President Trump

@revelette2,

You wrote "If the charter schools are so good.... " etc. In your original post you conceded that the charter school students have performed 4% better than their public school counterparts in math and reading proficiency. I checked but couldn't find any evidence of a comparable improvement in the Public schools there in the past decade. So, based on that, it appears you have already conceded the point behind your "if".

My main point was that the charter schools are indeed accountable to the State agencies now running the Detroit Public Schools and therefore the taxpayers as well.

So I believe I have addressed your challenge fully.
=> The charter schools do indeed perform better than Public schools in terms of measured student proficiency.
=> The charter schools require the continued certification of the state agency directing the Detroit Public schools and are therefore fully accountabler through them to the taxpayers.
=> the whole issue you presented in terms of the Free Press article was a highly deceptive and futile effort on the part of the School Board and the Teachers union to escape the lawful consequences of their prolongued failures and bankrupcy .

2 Replies

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

Personally I agree to disagree with ya'll. All you guys are doing are giving me the right wing talking points on public schools. I can go to websites to get more of the same if I wanted, which I don't.

Do you for a moment imagine you are giving us anything better in the regurgitated stuff you paste here????

At least we write our own comments.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

Quote:

All you guys are doing are giving me the right wing talking points on public schools. I can go to websites to get more of the same if I wanted, which I don't.

That's how someone from the left changes the subject when they can't answer reasonable statements. "It's a right wing talking point, so I'm going to move on." No attempt to tell us were wrong, just change the subject. No wonder you support the teachers unions over students and parents rights, you have no answers.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

When I wrote "if they are still held accountable" I didn't know if they were. I will take your word for the fact that they are. In that case, I don't have big issue with them. However, Devos has been pushing for less accountability and less oversight and that is who Trump chose as Secretary of Education. It is really not surprising the Charter schools are outperforming the public ones because the public schools are underfunded to the point they are unsafe for the children who attend. (At least in Detroit) I suppose not everyone can attend those rarified charter schools and students get left behind in unsafe underfunded public schools.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

If the taxpayers are sending their children to charter schools, why shouldn't their money go towards the school they chose to send their children to?

Do you think that childless individuals/couples should have to pay taxes for public or charter schools?

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Do you think that if charter schools were forced to teach 100% of the population that public schools are teaching, that their performance would be the same or better or worse than public schools?

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

It is really not surprising the Charter schools are outperforming the public ones because the public schools are underfunded to the point they are unsafe for the children who attend. (At least in Detroit) I suppose not everyone can attend those rarified charter schools and students get left behind in unsafe underfunded public schools.

I don't know about Detroit in particular, but the USA spends more per pupil than any other country in the world. Of course overpaid members of the teacher's union get billions. If Detroit's public schools are "underfunded" then I guess the despicable "for profit" charter schools are even MORE "underfunded, since the per student cost is less, eh?

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Don't leave Rev. Its what the slack jawed jerks are trying to do. So they can tell each other how much more intelligent they are than the surfs and tell each other their lies without being corrected by the more stupid on this site. Its what happened to abuzz.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

Its what this mutual admiration society does Rev. Put words in ones mouth so they can tell ecch other how much smarter they are than the surfs. They have no idea what it is to be truthful. The bigger the lie the happier they are.

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

I don't know about Detroit in particular, but the USA spends more per pupil than any other country in the world. Of course overpaid members of the teacher's union get billions. If Detroit's public schools are "underfunded" then I guess the despicable "for profit" charter schools are even MORE "underfunded, since the per student cost is less, eh?

I doubt it, they are also funded by corporations and private right wing religious groups and republican think tanks groups.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Do you think that if charter schools were forced to teach 100% of the population that public schools are teaching, that their performance would be the same or better or worse than public schools?

No I don't. But I also don't believe that is an explanation for the failure of our Public schools, particularly in urban areas.

I grew up partly in Detroit and the public schools then were lousy then as well. I was fortunate in attending Catholic schools and got a good education. We heard the 100% excuse frequently back then. It was and still is a very weak rationaliozation for a problem that was and is potentially amenable by corrective action that has never been taken.,

The public schools need serious competition in order to break the stultifying hold of self-serving unions and bureaucrats. The people of these communities also need choices so they can, by the examples they set, provide some feedback to others on the benefits of effective parenting and involvement.

