Break the state-run-school cartel - for the sake of the kids.

[darin]

Stossell hits a home run about the benefits - and NO drawbacks - of Charter Schools.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bammwIBSzLM

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I miss him on Fox News... wonder what the heck happened there why he's gone...

[darin]

I miss him on Fox News... wonder what the heck happened there why he's gone...

He left Fox to go digital. He has a YT page and posts on ReasonTV's YT channel too.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

He left Fox to go digital. He has a YT page and posts on ReasonTV's YT channel too.
REALLY... I will look that up right now. I like Stossel.

[pete311]

All I know is that charter schools in my city get public money but get to choose what kids they want. That leaves the public schools to rot with the worst kids because they are required to take them.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

All I know is that charter schools in my city get public money but get to choose what kids they want. That leaves the public schools to rot with the worst kids because they are required to take them.

You mean the worse kids whose traits they encourage and promote over the long ago abandoned principles and discipline that public schools once had?
You know, all that stuff that the libs/dems changed, so that they could dumb people down enough to vote for them!
Which started in the 60's and bears its insidious bumper crops of rotten fruits today..
That public school system(controlled by liberal policies and the dems) that you now bemoaned what it has become while ignoring it was by lib/dem design...
Your blinders must be at least ten miles thick, methinks...-Tyr

[darin]

All I know is that charter schools in my city get public money but get to choose what kids they want. That leaves the public schools to rot with the worst kids because they are required to take them.

Sounds fair. Parents' problems..not the schools or the district's issue. Parents raise assholes who refuse to behave and learn - that's fine.


If public schools were up to par, the charter schools wouldn't be popular-enough to draw the average students, thus leaving the below-average to the incompetent standard public schools.

[pete311]

Sounds fair. Parents' problems..not the schools or the district's issue. Parents raise assholes who refuse to behave and learn - that's fine.


If public schools were up to par, the charter schools wouldn't be popular-enough to draw the average students, thus leaving the below-average to the incompetent standard public schools.

There will always be a spectrum from where to filter. I don't see how you an blame a school that's been cherry picked for not performing. You say it's the parents problem, but then the school gets blamed. The world's best teacher isn't going to be effective in a classroom/school literally full of trouble.

[darin]

There will always be a spectrum from where to filter. I don't see how you an blame a school that's been cherry picked for not performing. You say it's the parents problem, but then the school gets blamed. The world's best teacher isn't going to be effective in a classroom/school literally full of trouble.

Which is the parents domain. Parents fail to train to teach their kids how to learn. That's where the student typically starts.

The problem with education is the public school system as-is; they cannot effectively teach the masses. Charter schools provide better results -regardless of where the student starts. Charter schools, over all, simply perform better. The school with the asshole kids or poor-performers? abolish the unions, make it a charter school and whatever level it is now will be increased within a couple years.

[pete311]

Which is the parents domain. Parents fail to train to teach their kids how to learn. That's where the student typically starts.

The problem with education is the public school system as-is; they cannot effectively teach the masses. Charter schools provide better results -regardless of where the student starts. Charter schools, over all, simply perform better. The school with the asshole kids or poor-performers? abolish the unions, make it a charter school and whatever level it is now will be increased within a couple years.

Huh? Charter schools perform better because they can deny enrolling the poor performers. They don't have a different teaching style or structure. So simply renaming a public school into a charter school won't make any difference unless you then move the kids out of the school and cherry pick the good ones. But then where do the other ones go? There must be a public school that is required to take them and then you can't blame them for not being able to control what all the others abandoned.

[Abbey Marie]

Huh? Charter schools perform better because they can deny enrolling the poor performers. They don't have a different teaching style or structure. So simply renaming a public school into a charter school won't make any difference unless you then move the kids out of the school and cherry pick the good ones. But then where do the other ones go? There must be a public school that is required to take them and then you can't blame them for not being able to control what all the others abandoned.

Depending on age, send the incorrigibles to votech, reform school or the military. There’s no point continually trying to educate someone who refuses to learn or behave.

[STTAB]

All I know is that charter schools in my city get public money but get to choose what kids they want. That leaves the public schools to rot with the worst kids because they are required to take them.

