Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKcurly on August 05, 2004, 10:19:49 PM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_re_us/school_construction
BALTIMORE - Kojo McCallum's fourth-grade classroom has been infested by mice and the window panes have deteriorated to a cloudy, opaque tint.
Outside the Charles Carroll Barrister Elementary School in Baltimore, graffiti colors the walls and drug needles have popped up on the grounds.
"Not only is it old and decrepit, it's the filthiest environment I've ever worked in in my life," McCallum said. "And kids have to learn there."
It would cost $3.85 billion to bring every Maryland school up to minimum health and safety standards, according to a February report from a task force led by State Treasurer Nancy K. Kopp.
---------------
Let's see, 3.85 days of hunting for nonexistent WMDs equals bringing every Maryland school up to minimum health & safety standards. Why I'll bet 200 days of hunting nonexistent WMDs would take care of the entire national public school system. Imagine that! :rolleyes:
curly
-
Are you saying we should pull some of that 5billion otw Iraq for our children? <>
-
That's pretty sad considering only 19% of the education money givin to states is actually getting to the schools.
-
Why is it that only urban schools suck like this? Poor rural areas always seem to have exceptional facilities and seem to preform much better. Why is that?
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_re_us/school_construction
Let's see, 3.85 days of hunting for nonexistent WMDs equals bringing every Maryland school up to minimum health & safety standards. Why I'll bet 200 days of hunting nonexistent WMDs would take care of the entire national public school system. Imagine that! :rolleyes:
curly
I grew up in Baltimore. The last school I went to was Francis Scott Key JR High. It was a dump 30 years ago. Who are you going to blame for that.
-
Originally posted by Silat
Are you saying we should pull some of that 5billion otw Iraq for our children? <>
Maryland had (not sure if it is anymore) one of the highest tax rates in the country, what did they spend it on?
-
most religious schools offer a better educations to students at about half the cost that the state pays.....throwing money to the states doesnt fix the problems.....its the states that need to be held accountable for there schools.
Not saying people NEED to send there kids to a religous based school just comparing cost issues.
-
One of the selling points of a lottery was that all the money was gonna go to the schools......didn't happen.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
One of the selling points of a lottery was that all the money was gonna go to the schools......didn't happen.
just like registration fees are suposed to fix the roads. Throwing money at school systems does not seem to fix education shortfalls.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
most religious schools offer a better educations to students at about half the cost that the state pays.....throwing money to the states doesnt fix the problems.....its the states that need to be held accountable for there schools.
Not saying people NEED to send there kids to a religous based school just comparing cost issues.
There are 3 types of private schools: catholic, religious (not catholic) and independent. For the most part, religious schools are joke when compared to public schools. Catholic and independent schools are stronger than religious schools, but still fall short of public schools so far as quality of instructional staff. Of course, this is "on average." There are private schools better than the average public school.
curly
-
Call me crazy, but I don't think money is the problem or the solution. It IS a problem, though, no doubt.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
There are 3 types of private schools: catholic, religious (not catholic) and independent. For the most part, religious schools are joke when compared to public schools. Catholic and independent schools are stronger than religious schools, but still fall short of public schools so far as quality of instructional staff. Of course, this is "on average." There are private schools better than the average public school.
curly
I could be wrong, but I've allways read that "non-public" schools generally produce better students at nearly half the costs.
I'm not familiar at all w/ no child left behind but I think I read that it does hold schools accountable for there work. Good and bad yes....but it has to start with the local govt giving a chit.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
I could be wrong, but I've allways read that "non-public" schools generally produce better students at nearly half the costs.
I'm not familiar at all w/ no child left behind but I think I read that it does hold schools accountable for there work. Good and bad yes....but it has to start with the local govt giving a chit.
Costs on a per student expenditure? Sure, private schools frequently hire teachers w/o the proper credentials.
Good education requires a government smart enough to provide a decent facility; parents who care; teachers who possess adequate credentials and the willingness to interact with the family.
The burn out rate of public school teachers is very high --- poor compensation, high student/teacher load and poor support from the administrative staff.
Excellent education can occur in the most dismal surroundings, but it requires an unusual teacher ... sort of like the Michael Jordan of teachers.
Concerning the quality of private school instruction, well, my experience has been that it's awful (on average,) especially the religious schools. I had at least one college freshman class once a year (two semester year) for over 30 years and the private school students were always behind -- even the bright ones.
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_re_us/school_construction
BALTIMORE - Kojo McCallum's fourth-grade classroom has been infested by mice and the window panes have deteriorated to a cloudy, opaque tint.
Outside the Charles Carroll Barrister Elementary School in Baltimore, graffiti colors the walls and drug needles have popped up on the grounds.
