Fair's fair. Many, if not most, school buildings heat/cool larger areas and not specific rooms. Therefore, simply having less students does not equate to a savings in heating/cooling as unused areas will still be heated/cooled as the occupied areas are heated/cooled. The same goes for maintenance cost. The whole building still needs to be maintained even if it is unoccupied and unused. There is no doubt that many cost would go down, but other costs will remain the same simply due to their nature.
You really can't use the word "failing" without defining which schools fall under this category. That is why I asked you if you felt that these were mostly schools where there are large pools of disadvanted kids. Obviously, you said no so I'm going to ask you to give me some examples. TIA
Truth be told, that is the issue in a nutshell. Ed reform people want to use the 'we can improve outcomes' when in reality, this hasn't been done because there is a reason that not all kids can perform the same on a test. I do believe we should educate all students whether they have good or bad parents and that we need to stop punishing public schools who try to do this on a daily basis. I always believed those working in the most needy schools should be praised. Also, should be paid more. Those are some tough working conditions. I chose not to do it anymore but God bless those that do. I think it's a travesty they are getting scapegoated.
You really can't use the word "failing" without defining which schools fall under this category. That is why I asked you if you felt that these were mostly schools where there are large pools of disadvanted kids. Obviously, you said no so I'm going to ask you to give me some examples. TIA
Which is why school districts would consolidate schools, shutting down entire unused buildings, and in the future, design smaller, more efficient schools.
Depending upon the size of the population, designing a larger school would be more efficient. It's not easy to predict what the future holds and thus planners have to try to guess while planning for future expansion if needed. Repurposing parts of buildings no longer being used by the school would help defray costs, but your whole premise is just not that simple.
Designing a larger school may be more efficient, definitely more efficient than 6 partially used schools. :shrug: New schools are being built all the time, while old schools are shut down. This is nothing new.
Which schools are failing are no more important to identify in the context of this thread topic than it it is necessary to identify which specific children are not being educated.
Never should you be defining which schools are falling under failing. You define failing as a set of established parameters and then apply those parameters to all schools and see which ones met them and which ones don't. The way you worded the sentence implies that AlbqOwl should be calling specific schools out, with the implied premise that you expect him to only name schools with disadvantaged kids.
Okay, at least you're honest. My question mostly had to do with cause and effect. What causes school failure and will vouches cure it? If you don't really care about that discussion, fair enough. I understand some parents want money toward their child's education to attend a private school of their choosing, even if I don't agree with it.
Mostly because what has been deemed as failing are those disadvantaged schools. I've not heard of any wealthy ones being closed down. It's quite obvious why. Hint: it does as much to do with socio economics.
Baloney. I gave you a definition of what a failing school is--at your request. If you are interested in applying that definition to specific schools, do your own homework. Which schools are failing are no more important to identify in the context of this thread topic than it it is necessary to identify which specific children are not being educated. What is important is the principle that parents should have the choice to choose the best school available for their children. How about we focus on that.
I believe the point he is trying to make is that most so-called "failing" schools have poor results because they are under-funded, have difficulty retaining experienced teachers and have a concentration of especially challenging children-low income kids from violent neighborhoods, from families with little history of academic success and/or with parents that do not speak English well. If these kids get scattered to other schools there is no reason to think that they will do better since the other schools are not accustomed to dealing with that type of student.
Hang on now, I've not seen him advocate that any specific school shut down. So in the end you don't know if there are or are not any wealthy school that fall under his criteria of failing. Your lack of hearing of such a school does not mean that such an event has not happened.
But here is the other question. If you have the chance to take 1, 2, 3, or however many kids out of their disadvantaged situation and move them to a school where they can succeed, then why would you deny them that simply because the others either cannot or will not leave that situation? Are you saying that we should maintain the fewer kids as disadvantaged because we can't remove that disadvantage from all of them?
Failing schools are not failing because they are under funded. Some of the worst schools in the country receive the most funding per capita in the country and still they produce miserable results. At the same time a homeschooled kid who receives absolutely no funding can receive an excellent education. If funding was the issue, the USA would be at or near the top of the list in excellence in education. Instead we are way behind most other developed countries and even some developing or so-called third world countries. Throwing more money at a bad system isn't going to make that system better.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?