Are Americans getting dumber?

[CuteOldGuy]

WTF, weren't you going to explain "legancy" costs to us? We're waiting.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

I've seen that, very informative. I cannot fathom anyone wanting their children to get a public education, blows me away there are some here that do.

Obama sends his kids to a private school in DC called Sidwell Friends School. It's actually affiliated with the Quaker church. A lot of DC politicians in both parties send their kids there. Until about two years ago, DC had a voucher program, but the Democrats shut it down. They don't give a shit about the kids. They only care about the teacher's unions and the teacher's unions don't give a shit about the kids either.

Democrat politicians are totally in bed with the teacher's unions and fight vouchers so that ordinary people can't send their kids to private schools. I think politicians should be forced to send their kids to government schools.

http://www.sidwell.edu/

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

WTF, weren't you going to explain "legancy" costs to us? We're waiting.

I provided you a link...I can lead you to water but I will not piss in it

[CuteOldGuy]

Why not admit you're a dumbshit for ranting about "legancy" for so long, when there is no such thing?

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Old-T

The key to your argument is that it is a charter school, so I assume the parents had to do something proactive to get their kids into those schools. That means they were also supporting the school's policies. That parental involvement is probably worth far more than the uniforms and many other trappings.

You also mention the other key element: better teachers. Doubling the number of charter/private schools will not double the number of good teachers. "Better" teachers are often those with more experience and with the zeal to withstand the pain of administivia. That means they often have enough senority to get the charter school positions.

Yes, a combination of better teachers, more involved parents, and a focused agenda tailored to attract a matching group of students is likely to produce better results. That is the easy part.

Take students who have no support at home (or often an educational hostile atmosphere), no parental support for the school, the second or third tier of teachers, and see if that works in any environment, charter or private or traditional public. Odds are it won't.

Throwing more $ alone will not fix it.

Decreeing tougher standards alone will not fix it.

And using the schools as a political football sure won't.

You really should watch the movie "Waiting for Superman". It was a real eye opener for me. Far and away the most important element in improving schools is better teachers. The movie drives this point home; good teachers get dramatically better results that typical teachers.

Because of tenure and teacher's unions it's become essentially impossible to fire bad teachers. The average cost to fire a teacher is several hundred thousand dollars because the unions fight it in court. In New York City they warehouse the really bad teachers. They have a building where they send them instead of going to class. They get full pay and benefits but don't teach anymore. It's cheaper to keep paying them for doing nothing than it is to fire them. They do this to the worst teachers, the drug addicts, pedophiles and violent ones.

There are private and charter schools that take problem kids from bad home environments in rough inner city neighborhoods and turn them around. The entire movie is on Youtube if you have the patience to watch fourteen separate videos. I'm sure it's on Netflix streaming video and Blockbuster streaming video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rmSldhnSDc

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why not admit you're a dumbshit for ranting about "legancy" for so long, when there is no such thing?

How many links do you want me to provide? I have already provided it once.

http://record-eagle.com/wednesday/x1...costs-are-huge


MPSERS is the state's "defined benefit" retirement plan mainly for retirees of our local school districts and community colleges. A defined benefit plan provides a guaranteed level of benefits upon retirement. Besides pension benefits, MPSERS also provides school retirees with health care benefits.

Most school employees hired before 1990 pay nothing toward these benefits and those hired between 1990 and 2008 only pay 4 percent of their gross salary while the rest of their liability is paid for by the taxpayers through local school district budgets.

This year, the rate school districts are charged for MPSERS will be nearly 25 percent. This is calculated on the salaries of current school district employees, so for every dollar a school district pays for an employee's salary, it is paying an additional 25 cents to cover pension and retiree healthcare costs.

According to the Senate Fiscal Agency, school districts spent $1.85 billion last year to pay for pension and retiree health benefits — that equates to $1,200 per pupil. Without any changes, this number will be even higher in the years to come

[gnadfly]

Unpossible.

[CuteOldGuy]

I know what "legacy" costs are, I was hoping you'd explain "legancy".

[LovingKayla]

We live in the sticks. The public school here has done more for my kid than garland EVER did.

Wonder what that says?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I know what "legacy" costs are, I was hoping you'd explain "legancy".

leg·a·ncy

 noun.
1) Obsolete . Old Man. Otherwise known on eccie as COG

[essence]

I haven;t read all the thread, but the same concerns exist in the UK, I can;t speak about other European countries.

BTW, all my kids in the UK have always gone to private fee paying schools, partly because of this kind of thing.

Unfortunately that reduces my funds for having fun with sexy eccentrics.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by LovingKayla

We live in the sticks. The public school here has done more for my kid than garland EVER did.

Wonder what that says?

All it says is that for your kids that collection of school + home environment "in the sticks" worked better for them that the combination of school + home environment in Garland. It is one data point for one family, presented in isolation.

I'm glad it is working out better for yours.

[Don't Be Daft!]

I too went to all private school in Manchester. Then "Uni" in Edinburgh. I did have plenty of mates who went through the public ranks and turned out quite well. I suppose my parents were more worried about the stick I'd get as kid growing up in the public system. As you know children can be quite mean at times and being a Jew with a Jewish sir-name might have complicated matters. So, I went to private school in Prestwich. The problem with the UK is its so small that even in the posh areas there are bad elements. That is a bit different here in America. For example whilst living in Chicago I lived in Deerfield on the north shore. The public education is quite brilliant as far as the northshore Lake county schools are concerned. Which is very different from Cook county Chicago schools. And, they don't do busying any longer so that elemenates the bad elements (mostly). Obviously, the wealthy can have some proper twats as well.