"Not only is it old and decrepit, it's the filthiest environment I've ever worked in in my life," McCallum said. "And kids have to learn there."
It would cost $3.85 billion to bring every Maryland school up to minimum health and safety standards, according to a February report from a task force led by State Treasurer Nancy K. Kopp.
---------------
Let's see, 3.85 days of hunting for nonexistent WMDs equals bringing every Maryland school up to minimum health & safety standards. Why I'll bet 200 days of hunting nonexistent WMDs would take care of the entire national public school system. Imagine that! :rolleyes:
curly
So the government now MAKES you take drugs, and MAKES you graffiti on the walls?
Blame someone else.
-BM
-
Building a brand new school in those areas will just mean you will have a brand new toe' up skoo' the following year.
The education of kids in Baltimore is up to the citizens of Baltimore and Maryland to figure out. The Federal government shouldn't have anything to do with "education" in the first place.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
The education of kids in Baltimore is up to the citizens of Baltimore and Maryland to figure out. The Federal government shouldn't have anything to do with "education" in the first place.
Wrong, or at least so sez the supreme court.
curly
-
One thing private schools enforce is classroom discipline. That goes a long way in a learning environment. Disruptors are out of there without any ifs, ands or buts.
They don't have to go any further in the discipline dept. than to expel the disruptive student.
Public schools is a different breed of cat altogether. I would support more money for public education if it was used to hire Joe Brown patrolling the hallways with a brickbat. "Trouble" public schools need a system like Singapore's or Japan's, with big martial arts experts walking the halls. Of course that would do no good against a student with a gun, so we'd need metal detectors at all entrances, keeping some other outside doors locked for a short while... 'Til the hall monitors have done their thing.
Mind you, these guys would have to have a good sense of justice so as not to go overboard. They should look and be intimidating.
Once a school demonstrated good grades (after these measures were taken) then talk about building nice schools with better educational tools that won't be destroyed by neer-do-wells within a week. There's usually only a few troublemakers (maybe a gang), but they can cause big trouble for everyone else. These students are not there to learn.
Doesn't matter whether the school is white or predominately black. Trouble schools are serious business. I have respect for teachers who have the guts to teach there. Even modern schools with everything you could possibly want, far as teaching goes, have their share of bad boys. Think what it must be like in the school you used as an example in your topic post Curly. Many of those students deserve an education and should not live in fear.
The band Devo has a song "We're through being cool." Hire professional hallway "enforcers" to solve the problem. That's where initial funding should go.
I'm sure you know more about the situation than me, but that is my opinion. It'll never happen I know, but seems like it would work.
Les
-
Wow, if I understand the US public school system properly,sounds like Maryland has to get it's **** in order.
-
The federal government could get rid of the US Dept. of Education tomorrow without any repercussions from the Supreme Court.
The Federal Government isn't obligated under the Constitution to provide funding for local / state public schools.
Public Education is left to the states. AFAIK the only rulings that the Supreme made toward Public Education and Funding had to do with States violating the constitutional rights of portions of their citizenry.
They did not obligate the Federal Government to provide funding. What Federal Funding the states receive now is voluntary and as long as they comply with the Federal Guide lines.
Your point in this thread appears to be "why does the Fed spend money in Iraq when the schools in Baltimore rot". The answer is "the federal government isn’t responsible for the conditions of Baltimore's schools".
Besides all that:
http://edworkforce.house.gov/press/press108/second/06june/unspent062904.htm
-
Originally posted by Wotan
The federal government could get rid of the US Dept. of Education tomorrow without any repercussions from the Supreme Court.
The Federal Government isn't obligated under the Constitution to provide funding for local / state public schools.
Public Education is left to the states. AFAIK the only rulings that the Supreme made toward Public Education and Funding had to do with States violating the constitutional rights of portions of their citizenry.
They did not obligate the Federal Government to provide funding. What Federal Funding the states receive now is voluntary and as long as they comply with the Federal Guide lines.
Your point in this thread appears to be "why does the Fed spend money in Iraq when the schools in Baltimore rot". The answer is "the federal government isn’t responsible for the conditions of Baltimore's schools".
Besides all that:
http://edworkforce.house.gov/press/press108/second/06june/unspent062904.htm
Your earlier statement The education of kids in Baltimore is up to the citizens of Baltimore and Maryland to figure out. The Federal government shouldn't have anything to do with "education" in the first place is incorrect. States do not have the right to provide "separate, but equal" (brown vs. board of education?) Therefore, the education of children obviously isn't up to the citizens of a state.
My point is that we are spending approximately one billion dollars/day on a war where the stated reasons are false (no WMDs.) Rather than pizz the money away on such craziness, why not pizz it away on the children of US citizens.
