they could always teach them instead that it takes a mom and a dad to make a family...

So if its two mom's or two dad's it's not a legitimate family? Is that what you teach at your house? That it's not legit to have a gay family?

Is a single mom, or dad a legitimate family? That's what it's about, people are legitimate despite the differences. I get what YOU believe, and that's cool for you. But reality is that it's not always that way in the lives of real people.

So are you saying that gays cannot make a family, divorced or single people cannot make a family?

That was exactly as expected. You believe all that's legitimate, some don't. Why should those who don't have the public school undermine their values? I thought maybe you'd get that by my example, do you want them to teach that the only legitimate family is the traditional family, or should government funded public schools remain neutral and leave such subjects to the home?

the only legitimate family is the traditional family,
We are long past Ozzie and Harriet or Father Knows Best in this country. Like Tal said, there is every kind of family grouping possible -- parents turn out to be the grandparents, a single mom or dad, a divorced mom or dad, a gay or lesbian couple or individual, an older sister, you name it -- and students might be living in houses, condos, apartment buildings, homeless shelters, cars, on the street. It would be an insult to teach that there is only one right way to be a family.

So you don't believe parents have the right to their values without public school interference? That is the issue, not what is a family.

So you don't believe parents have the right to their values without public school interference? That is the issue, not what is a family.
What are the parents' values? There is no one set of values. Jimmy parents' will have different values from Susie's parents and from Bobby's parents.

If the parents' values intefer with the child's education, then what?

I can only hope you teach your kids not to look down on others because they are different. No matter what their home is like.

What are the parents' values? There is no one set of values. Jimmy parents' will have different values from Susie's parents and from Bobby's parents.

Agreed, so why should the schools be involved in teaching their values?


If the parents' values intefer with the child's education, then what?.

What is it to you if I teach my kids my values? I don't interfere in your home, why would you interfere in mine?

I can only hope you teach your kids not to look down on others because they are different. No matter what their home is like.

I can only hope you'd let me raise my children my way as I would do for you.

Thousands of American higher-education administrators will spend part of Labor Day weekend trying to plumb the meaning of the ideas President Obama dropped on them last week to "reform" the American college and university system. Given the political genome of college administrators nowadays, they'll try to make the Obama plan work. But for the handful who want to preserve and protect their hallowed institutions, here's a recommendation: Drop by the nearest medical school for a chat with the doctors about how it's going with the Affordable Care Act, aka ObamaCare.

Insofar as all these higher-ed reforms will be tied to federal rules for getting the money, it is beyond dispute that this will be ObamaCare for education, just as Dodd-Frank was ObamaCare for banking and finance.

A clue to where this is headed may be seen by clicking on the White House backgrounder's link to the "Financial Aid Shopping Sheet" jointly developed by the U.S. Department of Education and Dodd-Frank's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The sheet has a striking name atop it: "University of the United States (UUS)"—with a logo, no less.
http://collegecost.ed.gov/shopping_sheet.pdf

The education proposal reflects the Obama modus operandi. First, identify an American industry that long ago made a Faustian bargain for federal support, such as hospitals and housing. Then describe the subsidy-dependent industry's inevitable bloat and inefficiency in images so stark no reasonable person could disagree. "Burdened with tens of thousands of dollars" in student debt, Mr. Obama said at Binghamton University in New York, "they have to put off buying a home, or starting a business, or starting a family." [Footnote: That was federal student debt.] Then after getting buy-in from the mortified industry, he imposes the solution—on his terms.

Those terms, as described by the White House, are that future financial aid will be tied to "college performance," based on a federal rating system of all colleges designed by the Department of Education with metrics defining affordability (average tuition, scholarships, loan debt), admission rates for disadvantaged students, remedial support for disadvantaged students, student outcomes (graduation and transfer rates, postgraduate earnings), and bonuses based on the number of Pell students graduated. And a lot more. The White House calls this a "datapalooza."

Terry Hartle of the American Council on Education commented on the proposals in the Chronicle of Higher Education, "If you want to condition the receipt of student aid on this information, you have an obligation to have perfect data." Wrong. Like ObamaCare, you'll make this work with far-from-perfect data.

