• 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!

Why is the Obama administration fighting to keep poor children in bad schools?

Boo Radley said:
Or private schools:

Still, I was intrigued to read of a well-designed study released today by the Center on Education Policy that challenges decades of research on the advantages of private schools. "Contrary to popular belief, we can find no evidence that private schools actually increase student performance," said Jack Jennings, the center's president and a former staffer in the Democratic-controlled House, in a press release. "Instead, it appears that private schools simply have higher percentages of students who perform well in any environment based on their previous performance and background."

Read more: Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME
Click to expand...

From your own link:

Except that's not exactly what the data shows. It's true that controlling for socioeconomic status (SES) eliminates most of the public-school/private-school differences in achievement-test scores in math, reading, science and history. But even after you control for SES, Catholic schools run by holy orders (not those overseen by the local bishop) turned out to perform better than other schools studied. True, as the study says, there are only a small number of religious-order schools. But the data suggests that the type of school a kid attends does affect how well he will do — and that we could learn something from how holy orders run their schools. The Center on Education Policy, however, is an advocacy group for public schools, so it didn't look into why holy-order schools are succeeding where others fail.

The center also downplays another finding: While controlling for SES eliminated most public school/private-school differences in achievement test scores, it did not eliminate differences in the most widely used test of developed abilities, the SAT. (As I explained more fully here, developed abilities are those nurtured through schoolwork, reading, engaging a piece of art, and any other activities that spark critical thinking. Developed abilities aren't inborn traits but honed competencies, more akin to athletic skill gained through practice rather than raw IQ. By contrast, achievement tests measure the amount of material students have committed to memory in any particular field.) Combined with high-school grades, SAT scores are the best predictor of how kids will do in their freshman year of college. And the data in the new study shows that private-school students outperform public-school students on the SAT.

Isn't that just because richer private-school kids can afford to be coached more before the SAT? No — remember that this study carefully controlled for socioeconomic status. Rather, it appears private schools do more to develop students' critical-thinking abilities — not just the rote memorization required to do well on achievement tests.

In short, today's study shows that sending your kid to private school — particularly one run by a holy order like the Jesuits — is still a better way to ensure that he or she will get into college. Just don't expect all education experts to agree.

Read more: Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME
 
Jack Hays said:
I have no quarrel with that, but it's beside the point. Some schools are going to do well, others not. I have nowhere claimed that charter schools are the complete answer. I just want our federal government to stop standing in the way of innovation and choice.:peace
Click to expand...

Data also indicate that parent involvement can vary by poverty concentration and minority enrollment in the school. The 2000 NAEP survey found that 73 percent of white 4th graders were in schools in which lack of parent involvement was deemed not to be a problem, or to be only a minor problem. The same could be said for only 38 percent of black 4th graders, however, and 48 percent of Hispanic 4th graders. Efforts to recruit poor or non-English-speaking parents can include a bilingual hotline, transportation to the school for the parent, translation services, or child care (Rutherford et al., 1997). Among poor students, defined as those eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch program, 42 percent of 4th graders were in schools where lack of parent involvement was not a problem or was only a minor problem. Of their better-off peers, 72 percent were in such schools.

Research Center: Parent Involvement
 
Boo Radley said:
Data also indicate that parent involvement can vary by poverty concentration and minority enrollment in the school. The 2000 NAEP survey found that 73 percent of white 4th graders were in schools in which lack of parent involvement was deemed not to be a problem, or to be only a minor problem. The same could be said for only 38 percent of black 4th graders, however, and 48 percent of Hispanic 4th graders. Efforts to recruit poor or non-English-speaking parents can include a bilingual hotline, transportation to the school for the parent, translation services, or child care (Rutherford et al., 1997). Among poor students, defined as those eligible for the federal free or reduced-price lunch program, 42 percent of 4th graders were in schools where lack of parent involvement was not a problem or was only a minor problem. Of their better-off peers, 72 percent were in such schools.

Research Center: Parent Involvement
Click to expand...

Ah yes, parental involvement. The excuse of choice for teacher guild protectionism. Except when the parents don't do what the teacher guild wants.

Parents like the program, according to the governor’s office, with 93 percent approval from parents (mostly single moms) whose kids were awarded vouchers. Ninety percent of the recipients are minorities, which in Louisiana means they are overwhelmingly black. While most of the program’s students are in New Orleans, there are recipients everywhere from urban areas like Baton Rouge and Shreveport to the rural parishes north and south. Early results for the statewide program show improvement: From 2011 to 2013, students in “scholarship schools” did better on literacy and math tests than they did in their old schools, with a 7 percent increase in students performing at grade level in those areas.:peace
 
Jack Hays said:
From your own link:

Except that's not exactly what the data shows. It's true that controlling for socioeconomic status (SES) eliminates most of the public-school/private-school differences in achievement-test scores in math, reading, science and history. But even after you control for SES, Catholic schools run by holy orders (not those overseen by the local bishop) turned out to perform better than other schools studied. True, as the study says, there are only a small number of religious-order schools. But the data suggests that the type of school a kid attends does affect how well he will do — and that we could learn something from how holy orders run their schools. The Center on Education Policy, however, is an advocacy group for public schools, so it didn't look into why holy-order schools are succeeding where others fail.