I am not saying the feds should do this/that/whatever. I am simply saying that since they are throwing the money away in Iraq, why not spend it in this country?
curly
-
Are you playing games? What is the context of this thread? My reply should be read within the context of this thread. You are complaining about the Federal Government spending money in Iraq and not on dilapidated schools.
Separate but equal is up to the states to figure out how to pay for, just like it’s up to the states to figure out how to fund school construction and repair.
Living outside of Baltimore I don’t wish to pay to educate children in another state. Especially when I have no input on how that money is spent. Living in America I can understand what my government is trying to do in Iraq. I can hold the president and my congress folk accountable for how they waste that money.
Maybe you should ask the Baltimore school board and/or Superintendent what they have thrown their money away on. Maybe you should ask the state of Maryland, a state with a high tax rate, what they have thrown their money away on.
Whether you agree with the Iraq war or not is of no consequence. That’s water under the bridge. That doesn’t change the responsibility the Federal Government has in seeing Iraq rebuilt. Like all things run by Government I am sure money is and will be wasted and "thrown away". What difference does it make if it’s thrown away in Iraq or in Baltimore? Well I have no say in how my money will be wasted in Baltimore.
Do an internet search of the Kansas City school system. Throwing money at it didn’t help much.
I will help you:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html
Here's a blurb:
For decades critics of the public schools have been saying, "You can't solve educational problems by throwing money at them." The education establishment and its supporters have replied, "No one's ever tried." In Kansas City they did try. To improve the education of black students and encourage desegregation, a federal judge invited the Kansas City, Missouri, School District to come up with a cost-is-no-object educational plan and ordered local and state taxpayers to find the money to pay for it.
Kansas City spent as much as $11,700 per pupil--more money per pupil, on a cost of living adjusted basis, than any other of the 280 largest districts in the country. The money bought higher teachers' salaries, 15 new schools, and such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room, television and animation studios, a robotics lab, a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary, a zoo, a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability, and field trips to Mexico and Senegal. The student-teacher ratio was 12 or 13 to 1, the lowest of any major school district in the country.
The results were dismal. Test scores did not rise; the black-white gap did not diminish; and there was less, not greater, integration.
The Kansas City experiment suggests that, indeed, educational problems can't be solved by throwing money at them, that the structural problems of our current educational system are far more important than a lack of material resources, and that the focus on desegregation diverted attention from the real problem, low achievement.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
Are you playing games? What is the context of this thread? You are complaining about the Federal Government spending money in Iraq and not on dilapidated schools.
The context is simple. Read the first note.
Later, you made an erroneous statement. I corrected it.
I am not suggesting that money is the entire solution to the school problem. Again, read the thread.
I am simply saying I would prefer to spend taxpayer money in the US on US problems rather than in Iraq on fake problems.
curly
-
The context is simple. Read the first note.
Apparently it's not. Had you read my reply with in the context of your original premise you would have no reason to swing in another direction.
Go back and reread what I posted with in the context of your original post. Clearly we are talking about money.
Also, separate but equal was more a civil rights issue rather a strict educational one.
My statement:
The Federal government shouldn't have anything to do with "education" in the first place.
Doesn’t mean states don’t have to abide by the Constitution. If it makes you feel better then I will add "outside of ensuring Constitutional protection the Federal Government should not have anything to do with "education" in the first place”. The point remains the same.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
Apparently it's not. Had you read my reply with in the context of your original premise you would have no reason to swing in another direction.
Go back and reread what I posted with in the context of your original post. Clearly we are talking about money.
Also, separate but equal was more a civil rights issue rather a strict educational one.
My statement:
Doesn’t mean states don’t have to abide by the Constitution. If it makes you feel better then I will add "outside of ensuring Constitutional protection the Federal Government should not have anything to do with "education" in the first place”. The point remains the same.
Yeah, that's exactly what I meant (ensuring ... .) you're right, I didn't see your qualifier.
Now, whether the feds should fund education, that's an entirely separate issue. In sort of the same direction, should the feds have funded the highway program across the country? Can you imagine driving across Oklahoma on state built roads? :)
curly
-
Bush's education policies have always bothered me. While Governor he did raise test scores, but at the same time had the highest drop out rate in history. Kicking or forcing out the slow ones just to raise the overall score is not right. Spending more money on more teachers and facilities would seem to be a better solution.
The reason most private schools have higher success rates is the children mainly come from affluent families. By and large there are no children from ghettos or poverty striken homes and families unless they are there on a basketball scholarship. This does not mean poor kids are geneticly dumber, they just have a harder environment to deal with. Often little or no parental supervision is a major factor with both parents working or single parents working two jobs. The home environment is key in how the child performs at school.