One attribute that sets the U.S. higher education system apart from any in the world is the diversity of its 4,495 degree-granting institutions—big, small, private, public, religious. Under this plan, that historic diversity would melt beneath conformance. The Obama plan says it will increase the number of college graduates and contain tuition costs by "rewarding states that are willing to systematically change their higher education policies and practices."

Random thought: Will professors at participating ObamaEd universities become subject in time to the same cost-containment rules that, say, Medicare imposes on doctors? Think it can't happen? Better read the president's speeches last week.

To better comprehend the origins of all this, one need only visit the White House website and read the proposal's first sentence. Actually it's the first half of the first sentence, which makes it clear that something other than student debt loads and repayment schedules is in play here: "Earning a postsecondary degree or credential is no longer just a pathway to opportunity for a talented few." A talented few?

When, since the end of World War II, has U.S. higher education been for the "talented few"? Like everything else the past four years, the economics of higher education is about to be refracted through the same lens of social antagonism Mr. Obama uses to think about pretty much everything.

Here are two higher-ed reforms that weren't in the president's speeches last week, and likely never will be.

The first is reform of the U.S.'s No. 1 national disgrace: the failed inner-city public-school system. Their doors opened again this week, and in nine months they will sweep tens of thousands of uneducated "graduating" seniors out the doors, with no chance of qualifying for any college.

The Obama administration's contribution to the new school year? A lawsuit just filed by Eric Holder's Justice Department against Louisiana's school-voucher program, whose black participation rate is 90%. Why isn't Education Secretary Arne Duncan finally resigning in protest?

The second reform would be returning the U.S. to its historic 3.3% economic growth rate, rather than the below 2% rate of nearly the entire Obama presidency. In his speeches Mr. Obama said a college education ensures higher lifetime earnings. But not if you've graduated into four years of unemployment or underemployment.

Imposing ObamaCare on health, education, finance, energy and anything else in reach is the reason why 2% growth and 7.5% unemployment looks chronic. We may have the best higher-education system in the world, but we're underachieving. So is the president.
Daniel Henninger: ObamaCare for Everything - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324009304579040822709807800.html#p rintMode)

What are the parents' values? There is no one set of values. Jimmy parents' will have different values from Susie's parents and from Bobby's parents.

If the parents' values intefer with the child's education, then what?

Then that is why home schooling is an option.

Thousands of American higher-education administrators will spend part of Labor Day weekend trying to plumb the meaning of the ideas President Obama dropped on them last week to "reform" the American college and university system. Given the political genome of college administrators nowadays, they'll try to make the Obama plan work. But for the handful who want to preserve and protect their hallowed institutions, here's a recommendation: Drop by the nearest medical school for a chat with the doctors about how it's going with the Affordable Care Act, aka ObamaCare.

Insofar as all these higher-ed reforms will be tied to federal rules for getting the money, it is beyond dispute that this will be ObamaCare for education, just as Dodd-Frank was ObamaCare for banking and finance.

A clue to where this is headed may be seen by clicking on the White House backgrounder's link to the "Financial Aid Shopping Sheet" jointly developed by the U.S. Department of Education and Dodd-Frank's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The sheet has a striking name atop it: "University of the United States (UUS)"—with a logo, no less.
http://collegecost.ed.gov/shopping_sheet.pdf

The education proposal reflects the Obama modus operandi. First, identify an American industry that long ago made a Faustian bargain for federal support, such as hospitals and housing. Then describe the subsidy-dependent industry's inevitable bloat and inefficiency in images so stark no reasonable person could disagree. "Burdened with tens of thousands of dollars" in student debt, Mr. Obama said at Binghamton University in New York, "they have to put off buying a home, or starting a business, or starting a family." [Footnote: That was federal student debt.] Then after getting buy-in from the mortified industry, he imposes the solution—on his terms.

Those terms, as described by the White House, are that future financial aid will be tied to "college performance," based on a federal rating system of all colleges designed by the Department of Education with metrics defining affordability (average tuition, scholarships, loan debt), admission rates for disadvantaged students, remedial support for disadvantaged students, student outcomes (graduation and transfer rates, postgraduate earnings), and bonuses based on the number of Pell students graduated. And a lot more. The White House calls this a "datapalooza."

Terry Hartle of the American Council on Education commented on the proposals in the Chronicle of Higher Education, "If you want to condition the receipt of student aid on this information, you have an obligation to have perfect data." Wrong. Like ObamaCare, you'll make this work with far-from-perfect data.