This is true, but not the entire story nor does it explain just how awful some public schools really are.

[darin]

Huh? Charter schools perform better because they can deny enrolling the poor performers. They don't have a different teaching style or structure. So simply renaming a public school into a charter school won't make any difference unless you then move the kids out of the school and cherry pick the good ones. But then where do the other ones go? There must be a public school that is required to take them and then you can't blame them for not being able to control what all the others abandoned.

You are trying a chicken or egg argument.

They perform better 'accross the board'. Better than the public schools when they had the same students that now attend charter schools. thats the point. Libertarians and conservatives differ so much from leftists - because we prefer things that work to make society better. we want to use things that actually work.

[pete311]

You are trying a chicken or egg argument.

They perform better 'accross the board'. Better than the public schools when they had the same students that now attend charter schools. thats the point. Libertarians and conservatives differ so much from leftists - because we prefer things that work to make society better. we want to use things that actually work.

They don't have the same students, that's the point.

[STTAB]

They don't have the same students, that's the point.

They also don't have the same teachers. Maybe that's the difference.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

They don't have the same students, that's the point.
That's life. There's winners and losers.

Maybe leftists teachers in public schools could start teaching the kids that instead of coddling them and giving them all a participation trophy and telling them their all beautiful and so important. Quit pumping their heads full of liberals garbage.

That's why we have charter schools, so parents have a place to put their kids to learn that won't get leftist indoctrination.

[pete311]

That's life. There's winners and losers.

Maybe leftists teachers in public schools could start teaching the kids that instead of coddling them and giving them all a participation trophy and telling them their all beautiful and so important. Quit pumping their heads full of liberals garbage.

That's why we have charter schools, so parents have a place to put their kids to learn that won't get leftist indoctrination.

Fine if that is your opinion, but then don't blame public schools that are left with only the trouble kids for under performing.

[Black Diamond]

Fine if that is your opinion, but then don't blame public schools that are left with only the trouble kids for under performing.
Considering that will be a very small percentage of kids were school choice realized, I'll take it.

[darin]

They don't have the same students, that's the point.

They *had* the same students. that's the point. When they *had* the same students they under-performed.

but think about what you're saying. If *the* difference is the quality of the student, why are we worried so much about teacher ability and quality policy?

[Black Diamond]

They *had* the same students. that's the point. When they *had* the same students they under-performed.

but think about what you're saying. If *the* difference is the quality of the student, why are we worried so much about teacher ability and quality policy?
It's about competition.

[darin]

And doesn't speak to the places where charter schools admit via lottery.

And it doesn't speak to why they need to admit via lottery or specific selection (hint: because there is a demand for better education than what's being offered).

[Gunny]

And doesn't speak to the places where charter schools admit via lottery.

And it doesn't speak to why they need to admit via lottery or specific selection (hint: because there is a demand for better education than what's being offered).Oxford University was under fire last week because their answer to not enough females performing well on tests? They dumbed down the test. How does that accurately reflect on actual education? I don't like the answers so I'll change the questions.

If the standard of performance is as low as the lowest achiever, not a whole bunch of actual education is going on. If I could have afforded it, my kids would have gone to private school. My daughter is a spec ed school teacher in a public school in one of the lowest income areas in SA. Pete would be proud. I wouldn't put up with the crap she does. Not for even a day. She sure as Hell didn't lean that patience from me.

But I look at some of the stuff my grandchildren bring home and just don't say a word. One's in 1st grade and one's in 3rd grade and the stuff they bring home we learned at home BEFORE first grade. But they teach to the level of the lowest performer so Little Juan doesn't get his psyche hurt. The non-achievers get the same awards as the high achievers. Lots of incentive there.

[STTAB]

And doesn't speak to the places where charter schools admit via lottery.

And it doesn't speak to why they need to admit via lottery or specific selection (hint: because there is a demand for better education than what's being offered).

Darin you're missing a point here somewhat. Yes , there are charter schools that admit by lottery, but even then those students chosen must maintain a certain level or they are kicked out. Thus at the end of the year, any poor performers have simply been removed from the equation. Public schools obviously can not do this.

