- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Messages
- 18,233
- Reaction score
- 15,861
- Location
- veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Since when is this a partisan thing? I believe the Obama admin. and many other democratic politicians have gone with corporate reformers.
Have you seen the data surrounding which political party garners the greatest majority of the black vote? How about the data surrounding which party opposes any type of school other than a public not-for profit public school controlled by the government, and does not feel that parents should have a choice in which school they attend with tax funding (vouchers, charter schools, etc.)? Which party does not think that competition could make education better? Which party is more concerned with supporting and protecting the NEA, AFT, and other teachers unions happy at the expense (pun intended) of the children and their families?
It's been partisan and political for decades. The answer to the above four question is... the Democratic Party.
So, your thread is basically a partisan anti-union thread and not really about corporate reform and education? The truth is the Obama administration was very BIG on charters and so was Arne who worked under the Obama admin. How about Rahm? There are many others, even in my very blue state that have a D. by their name but they are on the corporate reform wagon.
No. I answered your question in that post. The thread is about the NAACP and their stance on not supporting black children attending anything other than a government controlled public school just so they can use the black kids as a political tool to force higher taxes that the black kids will not benefit from in the end -- specifically that the NAACP is telling black parents to keep their kids in crappy schools as leverage for tax hikes. Did you even read the article linked in the OP?
That is the interpretation of what the NAACP stance is which is a hack job.
Your posts goes to show how little you know about the topic of teacher unions. When I stated it gives me a voice at the table it had nothing to do with negotiating wages.
It had everything to do with advocating what policies work and don't work, and not being afraid when I speak out in my community that I will be fired for being actively involved in the discussion of what works and doesn't work in the classroom based on my experience. It is just one more voice at the table, and a very important one.
Did you read it? It appears you did not, given the above.
Then we should be able to agree that by passing a simple law the whole "negotiating for wages" in the public sector can be resolved permanently. Would that make sense to do then?
Why should anyone believe your labor union is the only thing preventing you from being fired on the spot? You make it sound like no school district would function even barely were it not for the labor unions preventing everything from falling apart. There should be no reason a labor cartel is required in order for school districts to listen to their teachers. As I said before, every single thing unions credit themselves for establishing in their collective bargaining agreements could be established uniformly by legislation, which, when it comes to public sector jobs, is exactly how those standards should be established.
It seems unions have a knack for convincing their supporters to care more about the union machine itself than about its stated cause.
Yes, that was someone's interpretation of the NAACP stance.
Someone's interpretation? It's the NAACP's own frigging words. You really didn't read the article, did you? *smh*
I did read it and it IS someone else's interpretation. It's called spinning someone else's words.
If you read it, then your ability to comprehend is in dire need of assistance. Click on the link in the article to the actual NAACP statement. The NAACP even wrote the title of their statement to make it clear what they want: "Statement Regarding the NAACP’s Resolution on a Moratorium on Charter Schools."
Here is the the NAAP site: NAACP | Statement Regarding the NAACP’s Resolution on a Moratorium on Charter Schools
We are calling for a moratorium on the expansion of the charter schools at least until such time as:
(1) Charter schools are subject to the same transparency and accountability standards as public schools
(2) Public funds are not diverted to charter schools at the expense of the public school system
(3) Charter schools cease expelling students that public schools have a duty to educate and
(4) Charter schools cease to perpetuate de facto segregation of the highest performing children from those whose aspirations may be high but whose talents are not yet as obvious.
I agree with this stance. What is so bad about it?
Here's a hint - - Read the article in the OP to find out.
You mean the spin. If you look at each of those positions, I see nothing wrong with it. These are all very reasonable. Public money should have public accountability.
Spin? Recognizing spin is not hard, but it appears you may have missed the actual statement that was pure spin... Public money already has public accountability, it's the law. That statement of theirs is BS to deflect from what they are trying to accomplish, which is the very definition of spin.
Look, if you want to discuss the article in the OP instead of running around in circles to trying to defend the un-defendable, then we can do that. Tomorrow. I'm done for now. Have a good night.
Having free representation if I am being written up for my public stances that may or may not jive with my administration's is peace of mind to me.
This is simply false. The vouchers usually go to low income students which are usually minority students.
Nope it doesn't draw money out of the system.
The public school is already faili it can't get much worse than that.
Schools that enter the voucher system must accept the student awarded the vouchers.
The rest is just liberal rhetoric. The real question is why do you support keepi kids in a failing school.
. You want to fix failing schools, fix failing parents.
It's important to note that they don't want change to be done to them or for them but with them. Nothing wrong with the democratic process in including them as part of the discussion. Whenever the union is a topic, it is by some corporate shrill who want to take over the schools. Other than that, it should not be a problem whether a union exist within a school or not unless it is looking for full control.
One wonders what effect teachers and administrators have at all given this overused and exaggerated trope.
One wonders what effect teachers and administrators have at all given this overused and exaggerated trope.
that 'overused and exaggerated trope' is also quite accurate
allow me to address the question "what effect teachers and administrators have" and first focus on the role of the administrators. they should allow teachers to teach while assuring the school is a safe environment for learning. those adminstrators should use their authority to either remove or train the few teachers who are weak and get the hell out of the way of the rest of those teachers who know their craft
as for the teachers, they will enhance the academic growth of the students who arrive ready to learn. students from homes that value an education. from homes that provide a safe environment, access to essential materials, as well as ample food and sleep. from homes in which the parents have taught their children how to behave
but when the teachers are provided students who are behavioral problems, they must take their time away from teaching the class to instead deal with the reprobates, babysitting a few instead of teaching all
there is no bigger problem with America's public school system than crappy parents who are unsupportive and inattentive to their chidrens' physical, emotional, behavioral, and educational needs
Parents have a significant impact (as does society at large), but any honest commentary about improvements toward the education would not seek to minimize the impact of teacher preparation and ideology of such preparation, administration, school discipline procedures, and so on as having an enormous impact on not only the quality of education received, but also the quality of interaction students have with the staff. This is especially important when understanding many of the issues that minorities have against the current design of education in this country or in their localities.
Our preparation for teachers is one of the best in the nation and much has to do with the MTA. Yes, administration does have an impact on discipline procedures, and I'm not at all sure what that has to do with the MTA. Also, I believe the problem isn't so much minorities as is poverty. Until people address that poverty hurts the education of poor children before they even enter kindergarten, and address it before they start kindergarten (as in high quality early childhood education) this problem is not going away.
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?