One attribute that sets the U.S. higher education system apart from any in the world is the diversity of its 4,495 degree-granting institutions—big, small, private, public, religious. Under this plan, that historic diversity would melt beneath conformance. The Obama plan says it will increase the number of college graduates and contain tuition costs by "rewarding states that are willing to systematically change their higher education policies and practices."

Random thought: Will professors at participating ObamaEd universities become subject in time to the same cost-containment rules that, say, Medicare imposes on doctors? Think it can't happen? Better read the president's speeches last week.

To better comprehend the origins of all this, one need only visit the White House website and read the proposal's first sentence. Actually it's the first half of the first sentence, which makes it clear that something other than student debt loads and repayment schedules is in play here: "Earning a postsecondary degree or credential is no longer just a pathway to opportunity for a talented few." A talented few?

When, since the end of World War II, has U.S. higher education been for the "talented few"? Like everything else the past four years, the economics of higher education is about to be refracted through the same lens of social antagonism Mr. Obama uses to think about pretty much everything.

Here are two higher-ed reforms that weren't in the president's speeches last week, and likely never will be.

The first is reform of the U.S.'s No. 1 national disgrace: the failed inner-city public-school system. Their doors opened again this week, and in nine months they will sweep tens of thousands of uneducated "graduating" seniors out the doors, with no chance of qualifying for any college.

The Obama administration's contribution to the new school year? A lawsuit just filed by Eric Holder's Justice Department against Louisiana's school-voucher program, whose black participation rate is 90%. Why isn't Education Secretary Arne Duncan finally resigning in protest?

The second reform would be returning the U.S. to its historic 3.3% economic growth rate, rather than the below 2% rate of nearly the entire Obama presidency. In his speeches Mr. Obama said a college education ensures higher lifetime earnings. But not if you've graduated into four years of unemployment or underemployment.

Imposing ObamaCare on health, education, finance, energy and anything else in reach is the reason why 2% growth and 7.5% unemployment looks chronic. We may have the best higher-education system in the world, but we're underachieving. So is the president.
Daniel Henninger: ObamaCare for Everything - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324009304579040822709807800.html#p rintMode)

Interesting article.

There will be problems when funding is tied to university performance in the way outlined in the article. Universities will obviously try and make themselves more attractive and the most successful. One could see a situation arising where by some degrees will be incorrectly shorted. For example, a three year degree could become a two year degree.

What the author thinks is a reasonable definition is what I call a conjunction error

" Then describe the subsidy-dependent industries' inevitable bloat and inefficiency in images in images so stark that no reasonable person could disagree"

I don't believe that bloating and inefficiency necessarily go together. It is possible to have a bloated budget, but still be efficient.

Note. Incorrect placement of the apostrophe in the original article has been corrected in my citing.

Your higher education system does produce some of the best universities in the world while at the same time producing some that are not up to international standards..

Like I care about international standards.. the real question is ,do international universities measure up to our standards ? It is not the government's business to grade universities. But Henniger does make a valid point. These universities accept government handouts and then are surprised when there are strings attached. But a private university can rightly tell his to shove his rating where the sun don't shine.

I doubt if they will though, they like money and that why they do what they do.

like I care about international standards.. the real question is ,do international universities measure up to our standards ? It is not the government's business to grade universities. But Henniger does make a valid point. These universities accept government handouts and then are surprised when there are strings attached. But a private university can rightly tell his to shove his rating where the sun don't shine.

I think it is obvious that the author of the article doesn't care for national standards. In this particular instance I think that the proposal is a bad one for many reasons. I also suspect the author would probably rejects international standards as well.

I don't think we can write an article complaining about some type of federal implication of standards and take the opportunity to complain about falling standards in schools.

Considering the size of our nation our universities are up to your standards.

Of course international universities meet and exceed your standards. You have some good universities, so do others and we have come to expect you think you are superior in all respects, the master race. But you can't have a failing school system and expect your standards to be maintained, too many sporting scholarships and too little academic achievement

In the fields of the hard sciences ,mathematics ,engineering ,computing etc there are more internatonal students graduating from American universities than American students . International students make up 70 percent of the full-time electrical engineering graduate students in the United States, 63 percent of those in computer science, and more than half in industrial engineering, economics, chemical engineering, materials engineering and mechanical engineering.
Yes that is part an indictment of the failed liberal public education system here ,but it also demonstrates the high standards and reputations of the American university system... a system that the idiot emperor wants to tinker with .