The curent public school situation in Detroit and many other places in this country is highly stable in an unsatisfactory state. Serious disruption and competition will be required to improve institutions whose only remedy for everything is more money and more job security for inept teachers, and a served population which has been told it isn't their fault. Both are prescriptions for continued failure and misery.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

I doubt it, they are also funded by corporations and private right wing religious groups and republican think tanks groups.

Those are merely your stupid characterizations of them. I think those words were merely the best you could do in the absence of any useful facts or insights. Do you ever think for yourself?

So what? If they do a better job educating the children who benefits?

0 Replies

@maporsche,

What does that have to do with parents and school choice? Are you in favor of old lady Williams, who doesn't have school age children, having more control over the school system than a child's parents? That is what it sounds like.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

So you agree that given the same population that charter schools would not outperform public schools?

Then the only reason you believe we should have them is to drive down the cost of an equally shitty public education system? And the way we do this is by forcing teachers to earn LESS money?

I flat out object to public funds being used to provide a religious education.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

What does that have to do with parents and school choice? Are you in favor of old lady Williams, who doesn't have school age children, having more control over the school system than a child's parents? That is what it sounds like.

My point is that if you object to a parent's tax funds going to a school their child doesn't attend, then you MUST logically object to a childless individuals/couples tax funds going to a school that their non-existent child doesn't attend.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Quote:

My point is that if you object to a parent's tax funds going to a school their child doesn't attend, then you MUST logically object to a childless individuals/couples tax funds going to a school that their non-existent child doesn't attend.

I never said they objected, I said they should be able to send their student to the school they want to and the money that would educate that child should follow that child. It has nothing to do with the average property taxpayer, it has to do with parents and how they want to educate their child.

Do you have any children? Do you have to deal with school districts?

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Please don't try to put words in my mouth that I didn't say. Reread my post. I did not agree that given the same populations , the charter schools would not out perform the public schools. On the contrary there is ample ervidence in Detroit and many other states that they are significantly superior.
The rest of your "deductions" are merely nonsense.

I'm not aware that any teachers are being forced to earn LESS money. Please explain what you may mean.

I will certainly agree that, in terms of what they achieve, the Public school teachers in Detroit have long been paid far too much. However, the degrees to which that may be a consequence of their own actions, or the combined effects of decayed bureaucracy and a self-serving union I don't claim to know. It is however, abundantly clear that the system is badly broken and needs serious competition to be induced to reform itself.

The charter schools in question are all secular, so your "objections' here are quite irrelevant.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

Do you have any children? Do you have to deal with school districts?

No. I only have to deal with the school districts in so much that my property taxes pay for them.

THAT gives me a say, whether you think I should have one or not. Unless you don't think those who fund public endeavors should have a say in them.

I also have 3 good friends who are teachers here in Chicago, so some of our conversations are around their experiences as teachers.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Please don't try to put words in my mouth that I didn't say. Reread my post. I did not agree that given the same populations , the charter schools would not out perform the public schools. On the contrary there is ample ervidence in Detroit and many other states that they are significantly superior.
The rest of your "deductions" are merely nonsense.

I'm not aware that any teachers are being forced to earn LESS money. Please explain what you may mean.

I will certainly agree that, in terms of what they achieve, the Public school teachers in Detroit have long been paid far too much. However, the degrees to which that may be a consequence of their own actions, or the combined effects of decayed bureaucracy and a self-serving union I don't claim to know. It is however, abundantly clear that the system is badly broken and needs serious competition to be induced to reform itself.

The charter schools in question are all secular, so your "objections' here are quite irrelevant.

I asked you if they would perform the same, better, or worse. Your response was basically 'yes'. That led me to a different assumption than you had intended I guess, but it stemmed from your non-answer. I didn't put words in your mouth, I asked you a follow-up question (with a question mark and everything).

I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe that if you placed an entire schools worth of children into a given charter school's program, that those same children would outperform public schools. I severely doubt that to be the case based on the evidence I've seen.

The only argument that appears to have some basis in measurable data is the cost per pupil figures that I've seen online. Something like charter schools being 20%-30% less expensive than public schools. The cause most often cited for the less expense per pupil is due to faculty (i.e. teachers) being paid less money.

In your "competition" based school system example where unions are broken, a very likely result would be less money for teachers. Competition means taking funds away from public schools...where do you think those funds go?

3 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

In your "competition" based school system example where unions are broken, a very likely result would be less money for teachers. Competition means taking funds away from public schools...

Obviously. Less money for public school teachers because there would be less of them. Why? Because they have responsibility for fewer students.

Is there some point you're trying to make with this "insight?"

1 Reply

President Trump

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know