Louisiana's bold bid to privatize schools

[Boo Radley]

US education spending link: K-12 Spending Per Student in the OECD | Mercatus

See post 195.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Are you asking why I want the government completely out of education?

Government bureaucrats mess up nearly everything. Education is an individual choice. People should be able to buy it the same way they buy anything else. It is time for a change. So why not let go of this government monopoly and see what happens?

the same reason you don't want to jump off a cliff to see what happens. The results are predictable.

Has there ever been, anywhere in the world, a nation with both an educated population and an all private system of education?

Has there ever been, anywhere in the world, a nation that is both ignorant and free?

 

[ttwtt78640]

I find it interesting that your last one argues cutting funding is the large problem. Just saying.

I never said any such thing. INCLUDE the quote if you feel that I said so. You have serious reading comprehension issues. I said that IF local schools do not play by the federal (central planning) rules that they WOULD lose funding. You are always "just saying", yet saying very little, as in the post I am now wasting time replying to.

 

[Boo Radley]

What a crock. Spending on education as percentage of GDP? That is nonsense used to IMPLY that we spend less when, IN FACT, we spend far MORE on a PER STUDENT basis: K-12 Spending Per Student in the OECD | Mercatus

Yes, we have a lot more to spend. It has to with how important an investment we consider education to be. Finland may spend less per student, but not a high percentage of their GDP. We could spend the same percentage that they do.

Now, I don't claim money alone makes for a good education. I merely think you're looking at it all wrong. Other countries, and Finland is a good example of this, have a more centralized educatinal system, few to no private schools as I recall, very socialisitc. So, what do you think makes them better?

 

[Boo Radley]

I never said any such thing. INCLUDE the quote if you feel that I said so. You have serious reading comprehension issues. I said that IF local schools do not play by the federal (central planning) rules that they WOULD lose funding. You are always "just saying", yet saying very little, as in the post I am now wasting time replying to.

First, I said your link, the last one. And from that link:

As state and local governments come to terms with their budget deficits, however, more and more are cutting back on their funding for education. According to the National Governor’s Association and National Association for State Budget Offi cers, 13 states have made midyear budget cuts to K–12 schools already this fiscal year. Many more are expected to follow suit. Support for state universities is also being slashed by state after state.

I submit that these cutbacks are tantamount to a breathtaking dismantling of our educational system and therefore America’s heretofore unchallenged economic prowess.

I assumed you read what you linked. Do you think this supports your premise?

 

[ttwtt78640]

See post 195.

Try very hard to explain what education spending as a percentage of GDP has to do with ANYTHING. Is the same car "better" if you make less money? GDP is the total economic OUTPUT of a nation. If you spend more of your income on your housing is your house better than one owned by someome that makes 50x more? A minimum wage worker spends FAR MORE of their income on housing than a millionaire, yet we can all see that millionaires live in better houses. That is why PER PUPIL spending is what matters, not education spending realtive to some factor totally unrealted to education. Do you seriously NOT see that?

 

[Boo Radley]

Try very hard to explain what education spending as a percentage of GDP has to do with ANYTHING. Is the same car "better" if you make less money? GDP is the total economic OUTPUT of a nation. If you spend more of your income on your housing is your house better than one owned by someome that makes 50x more? A minimum wage worker spends FAR MORE of their income on housing than a millionaire, yet we can all see that millionaires live in better houses. That is why PER PUPIL spending is what matters, not education spending realtive to some factor totally unrealted to education. Do you seriously NOT see that?

As I said above, it's about committment. It is costing them more in terms of committment.

But read the other posts.

 

[ttwtt78640]

First, I said your link, the last one. And from that link:



I assumed you read what you linked. Do you think this supports your premise?

OK, when tax revenue drops gov't spending drops too. Unllike the federal gov't that can borrow and print money, states must TAX first and then spend. I have REPEATEDLY pointed out that their is NO link to U.S. education spending increases and its effect on student achievement which continues to drop in world rankings. That is my premise, plain and simple; spending more does not raise test score of the students, so TEMPORARILY spending less should not be a factor either.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yes, we have a lot more to spend. It has to with how important an investment we consider education to be. Finland may spend less per student, but not a high percentage of their GDP. We could spend the same percentage that they do.

Now, I don't claim money alone makes for a good education. I merely think you're looking at it all wrong. Other countries, and Finland is a good example of this, have a more centralized educatinal system, few to no private schools as I recall, very socialisitc. So, what do you think makes them better?

WHat I think makes them better is that their teachers can TEACH (not play the parent's role too). They make their students behave, we do not. They have students with parents that make them behave, we do not. Do you recall how our "students" treated that lady on the school bus? They were hoodlums with not a care in the world for manners or self control. This is what is ALLOWED in our schools, it is NOT allowed in other countries' schools. They do not hesitate to damage the self esteem of a moron, they require proper behavior in a classroom (or bus).