That IS going to affect the scoring difference between the two schools.

The solution to that particular problem is obvious, as Abby pointed out earlier in the thread, allow public schools to remove those children. Why should government resources be wasted on children who have no desire to learn.

I'm not saying this is the ONLY factor that allows charter schools to perform better than public schools, but it is A factor, no different than charter schools being able to hold teachers to a higher performance standard is a factor.

[darin]

Darin you're missing a point here somewhat. Yes , there are charter schools that admit by lottery, but even then those students chosen must maintain a certain level or they are kicked out. Thus at the end of the year, any poor performers have simply been removed from the equation. Public schools obviously can not do this.

That IS going to affect the scoring difference between the two schools.

The solution to that particular problem is obvious, as Abby pointed out earlier in the thread, allow public schools to remove those children. Why should government resources be wasted on children who have no desire to learn.

I'm not saying this is the ONLY factor that allows charter schools to perform better than public schools, but it is A factor, no different than charter schools being able to hold teachers to a higher performance standard is a factor.

I'm not real sure poor performers are removed from charter schools - that's the first question.

The second question with your comment is - 'a factor'.


That's dangerous. I suppose I am uncomfortable with anyone arguing a multifaceted issue with a mono-faceted argument.

The fact they are children: Also a factor. That they are in any school at all. Also a factor. That they study. Also a factor.

I think we should focus on the most-important/influential/impactful factors. So I'm not missing the point a little, I am simply focused on the most-important points.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Oxford University was under fire last week because their answer to not enough females performing well on tests? They dumbed down the test. How does that accurately reflect on actual education? I don't like the answers so I'll change the questions.

If the standard of performance is as low as the lowest achiever, not a whole bunch of actual education is going on. If I could have afforded it, my kids would have gone to private school. My daughter is a spec ed school teacher in a public school in one of the lowest income areas in SA. Pete would be proud. I wouldn't put up with the crap she does. Not for even a day. She sure as Hell didn't lean that patience from me.

But I look at some of the stuff my grandchildren bring home and just don't say a word. One's in 1st grade and one's in 3rd grade and the stuff they bring home we learned at home BEFORE first grade. But they teach to the level of the lowest performer so Little Juan doesn't get his psyche hurt. The non-achievers get the same awards as the high achievers. Lots of incentive there.


They have done that with blacks for over 50 years now, lower the standards to accomadate them and even score them higher to get jobs, promotions , bonuses , etc. etc, and etc...
The liberal school system instituted those changes in our public schools right after integration was mandated.
I was there entering high school as integration began here in the South.I saw that being done. Standards brought down!
and it only mushroomed after that in the decades that came.
Now the average high school graduate is not as educated as the average 7th grader was back in the 60's in the South. A fact..-Tyr

[STTAB]

I'm not real sure poor performers are removed from charter schools - that's the first question.

The second question with your comment is - 'a factor'.


That's dangerous. I suppose I am uncomfortable with anyone arguing a multifaceted issue with a mono-faceted argument.

The fact they are children: Also a factor. That they are in any school at all. Also a factor. That they study. Also a factor.

I think we should focus on the most-important/influential/impactful factors. So I'm not missing the point a little, I am simply focused on the most-important points.

No , I'm sorry but reading your posts it's quite clear that you are completely discounting the fact that shitty kids being in public schools but not charter schools is going to skew the comparison between the two. I mean it just is.

Let's assume you have two schools in one city, one is a charter school and one is a public school.

Now let's assume that the charter school accepts children based on a lottery system and that each of those schools starts out the school year with roughly the same caliber of students across the board.

As the school year progresses, each school is no doubt going to see kids who excel, many who just sort of hang around, and some who don't perform to standards. The charter schools DO get rid of students who aren't meeting standards. The public schools can not . So at the end of the year, that skews the numbers.

[Abbey Marie]

Here's a short interesting article on charters and discipline by Thomas Sowell:


http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426449/its-not-unfair-charter-schools-expel-disruptive-students-thomas-sowell

[darin]

No , I'm sorry but reading your posts it's quite clear that you are completely discounting the fact that shitty kids being in public schools but not charter schools is going to skew the comparison between the two. I mean it just is.

Let's assume you have two schools in one city, one is a charter school and one is a public school.

Now let's assume that the charter school accepts children based on a lottery system and that each of those schools starts out the school year with roughly the same caliber of students across the board.

As the school year progresses, each school is no doubt going to see kids who excel, many who just sort of hang around, and some who don't perform to standards. The charter schools DO get rid of students who aren't meeting standards. The public schools can not . So at the end of the year, that skews the numbers.

that is a fantsy scenario to which you have no data showing actually exists in a meaningful way. You would have to figure out the rate of sub-standard kids compared to the public schools. You would have to show public schools and charters have the same rate of sub-standard kids. If a charter school has 2 percent failures compared to 10 percent of public schools it means your point is invalid.

[Kathianne]

Here's a short interesting article on charters and discipline by Thomas Sowell:


http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426449/its-not-unfair-charter-schools-expel-disruptive-students-thomas-sowell

I was subbing in a k-12 semi-charter school. It's still in district and union, BUT it has different criteria required of staff, parents, and students. May be a quirk with AZ laws. No testing, from what I can read within district and out. HOWEVER, the rigor of curriculum is emphasized on the school and district site. Longer day for one. It's an IB accredited school, meaning emphasis is on 'World' view regarding all subjects. Two foreign languages are required. Something like 75% of students enter high honors tract in high school. By 4th grade parents can expect students to have at least 2-2.5 hours of homework. They use the Great Books program for literature and yes, they do teach civics. The pace of classes is quick, as it was in school. More classes, but 40 minutes instead of 60 per 'hour.'

The middle school I've mostly been at has undefined expectations from what I've seen, homework seems non-existent. There are a lot of non-English speaking/reading students. The kids are for the most part very nice, and well behaved. There are a few very angry kids, mostly 'Anglos.' I guess they may well be frustrated with the pace of learning, it's being held back to 'reach' the low performing.

Like it or not, we are a very diverse country, AZ is very different than IL. It shows up in the plethora of charter schools and homeschooling. The regulations are not as many, nor enforced with the same vigor.

[STTAB]

that is a fantsy scenario to which you have no data showing actually exists in a meaningful way. You would have to figure out the rate of sub-standard kids compared to the public schools. You would have to show public schools and charters have the same rate of sub-standard kids. If a charter school has 2 percent failures compared to 10 percent of public schools it means your point is invalid.

Are you seriously arguing that charter schools aren't pickier about which kids they admit and keep enrolled than public schools can be?

http://gothamist.com/2015/10/30/success_academy_charter.php

https://www.scpr.org/blogs/education/2015/02/13/17908/policy-kicking-out-students-with-low-grades-comes/

More links can be provided if needed.

This isn't saying anything negative about charter schools (unless you believe that poor students should be able to take away from the education of everyone else) it's just a fact. Public schools can not simply kick bad students out, they must allow them to remain in the class. Which leads to, among other things, public schools teaching down to the slowest kids in each class rather than simply removing them, which obviously slows down the education of students who could learn faster if given the opportunity.

[Abbey Marie]

Slightly tangential-
The schools here still have forced busing. Even after the courts ruled that there is nothing inherently unfair or unconstitutional about not having busing.

We had hearings about stopping busing about 10 years ago. People argued the expense of bringing kids way outside of their neighborhood. And the extra time kids spend on a bus because of it. How the schools are funded equally and the facilities are equal (they are). When the board could not rebut these arguments, they were forced to tell the truth: they think minority kids learn better in class with white kids.

What? Besides sounding rather racist, the opposite seems true to me- the curriculum gets dumbed-down and the kids who want to learn, suffer. Not to mention that it makes it difficult for anyone to be involved in extracurricular activities. Not to mention that my daughter was threatened by a bused kid in first grade. Said he would kill her whole family. That kind of thing can leave a scar.

So, here we are in 2017 still busing in kids from "downtown", and shuttling our kids downtown to learn. The refuge has become honors classes, and later, AP classes.

[STTAB]

Slightly tangential-
The schools here still have forced busing. Even after the courts ruled that there is nothing inherently unfair or unconstitutional about not having busing.