I don't think getting potential students to be more aware and informed of the options and opportunities they have and a tool to make a choice is tinkering with the system. They are the ones getting in debt for an education and future employment.

I would think you would be in favor of weeding out the schools that get federal dollars but don't prepare these young people for future employment which is the point of passing all that money around.

More bang for your buck is what a capitalist would say right? Facts beyond the brochures, marketing, and staged tours. I see it affecting the online and community colleges more than well funded bigger universities.

The federal government tinkering with our colleges and universities? What could go wrong?

Would you let your kid enroll in an on line class because of a commercial that runs all day and night without looking deeper into it? Get in debt because of it? How would you check them out?

The onus and responsibility is on the consumer, not the government. That would be you. Are you against consumer protection?

It is easy to check out colleges . I don't need the gvt to do it for me.

Would you let your kid enroll in an on line class because of a commercial that runs all day and night without looking deeper into it? Get in debt because of it? How would you check them out?

The onus and responsibility is on the consumer, not the government. That would be you. Are you against consumer protection?

Like how they vet non-profits in the IRS? I'm always amazed at your confidence in government.

It's MY government!! I voted, yes I have ID.

Good for you, most of us don't share your enthusiasm and for good reason.

in the fields of the hard sciences ,mathematics ,engineering ,computing etc there are more internatonal students graduating from American universities than American students . International students make up 70 percent of the full-time electrical engineering graduate students in the United States, 63 percent of those in computer science, and more than half in industrial engineering, economics, chemical engineering, materials engineering and mechanical engineering.
Yes that is part an indictment of the failed liberal public education system here ,but it also demonstrates the high standards and reputations of the American university system..... a system that the idiot emperor wants to tinker with .

Tom we all make good money training the students of the world, without these students there would be less of these universities

it is easy to check out colleges . I don't need the gvt to do it for me.

Not every one is as skilled and experienced as you Tom, and I don't know how easy it is to get certification and affiliation information from some of these online schools that have popped up the last few years, and as Clete says the profit are enormous.

Like how they vet non-profits in the IRS? I'm always amazed at your confidence in government.

You are way behind on that subject.

You are way behind on that subject.

Obviously the analogy went over your head.

Not every one is as skilled and experienced as you Tom, and I don't know how easy it is to get certification and affiliation information from some of these online schools that have popped up the last few years, and as Clete says the profit are enormous.

That's the shonky fringe schools, Tal, but mainline universities have a large percentage of overseas students

Here we go again...

Father of molested student talks about his outrage toward seven teachers who supported the rapist (http://eagnews.org/father-of-molested-student-talks-about-his-familys-anguish-and-his-outrage-toward-teachers-who-supported-the-pedophile/)

I'll spare you the horrific details here, but at least the judge got it right this time in spite of the teachers and board member pleading for leniency for this pervert.


Neal has pled (sic) guilty for his one criminal offense but he is not a predator,” teacher Harriett Coe wrote, according to the Herald. “This was an isolated incident. He understands the severity of his action and is sincere in his desire to make amends. He has been candid and conveyed his action to his family, friends and co-workers.”

In all, 10 people, including seven WB-RC teachers, submitted letters of support for Erickson, most pleading for a reduced sentence. They included Campbell, Amy Eagan, Coe, Toni Erickson, Carol Rau, Marilyn Glover, Sandi Lee, Kathryn Weber, Kathleen Sheel and Kathleen Palmer, the Herald reports.

Judge Michael Bumgartner told Erickson he was “appalled and ashamed that the community could rally around, in this case, you,” according to the Herald.

“What you did was a jab in the eye with a sharp stick to every parent who trusts a teacher,” he said shortly before sentencing Erickson to 15-30 years in prison.

Absolutely right, judge.

The system worked, that's great ain't it?

The judicial system worked, the education system did not.

From the WaPo editors...


Justice Department bids to trap poor, black children in ineffective schools (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-justice-department-bids-to-trap-poor-black-children-in-ineffective-schools/2013/09/01/2173e5a6-0f77-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html)

NINE OF 10 Louisiana children who receive vouchers to attend private schools are black. All are poor and, if not for the state assistance, would be consigned to low-performing or failing schools with little chance of learning the skills they will need to succeed as adults. So it’s bewildering, if not downright perverse, for the Obama administration to use the banner of civil rights to bring a misguided suit that would block these disadvantaged students from getting the better educational opportunities they are due.

