• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Louisiana's bold bid to privatize schools

Harry Guerrilla said:
I watched an interesting movie on pub ed in New Jersey.
If it's any indication of how most of the rest of the U.S. districts operate, it leads me to believe that graft, fraud, patronage, cronyism and a plethora of other problems, from all levels are what is keeping the schools from improving.

It's institutionalized corruption.
Click to expand...

Sounds a lot like private industry.
 
LibertyBurns said:
I don't agree with these types of schools but, if the parents so choose these, then i say it is indeed their CHOICE. I'm against compulsory education anyway...

Now go find 3 good schools and become the unbiased person I know you can be. You can do likewise with public schools and maybe become even more unbiased.

Why do people think that they have the right to tell other people how to live is beyond me...

Evolution is still not proven BTW... Though I personally believe in a creator and evolution.
Click to expand...

No, its not their choice, if the public is paying.

I am automatically biased against a system that will funnel money to schools that don't have normal standards. Schools like the above examples will be included in the mix, and that means education will get worse for many kids. Public schools try to teach science (evolution) and archaeology, for example. A school that doesn't teach those things at all is starting out with a dumbing-down curriculum. Ignorance is actually part of their foundation.

By the way, believing in evolution isn't important, but it is important that the subject is taught along with the other accepted science elements in science class.
 
Phys251 said:
But...but...privatization magically fixes everything!
Click to expand...

It's not a total privatization.
You can toss out that strawman.

It's a partial privatization.
The state still collects taxes and funds the system progressively (likely more so) and children have a greater opportunity at social mobility.
 
tryreading said:
No, its not their choice, if the public is paying.

I am automatically biased against a system that will funnel money to schools that don't have normal standards. Schools like the above examples will be included in the mix, and that means education will get worse for many kids. Public schools try to teach science (evolution) and archaeology, for example. A school that doesn't teach those things at all is starting out with a dumbing-down curriculum. Ignorance is actually part of their foundation.

By the way, believing in evolution isn't important, but it is important that the subject is taught along with the other accepted science elements in science class.
Click to expand...

These schools are still required to meet state curriculum standards.
Your post is just another of the long series of strawmen.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
It's not a total privatization.
You can toss out that strawman.

It's a partial privatization.
The state still collects taxes and funds the system progressively (likely more so) and children have a greater opportunity at social mobility.
Click to expand...

But if it's only partial privatization, then the big librul soshalist guv'mint shall remain. Why not just kill the whole thing off?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
And with those private schools, the parents have the choice of mobility.
So they can say adios.

With my public high school I had, gangs, easy access to illegal drugs, a market to buy and sell stolen goods, the ability to come and go as I wanted, among other things that aren't desirable.

You're basically saying, again and again, "Vouchers aren't perfect, so all kids will have to deal with their current situation, that they are in" and "some bad things can happen in private schools, so vouchers shouldn't be allowed."
What a solution that is. :doh
I guess you missed all the examples of horrid public schools.

Your current solution is just trapping low and moderate income people in areas where they're guaranteed to have little or no social mobility.
Click to expand...


You can have mobility with public schools as well. But You speak of my largest complaint. Those most able to leave will leave. the rest are left behind. The problem is the gangs and such, not the school, not the methodology (which is the same where ever you go). so, instead of manning up and tackling the problem, some are calling to let the few run away.

So it isn't that vouchers are not perfect (which sounds some tactic to avoid the topic), but that it does nothing for any significant number at all.
 
Boo Radley said:
You can have mobility with public schools as well. But You speak of my largest complaint. Those most able to leave will leave. the rest are left behind. The problem is the gangs and such, not the school, not the methodology (which is the same where ever you go). so, instead of manning up and tackling the problem, some are calling to let the few run away.
Click to expand...

So it's better to have everyone suffer in one school, rather than let some get out of it.
What kind of reasoning is that?
All must go down with the ship?

Lets assume that the results don't change, that charter schools still preform at the same level as regular schools.
They do it at less cost.
Most of these voucher programs don't pay the full cost of what a regular public school gets per child.

Boo Radley said:
So it isn't that vouchers are not perfect (which sounds some tactic to avoid the topic), but that it does nothing for any significant number at all.
Click to expand...

Doing what is being done now, essentially nothing, hasn't helped one single bit.
 
cpwill said:
Exactly. And that will change the net achievement of the body of students, allowing for measurement of the teacher.



Adults are all these things as well - that is no excuse for leaders who consistently fail to orient their teams onto achieving the assigned objectives.