People wanting vouchers so they can enroll their kids in private schools have the mistaken idea their kids will recieve a better education. Allowing children from all social classes will only water down those high scores and we will be right back where we started, except the public schools that were already in financial trouble are in worse shape because everyone used tuition vouchers to send their money to a private school.
It's a Catch-22.
-
Roads are different in that they aid in the defense of the nation by making the movement of troops easier as well as a host of other things.
Americans were better educated in the past and it didn’t cost billions to do it. Read the link I provided above about the KC school system.
Federalizing the education system will have all kinds of negative consequences. It will take away local control for one. It will waste even more money. It will unevenly distribute tax money and be used like Social Security to scare and manipulate the masses.
It’s a bad idea all round. Federal Highway funding has provided jobs, trade growth etc. It paid for itself. Federalizing education will simply grow and grow. Every election will see "We need to spend more on education blah blah blah..."
RPM read the links I provided above. It may sound good to "spend more money on teachers and classrooms" but it doesn’t bare fruit.
http://edworkforce.house.gov/press/press108/second/06june/unspent062904.htm
Dated June 29, 2004
New Government Data Confirms Federal Education Funding is Increasing More Quickly than States Can Spend It; States Have Billions in Unspent No Child Left Behind & Special Education Funds – and Percentage of Unspent Funds is Increasing
States Still Haven’t Spent $526 Million Carried Over from Clinton Administration; $2.7 Billion Has Been Sitting Unused for Two Years or More
This is just one of those “effeminate” issues that are used to scare folks much like SS and healthcare is used to scare the elderly. The problem isn’t funding, the problem is with the parents and communities that send kids to school unprepared and undisciplined. More money won’t change that.
-
Sorry Curly, Catholic school boy here. The quality of education I received and the quality of the instructors was unmatched by any public school in the area.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Sorry Curly, Catholic school boy here. The quality of education I received and the quality of the instructors was unmatched by any public school in the area.
Sorry? About what? Did you read what I wrote?
There are 3 types of private schools: catholic, religious (not catholic) and independent. For the most part, religious schools are joke when compared to public schools. Catholic and independent schools are stronger than religious schools, but still fall short of public schools so far as quality of instructional staff. Of course, this is "on average." There are private schools better than the average public school.
curly
-
ummm, Sorry there weren't more catholic school girls?
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Costs on a per student expenditure? Sure, private schools frequently hire teachers w/o the proper credentials.
Good education requires a government smart enough to provide a decent facility; parents who care; teachers who possess adequate credentials and the willingness to interact with the family.
The burn out rate of public school teachers is very high --- poor compensation, high student/teacher load and poor support from the administrative staff.
Excellent education can occur in the most dismal surroundings, but it requires an unusual teacher ... sort of like the Michael Jordan of teachers.
Concerning the quality of private school instruction, well, my experience has been that it's awful (on average,) especially the religious schools. I had at least one college freshman class once a year (two semester year) for over 30 years and the private school students were always behind -- even the bright ones.
curly
1) Is credentialling a requirement for being a good teacher? It seems to me that with apparent failure of national educational system, indoctrination in the system's "right" way to do things may be a mixed blessing at best.
2) I find it very hard to believe that "in 30 years of teaching" the private school students were "always" behind, "even the bright ones." Being able to make such a statement costs you a few credibility points, in fact.
Oh, and by the way, I am a graduate of a private religious non-catholic school that had some "unaccredited" teachers. I was admitted to a highly competitive 6 year combined undergraduate/medical school program right out of high school. I was selected editor of the Med School paper while pursuing studies, and I was Chief Resident in my postgraduate program. I'm now Board Certified in three (3) medical specialties, serve as physician advisor to the Utilization Review department, and I'm involved in training programs for residents and medical students. My high school taught me very well, and I was in no way "behind" even though I wasn't "blessed" with a public school education.
3) And you still haven't addressed the cost per student issue. Blaming it on hiring cheap teachers begs the question, since measured outcomes of . Large surveys have repeatedly shown that the parochial system, even with its "unaccredited" teachers and much poorer compensation, obtains similar and often improved objective outcomes.
4) My brother in law burned out as a (certified) public school teacher not because of compensation, but because the bureaucracy above him took ill advised positions, failed to respond to real conditions, and generally would not support his efforts to improve his school and his students. He could not maintain discipline in his classroom because he had no support from his principle. Bureaucracy, not certification, is the major issue - adn buraeucracy costs lots of (wasted) money.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
ummm, Sorry there weren't more catholic school girls?
Did they smack your hand with a splintered ruler when you asked for more school girls? :lol :lol
-
I worked for the TSB (Toronto School Board) for about five years, Admins, teachers, maintenance crews their only concern is carving up that year's gravy train rather than the children's education or welfare.
The most pathetic group of people i have worked with in my life.
I had to get out.
-
Originally posted by Torque
I worked for the TSB (Toronto School Board) for about five years, Admins, teachers, maintenance crews their only concern is carving up that year's gravy train rather than the children's education or welfare.
The most pathetic group of people i have worked with in my life.
I had to get out.
that's happening all over America as well. It's pretty sad when more money is spent on "overhead" than it is on Education.
-
" "non-public" schools generally produce better students at nearly half the costs."
It's not all about money. Although stupid people typically don't make enough $$$ to send thier kids to private school.
Non public schools will kick your kids bellybutton out on the sidewalk if they are an underperformer or "problem" child. And that is if they even accepted them into thier system to begin with.
In other words the end product of private schooling has more self discipline because they went in with, or maintained more, than thier public school counterpart
-
I went to a Catholic H.S. and a Public H.S. - the former in VA, the latter in MD.
The public H.S. was WAY better in every respect than the Catholic H.S. There were a _FEW_ good teachers there, the rest - bad.
The public H.S. had way more good teachers that actually cared.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
I went to a Catholic H.S. and a Public H.S. - the former in VA, the latter in MD.
The public H.S. was WAY better in every respect than the Catholic H.S. There were a _FEW_ good teachers there, the rest - bad.
The public H.S. had way more good teachers that actually cared.
-SW
Yup and we all know how you turned out!
JK he he he ;)
-
Originally posted by Simaril
1) Is credentialling a requirement for being a good teacher? It seems to me that with apparent failure of national educational system, indoctrination in the system's "right" way to do things may be a mixed blessing at best.
Of course not, but it's handy for math teachers to know something about mathematics.
2) I find it very hard to believe that "in 30 years of teaching" the private school students were "always" behind, "even the bright ones." Being able to make such a statement costs you a few credibility points,
Nonetheless, it was true. The best student I ever had came from a non-catholic religious school. He was successful, but his first year was painful.
Oh, and by the way, I am a graduate of a private religious non-catholic school that had some "unaccredited" teachers. I was admitted to a highly competitive 6 year combined undergraduate/medical school program right out of high school. I was selected editor of the Med School paper while pursuing studies, and I was Chief Resident in my postgraduate program. I'm now Board Certified in three (3) medical specialties, serve as physician advisor to the Utilization Review department, and I'm involved in training programs for residents and medical students. My high school taught me very well, and I was in no way "behind" even though I wasn't "blessed" with a public school education.
students.
It's fair to assume hubris was part of your private school education. :)
3) And you still haven't addressed the cost per student issue. Blaming it on hiring cheap teachers begs the question, since measured outcomes of . Large surveys have repeatedly shown that the parochial system, even with its "unaccredited" teachers and much poorer compensation, obtains similar and often improved objective outcomes.
I never taught in the public school system. My entire professional life was spent at the collegiate level. I know relatively little about the merits of public versus private. However, I can faithfully report my experience with private school students, and it was dismal.
4) My brother in law burned out as a (certified) public school teacher not because of compensation, but because the bureaucracy above him took ill advised positions, failed to respond to real conditions, and generally would not support his efforts to improve his school and his students. He could not maintain discipline in his classroom because he had no support from his principle. Bureaucracy, not certification, is the major issue - adn buraeucracy costs lots of (wasted) money.
Yes, I've read as much.
curly
-
Wut? Aye lernt reel gud.
-SSSUU
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
It's fair to assume hubris was part of your private school education. :)
curly
Ouch.
In fairness, I only listed that stuff as a counterpoint to your assertion that private school students are less prepared. Outside of the office, I prefer going by my first name (sans title) and my checks, envelopes, etc dont even have the "Dr." stuff on them.
I'm also a bit sensitive about public school educational arrogance because we homeschool our kids. National surveys of homeschooled kids have found that their mean performance is 20-30% higher than public school kids, even if the teaching parent only has a HS diploma, at an average cost of $400-500 annually. BTW, my kids are in 7th and 11th grade, doing great socially, and excel academically (90-99%ile) as measured by national standardized tests. Neither my wife (who does most of the teaching) nor I have education degrees.
Good education is not about money -- its about home and learning cultures that provide challenge and show clear consequences for choices made.
PS -- that proxy kill you got on me yesterday wasnt a TOTAL dweeb auger -- I was in Yak for first time in 3 tours, and misjudged the compression threshold. :lol
-
The Public Schools are getting a considerable portion of cash from the federal government and just got a huge increase over the last couple years.