The Justice Department has petitioned a U.S. District Courtto bar Louisiana from awarding vouchers for the 2014-15 school year to students in public school systems that are under federal desegregation orders, unless the vouchers are first approved by a federal judge. The government argues that allowing students to leave their public schools for vouchered private schools threatens to disrupt the desegregation of school systems. A hearing is tentatively set for Sept. 19.

There’s no denying the state’s racist history of school segregation or its ugly efforts in the late 1960s and early 1970s to undermine desegregation orders by helping white children to evade racially integrated schools. These efforts included funneling public money to all-white private schools. But the situation today bears no resemblance to those terrible days. Since most of the students using vouchers are black, it is, as State Education Superintendent John White pointed out to the New Orleans Times-Picayune, “a little ridiculous” to argue that the departure of mostly black students to voucher schools would make their home school systems less white. Every private school participating in the voucher program must comply with the color-blind policies of the federal desegregation court orders.

The government’s argument that “the loss of students through the voucher program reversed much of the progress made toward integration” becomes even more absurd upon examination of the cases it cited in its petition. Consider the analysis from University of Arkansas professor of education reform Jay P. Greene of a school that lost five white students through vouchers and saw a shift in racial composition from 29.6 percent white to 28.9 percent white. Another school that lost six black students and saw a change in racial composition from 30.1 percent black to 29.2 percent black. “Though the students . . . almost certainly would not have noticed a difference, the racial bean counters at the DOJ see worsening segregation,” Mr. Greene wrote on his blog.

The number that should matter to federal officials is this: Roughly 86 percent of students in the voucher program came from schools that were rated D or F. Mr. White called ironic using rules to fight racism to keep students in failing schools; we think it appalling.

Unfortunately, though, it is not a surprise from an administration that, despite its generally progressive views on school reform, has proven to be hostile — as witnessed by its petty machinations against D.C.’s voucher program — to the school choice afforded by private-school vouchers. Mr. White told us that from Day One, the five-year-old voucher program has been subject to unrelenting scrutiny and questions from federal officials. Louisiana parents are clamoring for the choice afforded by this program; the state is insisting on accountability; poor students are benefiting. The federal government should get out of the way.

Did you catch that headline? From WaPo?

"Justice Department bids to trap poor, black children in ineffective schools"

Why would they do that? Do the children come first or not?

Apparently not since there seem to be an abundance of schools rated D or F. No one seems to care.

Apparently not since there seem to be an abundance of schools rated D or F. No one seems to care.

Sigh, I guess you missed the whole point.

You focused on one thing and I saw another. No harm, no foul.

From the WaPo editors...



Did you catch that headline? From WaPo?

"Justice Department bids to trap poor, black children in ineffective schools"

Why would they do that? Do the children come first or not?


Weren't you previously supporting equal rights under the law?

Louisiana Sends Kids to Private Religious Schools, Test Scores Don't Go Up | Care2 Causes (http://www.care2.com/causes/louisiana-sends-kids-to-private-religious-schools-test-scores-dont-go-up.html)


In other words, the best way to improve failing schools is to put fewer resources into them.

In May of this year, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that the manner of funding violated the state's constitution and the state must repay the $30 million dollars to the public schools.

Now faced with trying to find funds for the estimated $45 million dollar cost for the voucher program, Louisiana must also deal with the reality that voucher students are performing worse on standardized tests than their public school counterparts. In results released also in May, 60 percent of voucher students failed to score at or above grade level in the LEAP testing given to third through eighth graders. The 40 percent proficiency level of voucher students was significantly lower than the state average of 69 percent.

The testing at the private voucher schools are for accountability purposes since they receive taxpayer funds. Seven of the schools performed so badly for the past three years (less than 25% of the voucher students scored at proficient levels in any year), they are no longer allowed to accept new voucher students (current students can remain).

These seven schools are also the most dependent on public funds of all the voucher schools.

The state superintendent told The Times-Picayune that the low 2013 scores for voucher students were due to a large influx of students from poor performing schools, indicating that 61 percent of the students were in their first year at the school.