Naturally. Some are worth more, others are worth less. We need to be finding out which ones are worth more, and paying them more, and finding out which ones are worth less, and either paying them less or (preferably) replacing them with ones that are worth (and get paid) more.



My premise is simply that good teachers will consistently have net positive effects off of the baseline, and poor teachers will consistently have net negative effects off of the baseline. And again, if that is incorrect, then hiring quality teachers and compensating teachers well at all is a waste of resources. Never have I argued the strawman you keep suggesting that the sole or even the main determinant of individual student performance is the teacher.



Incorrect - I seek to send them to a school that is succeeding. Or, at least, not failing nearly so miserably.



That might have worked on me if I didn't know so many teachers. Different schools have vastly different approaches to critical items such as discipline, teacher freedom, areas of focus.



A "market" at current, doesn't really exist. Our crappy public education system is what we have thanks to our single-payer system. That is why things like the OP are encouraging - we are going to get to see live examples of what happens when you introduce market forces to education.



I thought they were locked in to the same methodologies as everyone else?



I don't have a problem with state-schools. I went to a pretty good couple of public schools. I just don't care for state run schools unaccountable to anybody who are currently engaged in ****ing-over disadvantaged kids in order to benefit teachers unions. :)



Actually that last might not be true - we will see what happens when parents have more fiscal skin in the game. But what the market can do is provide better schools and better teachers over time at lower costs. And that is a change worth making.



Actually no you haven't. You seemed to suggest (as I recall) "all of us getting together", which is meaningless.


However, I'd love to see some specifics out of you. Not generalities like 'we should make schools more focused on learning" or "we shouldn't listen to parents when they are being stupid". Let's hear specifics.
Click to expand...

See I compliment you and you lose your mind again. I'm not in the mod nor do I have the time to go over each misrepresentation you do when you approach the topic this way.

Your first sentence is so far of point I feel we have to back to square one and makes me wonder if you saw the connection it had with the other sentences.

Let's look at this sentence:

Consitent effect? They will consistently effect some students. You respond as if I'm saying there was a consistent measure here. There isn't. And I wrote more after that which explained this:

Consistent effect? They will consistently effect some students. It's not as exact as you think. And daily, the metrics change. This is what makes it a challenging profession. A student are a product that thinks for him or her self. They are independent, each one different, nothing works consistently, the teacher must be the leeper of knowledge, the inspirer of hope, the source of humor, the rule maker, the autoritaian, wise, confident, bold, cautious, sensitive, direct, manage time materials, emotions, and when it is the right time to do all things for all those in his or her class.

Trust me, they are not paid what they are worth.
Click to expand...


Yes, you make some nonsense when you break that away, as if it were separate (it isn't). And you're wrong about that as well. Even among adults, one teacher is better for one student than another. And they have the capacity to better understand these difference, and still one will reach one and not another, one will respond and not another. The point was there are too many changing variables to go at this way. And you skipped that point all together.

And you recollection is too often flawed by the misrepresentations you, especially when you break things up. Like I have said, I've spend years trying to figure out if you do it on purpose or not, but I will not play that game with you. Back up, re-read, and try to formulate a rebuttal to what I actually argue.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
So it's better to have everyone suffer in one school, rather than let some get out of it.
What kind of reasoning is that?
All must go down with the ship?
Click to expand...

No. All school resources must be used to bring public school quality back to where it belongs. Sending funds to private schools won't improve the situation.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
These schools are still required to meet state curriculum standards.
Your post is just another of the long series of strawmen.
Click to expand...

What happens when a school claims teaching evolution is a violation of their religious freedom?
 
One private school is trying to fight against the theory of evolution with the lochness monster.

One public school threatens a student for talking bad about obama.

There are bad aspects in both sectors but, I stand by the principle that you should be able to choose!!!

Allowing people to choose will be the greatest thing since sliced bread ;)

We do it in every aspect of our life, why is school different?
 
tryreading said:
No. All school resources must be used to bring public school quality back to where it belongs. Sending funds to private schools won't improve the situation.
Click to expand...

All the money directed at schools, go towards things related to schooling.
It's just the the bureaucracy has become an entrenched money siphon, a long with many many other problems inside the system of schooling.

If charter schools can teach at the same level, that pub systems do, with less money and less economy of scale, the public system is really messing up.
 
LibertyBurns said:
One private school is trying to fight against the theory of evolution with the lochness monster.

One public school threatens a student for talking bad about obama.