Education spending surged by 78 percent, from $34 billion to $58 billion. Nearly all of this growth took place between 2001 and 2003, as the No Child Left Behind Act was being implemented. Most of the new spending was for aid to K-12 schools (in-cluding special education funding), which jumped from $19 billion to $32 billion. An $8 billion hike in college student financial aid dominated the rest of the spending increase.
Now seeing these figures...the state level and local level system are not spending the money correctly. School system often are just huge bloated mounds with tons of red tape. Take it from me been in the system before and almost all my friends are teachers or principles as well.
Throwing money at a system isn't always the solution...parents have to step up and take part in their childrens future and make alot of noise. Hell get th epress involved get attention and stay on it. Things will change it would just take time.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
That's pretty sad considering only 19% of the education money givin to states is actually getting to the schools.
Once again, IMO this is a state issue and the Feds should stay out of it.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Costs on a per student expenditure? Sure, private schools frequently hire teachers w/o the proper credentials.
Good education requires a government smart enough to provide a decent facility; .teachers who possess adequate credentials parents who care; and the willingness to interact with the family.
curly
Here in Mass. The superintended of the school system in Lynn failed the required test for graduation taken by all HS seniors.:rolleyes:
-
"superintended of the school system in Lynn failed the required test.."
That does not surprise me and IMO it is completely irrelevant. It's been decades since the superintendant attended high school while on the other hand the Lynn high school kids had literally just studied the material being tested and SHOULD know it.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_re_us/school_construction
BALTIMORE - Kojo McCallum's fourth-grade classroom has been infested by mice and the window panes have deteriorated to a cloudy, opaque tint.
Outside the Charles Carroll Barrister Elementary School in Baltimore, graffiti colors the walls and drug needles have popped up on the grounds.
"Not only is it old and decrepit, it's the filthiest environment I've ever worked in in my life," McCallum said. "And kids have to learn there."
It would cost $3.85 billion to bring every Maryland school up to minimum health and safety standards, according to a February report from a task force led by State Treasurer Nancy K. Kopp.
---------------
Let's see, 3.85 days of hunting for nonexistent WMDs equals bringing every Maryland school up to minimum health & safety standards. Why I'll bet 200 days of hunting nonexistent WMDs would take care of the entire national public school system. Imagine that! :rolleyes:
curly
alright youre really onto something here! theres mismanagement and corruption in departments of education so LETS CUT THE MILITARY BUDGET. you are a loyal extremist democrat alright. pass on your expert advice to bill after you get up and he zips his fly.
-
Do NOT get me started on the Baltimore school fiasco. Did you know the school system in Baltimore had to get bailed out this year to the tune of nearly 50 million dollars? Thats right, 50 million tax-payer dollars just upped and disappeared and the school board has absolutely NO IDEA where the money went.
Recently it came to light that one of the high schools graduated/advanced nearly 1/3 of its student body that according to the records should not have been promoted! These kids are now in a special "20 day intensive course" to get them up to the standards so they can still stay with their classmates in the next grade or have their diplomas certified. The principal gets on tv and screams its a racial thing (God forbid we actually expect blacks to LEARN), the students get on tv and scream making them attend this class is unfair and its not their fault (gee handsomehunk, who's fault is it then that YOU failed?), and the school superintendent and mayor get on tv and scream that they need more money.
Oh, our mayor O'Malley, the wonderful POS that said in a speech when Kerry came to town begging for money that he fears our President more that Al Quaida. Isn't that a wonderful statement?
Wait, there is more! Some city schools let their students take the aptitude tests several times until they achieved sufficient scores to show progress. Now that's what I call preparing our children for the real world. Oh well, SOMEONE has to work the fast food restaurants.
If I didn't live so damn close I'd wish the terrorists would nuke that cesspool. It's a black-hole for taxpayer money from all across the state.
-
That’s what I thought DmdBT. Typically some local politicians screw up the schools then cry about how they don’t have money to bail themselves out.
The liberal solution is to just through more money.
How about the citizens of Maryland and Baltimore demand that Baltimore account for every dollar to ensure its being used properly before crying about more funding.
The reason Leroy cant read isn't because we dont spend enough money. Its because his family has failed him.
-
Curly........religious schools joke compared to public.
Show me your proof curly Id reaaly like to see it.
My oldest son by 8th grade, heading down the wrong road, good at home, but bad everywhere else.Kicked out of school ,whole nine yards. Sent him in 9 th grade to small somewhat run down christian school.
It saved his life...by 12th grade he was all cif 1st team in football and baseball ...went from d grades to B...Only fights he got in was when bullys picked on smaller kids. after 1 and half years he was only in trouble for normal things,rowdy,yes. But change was so noticable by all.
Was recruted for foot ball and has good job now.
without this he would have had barrs for windows.
I have seen this result to many times not to know that the result is true.