We had hearings about stopping busing about 10 years ago. People argued the expense of bringing kids way outside of their neighborhood. And the extra time kids spend on a bus because of it. How the schools are funded equally and the facilities are equal (they are). When the board could not rebut these arguments, they were forced to tell the truth: they think minority kids learn better in class with white kids.

What? Besides sounding rather racist, the opposite seems true to me- the curriculum gets dumbed-down and the kids who want to learn, suffer. Not to mention that it makes it difficult for anyone to be involved in extracurricular activities. Not to mention that my daughter was threatened by a bused kid in first grade. Said he would kill her whole family. That kind of thing can leave a scar.

So, here we are in 2017 still busing in kids from "downtown", and shuttling our kids downtown to learn. The refuge has become honors classes, and later, AP classes.

Yep, and that's one of the reasons charter schools outperform public schools. They don't have to dumb down their classes , they simply remove low performers and move on.

Of course some public schools try to do much the same thing and simply place those kids in special ed, but they don't belong there either.

[Abbey Marie]

Yep, and that's one of the reasons charter schools outperform public schools. They don't have to dumb down their classes , they simply remove low performers and move on.

Of course some public schools try to do much the same thing and simply place those kids in special ed, but they don't belong there either.

After I retired, I briefly worked at our local school district headquarters. I saw up close how difficult it is to expel even the most badly-behaved student. Even if they tried, mama would get a lawyer and the district often caved.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Fine if that is your opinion, but then don't blame public schools that are left with only the trouble kids for under performing.
It's not the students that are to blame necessarily, it's the leftist indoctrination and agenda perpetrated in public schools that's to blame.

That's the number one reason why parents chose to send their kids to charter schools, to avoid such indoctrination. I'd argue the teachers in charter schools aren't any better than public schools, it's WHAT they teach, and HOW they teach that makes the difference.

[Kathianne]

Yep, and that's one of the reasons charter schools outperform public schools. They don't have to dumb down their classes , they simply remove low performers and move on.

Of course some public schools try to do much the same thing and simply place those kids in special ed, but they don't belong there either.
I don't think they can 'remove students' for non-performance. Behavior? Yes, but so could the general public schools if they did so consistently.

[Gunny]

I don't think they can 'remove students' for non-performance. Behavior? Yes, but so could the general public schools if they did so consistently.They have to commit murder here to get removed. One kid broke out the window in Ash's classroom and they sent him back to class. His dad's a Black Panther and in prison so he has an attitude problem.

Need to sent these kids to boot camp.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I don't think they can 'remove students' for non-performance. Behavior? Yes, but so could the general public schools if they did so consistently.
I used to drive school bus a long time ago. I was told to NEVER hit a student. Well one day while parked RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SCHOOL a few older boys got in a little scuffle in the back of the bus over who was going to sit in the back seats. I walked to the back of the bus and before I could say anything one smart ass little punk that usually never road my buss said there's nothing to see hear. I said that's not up to you to tell me jack shit. He said I'd be trouble for swearing, and I said he's in trouble for fighting on my buss, to which he replied there was nothing I could do about it. So I just turned around walked into the school office and told them what had just happened and that I wouldn't step foot back on that buss to drive unless this little smart ass was removed and banned from my buss. They DID come out and remove the student, so there WAS something I could DO ABOUT IT. But I wanted to BITCH SLAP that mouthy little bastard. When I was growing up I would have NEVER had the GALL to speak like that to one of my elders, let alone someone in an authority position. I mean what in the HELL is with these kids today? What the HELL are their parents teaching them?

One other time I had another younger little guy that was a problem child and was always disrupting other kids, so on a part of back road I pulled the buss over and shut it off. A deathly silence fell over the buss as I got up and walked towards the back. I stood over this kid and said I want you to move up to the front right now. He said you can't make me do that, and I said... "you see anyone here big enough to stop me?" He kind of slunk down in his seat and said, "no." So I said c'mon, let's go, the buss isn't moving again until you move. He got up and moved. I made him sit behind me for a week, then he could move back another row every week he was good. Funny thing was, he started talking to me while he sat behind me and I started to like the little fart, and when his time came to move back, he didn't. He liked sitting behind me and talking to me. I started to feel sorry for the little guy because he probably had a shitty home, no Dad around and the like. But after that I had a got of respect from the kids on my buss, I enjoyed driving and the kids were pretty good, considering they told me I had the biggest bunch of little outlaws of any buss route, I'd have begged to differ. I liked my kids once we had an understanding. I used to record different tapes that I'd play for them on the radio and I'd let them pick. I begrudgingly had to quit when I got hired at the prison. It was quite an experience.

[Kathianne]

They have to commit murder here to get removed. One kid broke out the window in Ash's classroom and they sent him back to class. His dad's a Black Panther and in prison so he has an attitude problem.

Need to sent these kids to boot camp.
It's easier to get rid of a kid, at least to 'self-contained bd' than it is to get rid of bad teachers in a union. The problem with the kids are the litigation and administrators that won't back teachers.

In order to actually go about removing a kid, it has to be documented over time. That means that all the staff that have the kid: PE, lunchroom monitors, art, music, foreign language, office, nurse, etc., have to have documented examples with dates, times, etc. Now let's say the kid is never a problem in 2 areas, that can open the door to problems with 'other staff,' not the kid. Yes, seriously.

[Gunny]

It's easier to get rid of a kid, at least to 'self-contained bd' than it is to get rid of bad teachers in a union. The problem with the kids are the litigation and administrators that won't back teachers.

In order to actually go about removing a kid, it has to be documented over time. That means that all the staff that have the kid: PE, lunchroom monitors, art, music, foreign language, office, nurse, etc., have to have documented examples with dates, times, etc. Now let's say the kid is never a problem in 2 areas, that can open the door to problems with 'other staff,' not the kid. Yes, seriously.Yeah, I hear ya. Even the Marine Corps was getting like that, and civilian government employees even longer ago. Months and hours of documentation, counseling, etc. You used to could just fire them for being lame.

My daughter's on the tightrope every day. Trying to control kids that can't be controlled, held responsible, but not empowered to do it. I wouldn't want her job for anything. I don't understand what these people that give all the power to kids are thinking. It's just nonsense.

[Abbey Marie]

...
He said I'd be trouble for swearing, and I said he's in trouble for fighting on my buss, to which he replied there was nothing I could do about it.
...
.

And therein lies the problem. Kids know this.

[Kathianne]

And therein lies the problem. Kids know this.

They think and their parents think. In reality though, bus services are tough to come by, just look at any classified page. HPD already posted he got what he wanted, eventually coming to see more in the kid.

The real showdowns, those leading to court are expulsions and things that go on permanent record.

[Abbey Marie]

They think and their parents think. In reality though, bus services are tough to come by, just look at any classified page. HPD already posted he got what he wanted, eventually coming to see more in the kid.

The real showdowns, those leading to court are expulsions and things that go on permanent record.

I was thinking more about the classroom antics than on the buses. My experience working at the district office was that for an expulsion to happen was difficult, and for it to stick was rare.

[Kathianne]

I was thinking more about the classroom antics than on the buses. My experience working at the district office was that for an expulsion to happen was difficult, and for it to stick was rare.

I explained why a few posts ago. Litigation and spineless administrators together. The actual process wouldn't be difficult, as opposed to getting rid of really bad teachers, protected by the unions. It takes the will to follow the process and then see it through in court.

[STTAB]

I don't think they can 'remove students' for non-performance. Behavior? Yes, but so could the general public schools if they did so consistently.


You would be wrong, as the two links I gave showed. Yes, charter schools kick bad performing kids out. Because they are not obligated to "educate" them , as public schools are.

And like I said, frankly I think public schools should be able to do the same. 80% of my time as a school board member is spent dealing with parents' of kids who don't care about their own education, and most of the time the parent doesn't either, and I've even tried spelling it to no avail . "Look, how poorly YOUR child does is YOUR problem, but when my teacher has to get your child up to a certain level or we lose funding that affects ALL the kids, so you need to do your part as a parent" they just look at me like I'm stupid.. And I'm fairly lucky, we have very few truly problem students when compared to a large inner city.