 

[Dittohead not!]

WHatI think makes them better is that their teachers can TEACH (not play the parent's role too). They make their students behave, we do not. They have students with parents that make them behave, we do not. Do you recall how our "students" treated that lady on the school bus? They were hoodlums with not a care in the world for manners or self control. This is what is ALLOWED in our schools, it is NOT allowed in other countries' schools. They do not hesitate to damage the self esteem of a moron, they require proper behavior in a classroom.

Good point.

Holding students accountable for their actions is more important than simply spending more money on education, no doubt about it.

One of the biggest problems with school funding is that the money gets siphoned off at the federal, state, county, and district levels before it ever gets to the schools.

Funding schools directly and allowing parents to choose would be a better way of holding schools accountable through competition for students, it seems to me, and allowing schools to set standards and hold students accountable would do more than imposing standards set by the state or federal governments.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I find it interesting that your last one argues cutting funding is the large problem. Just saying.

Do your EVER pay attention to what SUBJECT the posts are ABOUT? This was a reply to Hayseed asking a silly question about U.S. K-12 education in world rankings for student educational achievemnet, yet YOU zoom in on a spending cut beef by an educational organization to DIVERT the conversation to imply more spending = better results (which WE know is untrue). Try to focus on the topic of the posts, in this case it was U.S. K-12 student performance NOT COST.

 

[Boo Radley]

WHatI think makes them better is that their teachers can TEACH (not play the parent's role too). They make their students behave, we do not. They have students with parents that make them behave, we do not. Do you recall how our "students" treated that lady on the school bus? They were hoodlums with not a care in the world for manners or self control. This is what is ALLOWED in our schools, it is NOT allowed in other countries' schools. They do not hesitate to damage the self esteem of a moron, they require proper behavior in a classroom.

I will agree their teachers may nto ahve to, as their parents parent. This is allowed becasue parents insist on allowing it. So, according to you, it isn't the money, or the scools, or the teachers, but the parents.

 

[Boo Radley]

Do your EVER pay attention to what SUBJECT the posts are ABOUT? This was a reply to Hayseed asking a silly question about U.S. K-12 education in world rankings for student educational achievemnet, yet YOU zoom in on a spending cut beef by an educational organization to DIVERT the conversation to imply more spending = better results (which WE know is untrue). Try to focus on the topic of the posts, in this case it was U.S. K-12 student performance NOT COST.

Of course I do, but you chose to use that source. The reason I said "just saying" was because the notation was not part of that discussion. There is more than one discussion going on, and most of us can handle that. We were discussing costs.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Of course I do, but you chose to use that source. The reason I said "just saying" was because the notation was not part of that discussion. There is more than one discussion going on, and most of us can handle that. We were discussing costs.

And I showed you that the USA spends MORE that MANY, MANY nations that FAR outperform our system's results, so COST is obviously NOT the issue, MOVE ON. Nonsense about education spending as a percenatge of GDP is a foolish attempt at diversion. WE ALREADY OUTSPEND the nations that we trail PER STUDENT, so it is time to look for a new boggie man. I have proposed our student behavior standards, the lack of parental involvement and the refusal of the schools to maintain ORDER in the classroom, yet have heard NO argument to refute that. If a teacher must spend time playing parent then that time is SUBRACTED from time able to be spent teaching the lesson plan; is that NOT so?.

 

[Layla_Z]

The problem isn't how much is spent but how it is spent. More money needs to be spent on academics. I've described before the school that cut teachers but added football and the other school that had teachers' budgets cut in half but the top adminstrator got a big raise.

Other countries do better on tests because they don't test everyone as we do here. Next, they value education. The parents support the school and the teachers. Teachers want to discipline their students and control their classroom but too often when they do they are supported by the adminstration. So when the parent comes to the school pitching a fit because their little angel got in trouble the teacher is the one being attacked. Once that happens the kid is even more difficult to deal with. Thigns would have been much different for those jerks on the bus if there had not been a video and it had not been posted. Do you think that's the first time something like that happened?

Also, about the money. Other countries don't spend as much because they don't offer sports as part of school. I'd be interested to see a comparison of academic spending.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I will agree their teachers may nto ahve to, as their parents parent. This is allowed becasue parents insist on allowing it. So, according to you, it isn't the money, or the scools, or the teachers, but the parents.