Of course, this does not explain why voucher students in the previous year were only at 33 percent proficiency.

Perhaps the poor performance of the voucher students has something to do with the curriculum in the schools. In 2008, the same year that the voucher program was approved for New Orleans, the legislature passed the Louisiana Science Education Act. The ironically titled act encourages the teaching of creationism as an actual competing theory to evolution.


Of the approximately 130 voucher schools, 20 purposely use textbooks and guides in their “science” programs that promote Biblical theories. While they will indicate that “evolutionists” believe something different, God's word is the one they should always trust. So if God says that dinosaurs and people lived on an earth that is only 6,000 years old, that is the correct test answer.

Unfortunately, standardized tests don't agree.

In December of 2012, the Orleans Parish School Board prohibited the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in public schools. Orleans Parish had 84 percent proficiency on the LEAP tests. Of the seven voucher schools that had less than 25% proficiency, three of them have a biblical based curriculum for their science teachings.

The majority of the voucher schools are religious.

The court ruling did not say the entire voucher program was unconstitutional, nor did it say that public funds could not be used. It simply stated that the funds could not come from the pool of money specifically designated for public schools.

Tax payer money shifted from public schools to private religious ones that think the Earth is 6,000 years old. What could go wrong?

First order of business is to get their religion right. "So if God says that dinosaurs and people lived on an earth that is only 6,000 years old, that is the correct test answer."

There is nothing in the Bible about the Earth's age or about dinosaurs. The adults need to get their heads on straight before teaching children.

You focused on one thing and I saw another. No harm, no foul.

No sense. That Jindal is trying to get these poor, black kids out of failing public schools shows and WaPo finds it "appalling" that Holder would keep them there IS the concern you couldn't find.

Weren't you previously supporting equal rights under the law?

What's your point?

Louisiana Sends Kids to Private Religious Schools, Test Scores Don't Go Up | Care2 Causes (http://www.care2.com/causes/louisiana-sends-kids-to-private-religious-schools-test-scores-dont-go-up.html)



Tax payer money shifted from public schools to private religious ones that think the Earth is 6,000 years old. What could go wrong?

From your source:


White said the 2013 scores for voucher students were low because of the large influx of students from failing schools. The voucher program, officially called the Louisiana Scholarship Program, started in New Orleans in 2008 and expanded statewide just this school year. It is open to low-income students who are either entering kindergarten or who have been attending a public school graded C, D or F. This year, 61 percent of test-takers were in their first year at their voucher school.

"Anytime you start something new, it's going to take some time to grow," White said. "Nearly two thirds of the kids taking tests in those schools had only been there six months."

And he pointed out that the state did take seven schools off the voucher list. "After a period of time we cannot tolerate failure," he said.

What is it you guys say about Obamacare? It ain't perfect but give it time?

but give it time?Time there (at the religious schools) will only turn them into religious drones.

Time there (at the religious schools) will only turn them into religious drones.

Why do you hate people of faith so much? You know nothing about them and your stereotypes are offensive and antagonistic. Not to mention some of the finest educational institutions in America, including a great number of our most prestigious universities Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Notre Dame, etc. - were founded by Christians and/or run by the church, some still are. So keep your hate to yourself.

I was of course referring to the posts above where the teachings will flaunt science if it doesn't line with the bible.

To each his own opinions. I'm not surprised your immediate response is to attack whilst continuously posting your own opinions. Typical political correctness: if one doesn't embrace your view then it must be hate.

I was of course referring to the posts above where the teachings will flaunt science if it doesn't line with the bible.

To each his own opinions. I'm not surprised your immediate response is to attack whilst continuously posting your own opinions. Typical political correctness: if one doesn't embrace your view then it must be hate.

And again, right over your head...

What's your point?



The problem as I see it is that the voucher programme can be viewed as an attempt to promote equality of enrolment. Providing that type of assistance is also a type of affirmative action.

You didn't approve of affirmative action when it come to universities reserving places for minority students, yet you appear to be arguing for the opposite in this post. Could you make your position clear as you cannot have it both ways.

I was of course referring to the posts above where the teachings will flaunt science if it doesn't line with the bible.

To each his own opinions. I'm not surprised your immediate response is to attack whilst continuously posting your own opinions. Typical political correctness: if one doesn't embrace your view then it must be hate.