-
Originally posted by demaw1
Curly........religious schools joke compared to public.
Show me your proof curly Id reaaly like to see it.
My oldest son by 8th grade, heading down the wrong road, good at home, but bad everywhere else.Kicked out of school ,whole nine yards. Sent him in 9 th grade to small somewhat run down christian school.
It saved his life...by 12th grade he was all cif 1st team in football and baseball ...went from d grades to B...Only fights he got in was when bullys picked on smaller kids. after 1 and half years he was only in trouble for normal things,rowdy,yes. But change was so noticable by all.
Was recruted for foot ball and has good job now.
without this he would have had barrs for windows.
I have seen this result to many times not to know that the result is true.
I didn't offer proof demaw, I offered personal observation.
Good news about your son.
curly
-
Originally posted by Westy
"superintended of the school system in Lynn failed the required test.."
That does not surprise me and IMO it is completely irrelevant. It's been decades since the superintendant attended high school while on the other hand the Lynn high school kids had literally just studied the material being tested and SHOULD know it.
How is it irrelevant that someone supervising kids' education can't meet minimum requirements for a 12th grader? This isn't rocket science, and it isn't calculus -- they test for the minimum a HS graduate should know.
This speaks not only to the supervision the bureaucracy gives its own, but also to the effectiveness of the colleges that train our "certified" teachers and administrators.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
I didn't offer proof demaw, I offered personal observation.
Good news about your son.
curly
I again question the objectivity of a personal observation that can claim "every" anything over 30 years of students. There is simply too much random variation over that time period to expect that EVERY non-public graduate fell below EVERY public graduate -- which seems to be your claim, curly.
you say you saw freshmen -- did you know the educational background of every student, or just check on the ones who didnt do well? Observer bias is about the only thing I can think of that could produce the results you claim, as we do tend to see what we expect after a while.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
I again question the objectivity of a personal observation that can claim "every" anything over 30 years of students. There is simply too much random variation over that time period to expect that EVERY non-public graduate fell below EVERY public graduate -- which seems to be your claim, curly.
you say you saw freshmen -- did you know the educational background of every student, or just check on the ones who didnt do well? Observer bias is about the only thing I can think of that could produce the results you claim, as we do tend to see what we expect after a while.
No, I didn't see every freshman. I would typically have one freshman class per year.
Concerning your statement Observer bias is about the only thing I can think of that could produce the results you claim, I can think of several other possiblities ... the mostly likely being that my observations were correct.
Usually (not always), my freshman class was the first course of calculus. Most of my public school students had completed a calculus sequence in high school and should have tested out of freshman calculus. The private highschools in my area didn't offer the calculus sequence.
I saw a thin slice of highschool students. Typically, they were math, cs, physics or chemistry majors with the infrequent biology major.
Maybe the private schools do as well (or better) than public schools with non-science subjects. But in Oklahoma, the private school mathematics curricula is a joke. Naturally, the students suffer. And that is a fact, like it or not. :)
Perhaps there are private schools in Oklahoma which have decent mathematics curricula. I never one of their students.
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Usually (not always), my freshman class was the first course of calculus. Most of my public school students had completed a calculus sequence in high school and should have tested out of freshman calculus. The private highschools in my area didn't offer the calculus sequence.
curly
It seems to me that you've provided the answer to your observation -- and it has less to do with the quality of education than with curriculum choices and resources.
Your public school students had been exposed to calculus to the degree that "they probaby should have tested out" of the course. Esseentially, your segment of the public school graduate pool was filled with science kids who had enough background to almost not need your class. The denominator was skewed, in other words.
In that environment, even bright kids with otherwise good math backgrounds would look less capable. And, the lack of calculus doesnt necessarily generalize to overall poor education, which you at least imply in several posts.
My "religious non-catholic" private school didnt get me to calculus level, but the year after I graduated (1980) they reorganized the math pathway so college prep kids could skip one lower tier and get the course. At the college level, my starting calculus skills were behind some kids, though I still got an A. However, my history, sociology, biology, and especailly english, writing, and literature backgrounds were superior -- even in the context of my university's Honors Colloquium programs. Is that really the private high school systemic failure you've generalized about?
My exposure to private schools in Ohio is a bit different than Oklahoma, and that may also explain some of your experience. While we clearly have some "church basement" type schools, where the main goal is to avoid exposure to the world regardless of academic compromise, we also have a fair number of aggressive college prep type schools whose students routinely top out the state wide tests. We also have a number of Jr Ivy League prep schools -- and comparing puvblic schools with that standard just wouldnt be fair, both from a resource standpoint and from the preselected student body.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
It seems to me that you've provided the answer to your observation -- and it has less to do with the quality of education than with curriculum choices and resources.