It is a COMBINATION of things, but we have eliminated MONEY. The parents are certainly part of the problem, but the schools meekly accept ANY behavior as being their OWN problem. I would NOT, I would expell the VERY FEW students that do not allow the rest a chance to learn, give the parent the money BACK (voucher?) that was allotted for that "student" and tell them to deal with educating their OWN monster(s). Next is our teacher QUALITY, not quantity, as we are well ahead in that area as well. Link: Next US education reform: Higher teacher quality - CSMonitor.com

 

[Boo Radley]

It is a COMBINATION of things, but we have eliminated MONEY. The parents are certainly part of the problem, but the schools meekly accept ANY behavior as being their OWN problem. I would NOT, I would expell the VERY FEW students that do not allow the rest a chance to learn, give the parent the money BACK (voucher?) that was allotted for that "student" and tell them to deal with educating their OWN monster(s). Next is our teacher QUALITY, not quantity, as we are well ahead in that area as well. Link: Next US education reform: Higher teacher quality - CSMonitor.com

First, I never said cost was the issue, your link did.

Meekly accept? Teachers can, and many do, quit, but that's about it. Parents run most of the show. And changing schools doesn't change the aprent problem. It just moves it from one palce to another, and none of the schools do anything different in terms of methodology (I still maintian this is an important point).

As for quality, how do we measure it? Many republicans if not conservatives argue accredidation isn't important.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The problem isn't how much is spent but how it is spent. More money needs to be spent on academics. I've described before the school that cut teachers but added football and the other school that had teachers' budgets cut in half but the top adminstrator got a big raise.

Other countries do better on tests because they don't test everyone as we do here. Next, they value education. The parents support the school and the teachers. Teachers want to discipline their students and control their classroom but too often when they do they are supported by the adminstration. So when the parent comes to the school pitching a fit because their little angel got in trouble the teacher is the one being attacked. Once that happens the kid is even more difficult to deal with. Things would have been much different for those jerks on the bus if there had not been a video and it had not been posted. Do you think that's the first time something like that happened?

Also, about the money. Other countries don't spend as much because they don't offer sports as part of school. I'd be interested to see a comparison of academic spending.

This is precisely what vouchers are about. Giving the parents (and the public schools) the control that they deserve. The parents are then free to put their children into ANY school, public or private that they feel will do the best job of educating them using their voucher. The public teacher's union fights this as they LEGITIMATELY fear they will not be chosen, and will lose their monopoly. Instead they should welcome the challenge, as they too can use that VOUCHER as a REASON to choose as well; they can flip the "choice" to THEIR advantage. The law should allow that any school, that sees no way to handle a given moron "student's" discipline problem, may then simply give the parent a voucher to educate that "student" elsewhere and expell the few trouble makers, allowing the rest to be educated without that moron's distraction.

The state may then create a MUCH better situation in the public school system. Trust me when I say that private schools will NOT put up with a moron's behavior, they simply reject the notion that they MUST educate all comers, regardless of their behavior. There is NO reason that ANY school must continue to accept the unexacceptable behavior of a few moron's and dedicate massive resources to try to control them.

 

[ttwtt78640]

First, I never said cost was the issue, your link did.

Meekly accept? Teachers can, and many do, quit, but that's about it. Parents run most of the show. And changing schools doesn't change the aprent problem. It just moves it from one palce to another, and none of the schools do anything different in terms of methodology (I still maintian this is an important point).

As for quality, how do we measure it? Many republicans if not conservatives argue accredidation isn't important.

You have the tail wagging the dog here. It is not that the teacher should quit, it is that the school should quit messing with moron's, simply expell them and give the parent a "refund" in the form of a voucher. Far too much time and effort is WASTED on trying to discipline a few monsters; that detracts time from the REAL mission, which is to educate the vast majority of students.

 

[Boo Radley]

You have the tail wagging the dog here. It is not that the teacher should quit, it is that the school should quit messing with moron's, simply expell them and give the parent a "refund" in the form of a voucher. Far too much time and effort is WASTED on trying to discipline a few monsters; that detracts time from the REAL mission, which is to educate the vast majority of students.

The school answer to parents. So, the school really can't do what you suggest. It isn't government, but parents. A voucher, as I said, just moves the problem. The student doesn't change based on place.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The school answer to parents. So, the school really can't do what you suggest. It isn't government, but parents. A voucher, as I said, just moves the problem. The student doesn't change based on place.

True but the PLACE changes based on the students. This is the key advantage that private schools enjoy, they demand proper behavior and thus get better results while spending less money. Reform schools, not public schools are where disruptive morons belong. Are you aware that "special needs" students now get over 40% of the federal funding? There is surely ample money to weed out the morons and place them in "special" (reform) schools, letting the vast majority actually learn the lesson plan thus helping EVERYBODY. Note that "move" is a vital part of the word "remove". It is high time we that stopped pretending that all students are "equal", if parents do their job then the school may do its job. It is trying to make the school do the job of the parents that is MY #1 assertion as to why U.S. education is declining even as more money and smaller class sizes SHOULD have had the opposite effect.