There are bad aspects in both sectors but, I stand by the principle that you should be able to choose!!!

Allowing people to choose will be the greatest thing since sliced bread ;)

We do it in every aspect of our life, why is school different?
Click to expand...

Because liberty is the greatest thing that there is. A schoolteacher should have the liberty to decide how to run his or her classroom. A bus driver should have the liberty to decide whether to literally drive the bus off a cliff.

TWO sleights-of-hand lie within the above paragraph. Can you CORRECTLY identify them? :) (Hint: The first sentence is not one of them.)
 
What does creationism and evolution have to do with becoming part of the work force! The state is making christians pay taxes, then they try to tell them they have to teach something not completely proven, no matter the evidence supporting it, that by the way is against some christian religions, i say some because not all of them are so nieve, anyway it is absolutely absurd!
 
LibertyBurns said:
What does creationism and evolution have to do with becoming part of the work force! The state is making christians pay taxes, then they try to tell them they have to teach something not completely proven, no matter the evidence supporting it, that by the way is against some christian religions, i say some because not all of them are so nieve, anyway it is absolutely absurd!
Click to expand...

It's more or less scientifically proven.
You're allowed not to believe it, but it doesn't make it less proven.

It's not crucial to a job, unless you go into some sciences, but none the less, people should be informed to some degree or another.
Even if later, they don't believe it.
 
Phys251 said:
Because liberty is the greatest thing that there is. A schoolteacher should have the liberty to decide how to run his or her classroom. A bus driver should have the liberty to decide whether to literally drive the bus off a cliff.

TWO sleights-of-hand lie within the above paragraph. Can you CORRECTLY identify them? :) (Hint: The first sentence is not one of them.)
Click to expand...

What slice bread and choice?

Edit: Because if you say the second sentence then you show your unwavering bias ;)
 
Last edited:
LibertyBurns said:
What does creationism and evolution have to do with becoming part of the work force! The state is making christians pay taxes, then they try to tell them they have to teach something not completely proven, no matter the evidence supporting it, that by the way is against some christian religions, i say some because not all of them are so nieve, anyway it is absolutely absurd!
Click to expand...

-Any doctor who does not accept evolution as a scientific fact has NO business prescribing me antibiotics. "Here you go, sir. Just keep taking them until you feel better. No need to waste all the pills; you can save them for later."
-Any psychotherapist who does not accept evolution as a scientific fact has NO business trying to help people understand who they are. "God made you this way, and you're a man, and your wife should submit to you, and you should lord over the environment, and you should be fruitful and multiply. And anything wrong with you and with the world is just a byproduct of sin."
-Any biological researcher who does not accept evolution as a scientific fact has NO business developing new species or the cures to diseases. "We know that mutation is always bad, so if we can develop an anti-HIV vaccine that can wipe out all HIV in their current forms, we'll knock out AIDS in a generation."

In certain fields of study, failure to understand basic science is far, far more dangerous than simply willful ignorance. It is DANGEROUS.
 
Phys251 said:
-Any doctor who does not accept evolution as a scientific fact has NO business prescribing me antibiotics. "Here you go, sir. Just keep taking them until you feel better. No need to waste all the pills; you can save them for later."
-Any psychotherapist who does not accept evolution as a scientific fact has NO business trying to help people understand who they are. "God made you this way, and you're a man, and your wife should submit to you, and you should lord over the environment, and you should be fruitful and multiply. And anything wrong with you and with the world is just a byproduct of sin."
-Any biological researcher who does not accept evolution as a scientific fact has NO business developing new species or the cures to diseases. "We know that mutation is always bad, so if we can develop an anti-HIV vaccine that can wipe out all HIV in their current forms, we'll knock out AIDS in a generation."

In certain fields of study, failure to understand basic science is far, far more dangerous than simply willful ignorance. It is DANGEROUS.
Click to expand...

I can't believe you just said that... What in the hell does antibiotics have to do with evolution, your being very idiotic with your argument...

That was a weak argument all around lol... Geez you are a teacher? Really? Are you serious? What do you teach art class?

Ahhh finger painting ;) Sorry but, that was just to silly and all based on your opinion...

Edit:

How many doctors do you think don't believe in that yet still perform their jobs?

Does doctor Ron Paul believe in evolution, and should he have delivered thousands of babies?
 
Last edited:
Anyway back on subject. School choice, the choice to learn what you want, if people cant get jobs then school has failed haha..., Doesnt matter if they learned about where we come from, whether it be an ape, alien, an egg or a creator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom