|
The Wall Street Journal ran an op-ed showcasing the narrative DeVos will soon be pushing: any resistance to school privatization and Christianization is the corrupt lazy teachers' unions trying to extract rent from a failing system. It's gonna be bad.
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:05 |
|
|
Last December, Vice ran a good if heartbreaking piece about what DeVos and her ilk had done to Detroit public schools. And HUGE PUBES A PLUS wrote an excellent OP for CSPAM's DeVos thread and I'm just gonna steal part of it! HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:The DeVos family uses all that sweet bank to fund their many projects and causes. Members of the Dutch Reformed Church (now Christian Reformed) they practice Dominion Theology, which means they want the United States to be a Christian-dominated theocracy. Dick and Betsy DeVos support all the usual fundamentalist causes: Anti LGBT, anti choice, anti public schools, anti union, anti anything and anyone who doesn't think and believe exactly the way they do. Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Feb 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
Oxphocker posted:Part of the problem is the way we fund schools with local taxes. This is true but incomplete. While property tax bases are a problem, poor kids in poor schools do worse even when you spend more on them. Poverty means malnutrition, trauma, and exhausted parents, and there's only so much a school can do to compensate for that. (Free meal programs really help.) "Failing schools" and "school choice" often end up reinforcing the already-extant patterns of trying to avoid having to go to school around poor kids, by defining any school those kids go to as failing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Deadspin profiled DeVos, although it's nothing that hasn't already been posted in this thread. Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Feb 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Do you have a citation on this? I'd be interested to read the scholarship on spending more on poor schools and having the students performance directly negatively correlate. Thanks! I didn't say they directly negatively correlate - I said rather that the fact that children in poor areas are living in poverty is the primary reason schools with poor tax bases do poorly. It's one of the main conclusions of the Coleman Report. That doesn't mean underfunding schools in poor areas is good! It means that we shouldn't expect that more equitable school funding will dramatically improve educational outcomes in poor areas on its own. on the left posted:Explain the societal benefit of dropping 70k/year on special ed for a single student. I'm assuming we will never see any of that money back in the form of income taxes. on the left is trash but this is worth answering. Special education helps BD or LD children function better as adults. Even in a cruel dollars and sense measure, spec ed means children are more likely to grow up to be self-sufficient adults, and not end up in a care home or in prison. It's the most effective MH therapy program in history.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
stone cold posted:which rather carries the implication that we shouldn't spend money on poor children. Next sentence, SC. quote:It means that we shouldn't expect that more equitable school funding will dramatically improve educational outcomes in poor areas on its own. Your first paper is arguing about whether poor schools spend the money they get from transfers efficiently relative to other school expenditures. They do! What it doesn't even address is the cause of the difference in outcomes between rich and poor schools. I don't have access to the second paper so I really can't comment on it. For the specific issue of "why do kids in poor neighborhoods have poor educational outcomes", the property tax lottery is seriously overblown. You can't blame all of the problems of American education on the property tax lottery, because the real "problem" is that districts concentrate impoverished students in segregated groups, then presume that those districts are doing something wrong. This doesn't mean that the property tax lottery is just - it should be corrected - but it isn't the reason why the schools teaching poor students are deemed to be "failing." The problem is that the way we evaluate schools is designed to justify white flight. A "failing school", often as not, is one that is doing its best - and a good job! - serving poor kids.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:The School Improvement Grant program dumped $7 Billion on struggling schools with no significant benefit found. Look at the strings attached to that money: quote:The money went to states to distribute to their poorest-performing schools — those with exceedingly low graduation rates, or poor math and reading test scores, or both. Individual schools could receive up to $2 million per year for three years, on the condition that they adopt one of the Obama administration’s four preferred measures: replacing the principal and at least half the teachers, converting into a charter school, closing altogether, or undergoing a “transformation,” including hiring a new principal and adopting new instructional strategies, new teacher evaluations and a longer school day.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
K-12 teachers don't get into the gig for the cushy working conditions and lucrative pay.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
shovelbum posted:I would say that people who are already in a position to have a college degree (most a masters) should refuse to work for those wages, and should not pursue those opportunities as students. A massive teacher shortage would kind of force the issue more than grinning and bearing it does. you know that teachers have unions, right?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
Speak posted:You're right, I didn't get into it for either of those things, but that doesn't mean they don't matter. I'm not saying teachers don't deserve better than they get. On the contrary. The point is that anyone who isn't willing to tolerate the poor working conditions and compensation already quit. Yay capitalism.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:What are you talking about? are you an eliza bot? gently caress off with this
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Obviously the wealth of the students' parents and teacher quality both matter. Since you are willing to grant that teacher quality is important, you would agree with me and disagree with Oxphocker that it doesn't make a lot of sense to categorically oppose evaluation of teachers' performance on the basis that teachers' performance has little effect on student outcomes. The problem is that "evaluation of teachers' performance" is an axe often wielded by people who will find no public school and no public expenditure acceptable at all. See the recent mess when DeVos toured a perfectly successful school and described it afterwards as struggling and in a holding pattern.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:What do you mean by "participate in society"? That seems needlessly vague. People have their personal life where they can do whatever they want and people have their job where they contribute to society in some way. Your version of schooling seems geared towards the private side where people can discover themselves through hobbies (?). What use is that? Why should we spend time money and infrastructure on something like that? Wouldn't it be better suited towards actually preparing people for the workforce? Because a basic liberal education is needed in order to effectively participate in politics, for one. It's also broadly applicable to the sort of jobs or societal needs we haven't even conceived of yet.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
Crabtree posted:Well there always seems a soros or actors or some other rival rich among those currently in power. If courts and smears don't work, they could just go after their children too to "cut off liberal indoctrination at its root". I hope our Illuminati masters pick Ellison over Perez although I guess Perez will be a decent vessel for their implacable secret agenda
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 10:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:05 |
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:If people could go bankrupt at 22 and keep the degree they just earned, they all would do it. The bankruptcy would be discharged just about when they were thinking of settling down and buying a house. this is just openly acknowledging that degree requirements exist chiefly to keep poor people from improving their station in life
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 17:24
|
|