Well, superior curriculum is one reason to choose a public school. They have the resources to support a wide range of subjects.
In that environment, even bright kids with otherwise good math backgrounds would look less capable. And, the lack of calculus doesnt necessarily generalize to overall poor education, which you at least imply in several posts.
I can only judge by my experience. My experience has been that private schools are weak in mathematics. It is fair to conclude they are more than likely weak in other areas as well, especially the high resource areas like physics, chemistry or biology.
My "religious non-catholic" private school didnt get me to calculus level, but the year after I graduated (1980) they reorganized the math pathway so college prep kids could skip one lower tier and get the course. At the college level, my starting calculus skills were behind some kids, though I still got an A. However, my history, sociology, biology, and especailly english, writing, and literature backgrounds were superior -- even in the context of my university's Honors Colloquium programs. Is that really the private high school systemic failure you've generalized about?
I didn't characterize the private h.s. system as a failure nationwide. I didn't even characterize it as a failure in Oklahoma. I simply said it is inferior to public school education in Oklahoma. And, as I've indicated all along, my remarks were based on my experience and not on reading some article published by a testing agency or some goofball with an agenda.
My exposure to private schools in Ohio is a bit different than Oklahoma, and that may also explain some of your experience. While we clearly have some "church basement" type schools, where the main goal is to avoid exposure to the world regardless of academic compromise, we also have a fair number of aggressive college prep type schools whose students routinely top out the state wide tests. We also have a number of Jr Ivy League prep schools -- and comparing puvblic schools with that standard just wouldnt be fair, both from a resource standpoint and from the preselected student body.
An important ingredient in the educational formula is parental involvement. It seems reasonable to guess that students in private schools have parents who are more involved in their life than the average student.
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
I can only judge by my experience. My experience has been that private schools are weak in mathematics. It is fair to conclude they are more than likely weak in other areas as well, especially the high resource areas like physics, chemistry or biology.
Curly, with a click of Google, you can find out the following information:
~Generally, students with higher scale scores reported higher levels of parental education. The more education parents had the higher the scores of their children.
~Both public and nonpublic schools showed increased scale scores for fourth- and eighth-grade students. Public schools showed increased scores for twelfth-grade students as well. Students attending nonpublic schools continued to outperform their peers attending public schools.
~Students eligible for the free/reduced-price lunch program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) scored lower than those not eligible, for all three grades. Eligibility for free/reduced-price lunches is determined by the USDA's Income Eligibility Guidelines
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Curly, with a click of Google, you can find out the following information:
~Generally, students with higher scale scores reported higher levels of parental education. The more education parents had the higher the scores of their children.
~Both public and nonpublic schools showed increased scale scores for fourth- and eighth-grade students. Public schools showed increased scores for twelfth-grade students as well. Students attending nonpublic schools continued to outperform their peers attending public schools.
~Students eligible for the free/reduced-price lunch program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) scored lower than those not eligible, for all three grades. Eligibility for free/reduced-price lunches is determined by the USDA's Income Eligibility Guidelines
Rip, with a click on Google, I can also find that Jesus Christ lives in Baltimore, Maryland.
Again, I am speaking about my experience in education in Oklahoma. I have no interest (or opinion) about private school education in general.
curly
-
On a side note that really has nothing to do with this topic:
... My ex-boss has a stay-at-home wife who home- schooled her 4 children. The youngest is now 15 and the oldest (22) is finishing up his bar exam (age 22) in Cali. All kids were "finished" with highschool dips by avg. age of 15, all were finished with community college credits at age 16, and one graduated with a Masters at age 18. Incredible...
~Edit: The kid doing his bar, finished highschool at age 13.
-
Since when is the federal government supposed to fund schools? That is the responsibility of the people in the county and city where that school is. If they want a nicer school they should get off their tulips and pay for it.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
Building a brand new school in those areas will just mean you will have a brand new toe' up skoo' the following year.
The education of kids in Baltimore is up to the citizens of Baltimore and Maryland to figure out. The Federal government shouldn't have anything to do with "education" in the first place.
but how is the government supposed to properly brainwash children if they dont have control ove the schools? we might end up with an entire generation of kids who beleive in silly concepts like 2+2 = 4 ;)
-
We need to get the Democrats in office.
I am sure they will form a committee, conduct a lengthy, through, and expensive study of the problem. In the end they will conclude that:
What we need is more government and a bigger committee. People need work you know. It's not easy to have a liberal arts education and no real world skills.
I mean shouldn't the schools teach our children values and discipline??
Really, who has time for that? There are only a finite number of hours in the day and I don't get enough ME time. Sure don't want to waste it on parenting.
;)
Crumpp