Please read the signature line below

I don't display sigs.

The problem as I see it is that the voucher programme can be viewed as an attempt to promote equality of enrolment. Providing that type of assistance is also a type of affirmative action.

You didn't approve of affirmative action when it come to universities reserving places for minority students, yet you appear to be arguing for the opposite in this post. Could you make your position clear as you cannot have it both ways.

I don't see the point in racial quotas, I thought we were supposed to be a colorblind society. If I were a minority I'd be offended to know the only reason I got in was because of my skin color, or conversely rejected because I wasn't black.

The point of vouchers is to get children out of bad schools. Race is not a factor to me, but if it helps poor blacks that would seem to me something to celebrate, not criticize or worse as in Holder's case, sue to stop. Seems to me it is the left wanting it both ways, not me. I say there's room for all.

It's not a matter of race... it's a matter of choice .

And again another example of the left wanting it both ways.

It's not a matter of race ...it's a matter of choice .

I didn't say it was a matter of race I said it was a matter of affirmative action. Affirmative action is a way of providing an alternative for someone who would other wise not have the opportunity to better themselves.

In other posts you seem opposed to affirmative action.

I don't see the point in racial quotas, I thought we were supposed to be a colorblind society. If I were a minority I'd be offended to know the only reason I got in was because of my skin color, or conversely rejected because I wasn't black.

The point of vouchers is to get children out of bad schools. Race is not a factor to me, but if it helps poor blacks that would seem to me something to celebrate, not criticize or worse as in Holder's case, sue to stop. Seems to me it is the left wanting it both ways, not me. I say there's room for all.


Race is not a factor in terms of my argument. See my post to Tom.

And again another example of the left wanting it both ways.

I'm not the left. What makes you think that I am?

Private schools like private business are for profit, and is a solution that misses the root problem of failing schools in filing communities. Privatizing and closing public schools is profitable, and shifts money from communities to corporations and allows for changes in curriculum that push some misguided stuff that religions push.

The very thing that the right says the left is doing. No body has answered the question of what happens when the private seats are filled? Or those parents that cannot take kids to those private schools or pick them up when there is no free bus.

To bad for them huh? Louisiana is a good example of the problems in private companies sucking money from taxpayers for profit, and the kids are commodities. So its not really affirmative action, but a broken business model.

Who says you cut off busing ? Geeze ,the parents need to get something from their school tax money . They certainly isn't getting their kids educated with the money.

Neither are the private schools since it's a wash on who does a better job. I suspect it depends more on the parents than who builds and maintains the buildings. You talk of choices. Most of those choices are made by parents looking for a good neighborhood with good schools nearby. As the middle class shrinks, so do the middle class communities.

You still have the same problem, poor communities. Free bus or not. Its cost shifting, and leaves more people who cannot avail themselves of good schools are left behind to fend for themselves.

The trend is that those bussed students really do no better than when they weren't bussed and still go back to that same poor underfunded community. The trend is also on what does this experiment gains besides money in the private sector when religion and science is indistinguishable from each other as indeed as in Louisiana its shown through test result data that's what's acceptable in school tests, falls short of acceptable in a broader academic view.

That may be great for the south, but a student that moves somewhere else quickly learns that rigid thinking limits his/her options and opportunities for advancement just because they are not well prepared to compete on a higher level, with more competition, than they have been taught.

I'm not the left. What makes you think that I am?

I wasn't referring to you. How's that?

Private schools like private business are for profit,

First you complain about religious schools being included in the voucher program then you complain that private schools are in it for a profit. Uh, no. But even so, if they were in it for profit the way to make a profit is to furnish a quality product - but then I know how you lefties hate competition so I understand. And that is why public schools hate vouchers, they lose money for those students that jump their sinking ship.

You are right I have issues with both that are in my view self serving unto themselves. It not a left or right thing that you apply to everything though, its and equal and fairness thing to me.

I would gladly zero the corporate taxes if they sponsored education, from pre K through college, and afforded everyone an opportunity to be trained and educated, and employed gainfully to contribute to the welfare of the whole and not the few.

Then you wouldn't need all those government safety net programs to service a growing number of poor people and disadvantaged.

Corporate sponsorship of public schools already happens... and the lefties pan that too.

and the lefties pan that too.You're all for corporate sponsorship of public schools?

Certainly... what's the down side ?