Explain to me more clearly what the entire issue of her favoring merit and test scores as a means of determining pay and 'teaching success' has to do with her being a single mother of two kids who attend public school?
I'm not seeing how that matters - at all.
I would naturally expect a parent who lives in a school district, governs within that school district, to naturally have their kids attend that school district.
So - you don't want her kids in public school? You think they should be in a private school?
To me, if her kids were in private school, it would be highly hypocritical for her to push an agenda only to not have her kids be directly affected by it.
If you want to pick apart her beliefs and reasons for her actions then I'm all for it. But I fail to see why her kids being in her public school system has anything to do with it in a negative means - nor does *the President's family decisions* somehow compare in any way to Rhee's family decision.
and didn't get what your point was.check that last part again. then ask yourselves how many of the Democrats that killed the Washington DC voucher program can say the same.
So - you don't want her kids in public school? You think they should be in a private school?
To me, if her kids were in private school, it would be highly hypocritical for her to push an agenda only to not have her kids be directly affected by it.
If you want to pick apart her beliefs and reasons for her actions then I'm all for it. But I fail to see why her kids being in her public school system has anything to do with it in a negative means - nor does *the President's family decisions* somehow compare in any way to Rhee's family decision.
Explain to me more clearly what the entire issue of her favoring merit and test scores as a means of determining pay and 'teaching success' has to do with her being a single mother of two kids who attend public school?
I'm not seeing how that matters - at all.
Ok - *that* made sense, Gray.
CP - if that was your point then it just didn't come across that way.
I read this:
and didn't get what your point was.
On the voucher-program note. I'm against government-funded vouching for private schools.
If the schools are *that bad* then *that money* should go to fixing the public school system instead of simply paying to let *some* kids attend a private school.
money is not the problem in the public school system. per capita real spending on education has exploded even as our educational system has gotten worse. vouchers are about letting children escape failing schools.
which is why unions oppose them. keeping children trapped in those failing schools means guaranteed jobs and benefits for those failing teachers.
math, reading, science, writing
AL 269, 255, 138, 148
AZ 277, 258, 140, 148
AK 283, 258, n/a, n/a
GA 278, 260, 144, 153
KY 279, 267, 153, 151
MS 265, 251, 132, 142
MO 286, 267, 154, 153
NC 284, 260, 144, 153
SC 280, 257, 145, 148
TX 287, 260, 143, 151
VA 286, 266, 155, 157
WV 270, 255, 147, 146
WY 286, 268, 159, 158
AVG 282, 262, 147, 154
better than average: 6, 4, 4, 2
worse than average: 7, 9, 7, 10
notice that the states which do not negotiate with unions perform substantially worse than those states which do have active, recognized unions in their school systems
if the unions were actually detrimental to educational achievement, that finding should be reversed
one can conclude that unions may be a contributor to enhanced educational attainment
State Profiles.net
Many people are religious and that prevents them from wanting to learn anything outside the bible?
That has to be the dumbest thing I've ever read concerning education and has absolutely no basis in reality.
Sounds dumb, but often the truth is hardest to swallow. Look at nations where religion is the law. Enough said.
We're not Germany or Iran, here.
We're not a religious country. Religion does not governmen us, our school system - or anything. Our BIGGEST problem when it comes to the issue of religion is that we try to please everyone and that's inherently impossible.
So - since we don't have a national-religion nor do we cater to any particular one - why, then, do we have school systems like Chicago's and DC's?
We're not Germany or Iran, here.
We're not a religious country. Religion does not governmen us, our school system - or anything. Our BIGGEST problem when it comes to the issue of religion is that we try to please everyone and that's inherently impossible.
So - since we don't have a national-religion nor do we cater to any particular one - why, then, do we have school systems like Chicago's and DC's?
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?