 

[Boo Radley]

True but the PLACE changes based on the students. This is the key advantage that private schools enjoy, they demand proper behavior and thus get better results while spending less money. Reform schools, not public schools are where disruptive morons belong. Are you aware that "special needs" students now get over 40% of the federal funding? There is surely ample money to weed out the morons and place them in "special" (reform) schools, letting the vast majority actually learn the lesson plan thus helping EVERYBODY. Note that "move" is a vital part of the word "remove". It is high time we that stopped pretending that all students are "equal", if parents do their job then the school may do its job. It is trying to make the school do the job of the parents that is MY #1 assertion as to why U.S. education is declining even as more money and smaller class sizes SHOULD have had the opposite effect.

Some do and some don't. The difference is money talks. There are problem children in private schools as well, and their parents protect them as well. And yes, I know about special needs children, which is another issue. Not doing the work is not equal to not being able to do the work.

However, this is an essay fix. Make rules parents can't supercede. This will take government. Is that what you suggest?

 

[haymarket]

Links of USA ranking in world K-12 education:

Statistics on American K-12 Public Education - The Broad Foundation - Education

International Education Rankings Suggest Reform Can Lift U.S. | ED.gov Blog

U.S. Falls In World Education Rankings, Rated 'Average'

http://www.neha.org/pdf/JEH/columns/JEH3.11_MgED_World_Rankings_of_the_U.S_Education_NEHA.pdf

Your statement from your own post 193

What "I'm we're" discussing is WHY U.S. public education spends the MOST of all the nations yet scores in WELL BELOW most of them.

Using all of the sources you provided, you apparently either misspoke or outright lied when you stated that the USA leads in spending for education but is behind the majority of the nations of the world in results.

1 - Why would you do that?

2- Why would you then present links to data that FAIL to prove your claim - or even come close to your claim?

3 - by your own data, the USA is in the top ten percent of nations in terms of student results. Why did you not state this in the first place but instead choosing to state that we were in the bottom half of the nations of the world?

Engaging in over the top hyperbole like claiming that the USA scores well below most other nations in the world only makes your statements about education look rather stupid to say the least. It also calls into question your intellectual integrity because you were not even close with your claims.

Why would you do this?

btw - there are between 194 and 196 nations in the world depending on how they are counted. What that means for your statement is that to be out performed by MOST as you claimed, the USA would have to be beaten by nearly 100 other nations.

You should really look up this stuff before you go making such absurd statements that are so easy to prove false on their face.

 

[Furiounova]

Schools should be funded based on how many students attend and not by zip code. That is the main reason we have so many problems with the public school system. You have one district with a ratio of 1:16, swim team, lacrosse team, latest computers, and text books with another district having a ratio of 1:28, broken water fountains, very few sports teams, and textbooks from 1954

 

[ttwtt78640]

Your statement from your own post 193



Using all of the sources you provided, you apparently either misspoke or outright lied when you stated that the USA leads in spending for education but is behind the majority of the nations of the world in results.

1 - Why would you do that?

2- Why would you then present links to data that FAIL to prove your claim - or even come close to your claim?

3 - by your own data, the USA is in the top ten percent of nations in terms of student results. Why did you not state this in the first place but instead choosing to state that we were in the bottom half of the nations of the world?

Engaging in over the top hyperbole like claiming that the USA scores well below most other nations in the world only makes your statements about education look rather stupid to say the least. It also calls into question your intellectual integrity because you were not even close with your claims.

Why would you do this?

btw - there are between 194 and 196 nations in the world depending on how they are counted. What that means for your statement is that to be out performed by MOST as you claimed, the USA would have to be beaten by nearly 100 other nations.

You should really look up this stuff before you go making such absurd statements that are so easy to prove false on their face.

OK, compared to MOST industrialized nations or OCED nations, as in the top 30. It should be OBVIOUS, even to you, that third world nations are easy to beat. So yep, you sure got me there! WOW, my points are all invalid now, we beat lower Slobovia, and some 130 other insignificant third world nations. No need for any more educational reform here, no sir. We are heads above tiny nations with 100 teachers in the whole country. Lets celebrate that great victory and give all the teachers great big raises!

Quote taken from 1st link:

"American students rank 25th in math and 21st in science compared to students in 30 industrialized countries.

America’s top math students rank 25th out of 30 countries when compared with top students elsewhere in the world. [1]

By the end of 8th grade, U.S. students are two years behind in the math being studied by peers in other countries. [2]

Seventy percent of 8th graders can’t read at their grade level, and most will never catch up."

Link: http://educationnext.org/files/ednext_20114_Peterson_fig1.gif