The center also downplays another finding: While controlling for SES eliminated most public school/private-school differences in achievement test scores, it did not eliminate differences in the most widely used test of developed abilities, the SAT. (As I explained more fully here, developed abilities are those nurtured through schoolwork, reading, engaging a piece of art, and any other activities that spark critical thinking. Developed abilities aren't inborn traits but honed competencies, more akin to athletic skill gained through practice rather than raw IQ. By contrast, achievement tests measure the amount of material students have committed to memory in any particular field.) Combined with high-school grades, SAT scores are the best predictor of how kids will do in their freshman year of college. And the data in the new study shows that private-school students outperform public-school students on the SAT.

Isn't that just because richer private-school kids can afford to be coached more before the SAT? No — remember that this study carefully controlled for socioeconomic status. Rather, it appears private schools do more to develop students' critical-thinking abilities — not just the rote memorization required to do well on achievement tests.

In short, today's study shows that sending your kid to private school — particularly one run by a holy order like the Jesuits — is still a better way to ensure that he or she will get into college. Just don't expect all education experts to agree.

Read more: Are Private Schools Really Better? - TIME
Click to expand...

Yes, I linked the opinion piece for the study, not the opinion.


In a 2007 study, "Are Private High Schools Better Academically Than Public High Schools?" the Center on Education Policy (CEP) found that once key family background characteristics were considered, public high school students do as well as private school students. "When we controlled for other factors, family background was the biggest determinator of how a kid was going to do," says Diane Stark Rentner, Deputy Director of the CEP.

The report found that:

1. Private high school students scored no better on achievement tests in math, reading, science and history than their counterparts in public high schools.

2. Private high school students were no more likely to attend college than their public high school counterparts.

3. By age 26, young adults who had attended private school enjoyed no more job satisfaction than those who had attended public high schools and were no more likely to be engaged in civic activities.

Is private school worth it? - The Week
 
Jack Hays said:
Ah yes, parental involvement. The excuse of choice for teacher guild protectionism. Except when the parents don't do what the teacher guild wants.

Parents like the program, according to the governor’s office, with 93 percent approval from parents (mostly single moms) whose kids were awarded vouchers. Ninety percent of the recipients are minorities, which in Louisiana means they are overwhelmingly black. While most of the program’s students are in New Orleans, there are recipients everywhere from urban areas like Baton Rouge and Shreveport to the rural parishes north and south. Early results for the statewide program show improvement: From 2011 to 2013, students in “scholarship schools” did better on literacy and math tests than they did in their old schools, with a 7 percent increase in students performing at grade level in those areas.:peace
Click to expand...

Let me ask you, do you think students have minds or are merely empty vessels?
 
The elephant in the room of education reform is, of course, the growing number of children who live in poverty in the state. If a child had never set foot in a doctor’s office before he was five years old, we’d not be surprised if he had undiagnosed medical conditions and we’d be forgiving of the doctor when she had to take more time and invest more resources to get that child fully healthy. Many of these low-income kids come to our schools academically unwell. We need to continue to invest in and expand our early childhood programs as well as our school meal programs. Let’s find more ways to help these families outside of school to help keep our schools growing in a healthy way.

http://abetteriowa.desmoinesregiste...t-the-main-problem-with-education-shortfalls/
 
One such problem that is attacking the education system in America is the alarming attrition rate of teachers.

(Snip)

Another problem that is facing American education today, and one which can easily be seen as a reason for the low attrition rate of teachers, is the lack of parental involvement with which most teachers have to deal.

http://www.nationalforum.com/Electr...Ashley Problems Facing American Education.pdf
 
The answer, it turns out, is none of the above. If there’s a crisis in U.S. education, the fault lies with a group more accustomed to leveling blame than receiving it: parents.

One upside of all the hand-wringing about the state of U.S. education is that vast amounts of data now exist about what’s really happening in America’s classrooms. In recent years teachers have become the chief targets of reformers’ ire. Yet a Gates Foundation study released in January this year based on 3,000 classrooms across the nation found that less than eight percent of teachers in their survey ranked below “basic” competence. And a second Gates-financed study released earlier this month suggests the average teacher may be working an eleven-hour day.

The Real Reason America's Schools Stink - Businessweek


Making teachers entirely responsible for a student’s academic progress — regardless of whether the child eats enough or sleeps enough or gets enough medical attention — is counterproductive. Pretending that these issues can be “factored out” in some kind of mathematical formula that can assess how much “value” a teacher has added to a student’s progress is near nutty. That’s not just me saying it. Leading mathematicians say it too.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...em-gets-worse/2011/09/13/gIQAWGz2RK_blog.html
 
Jack Hays said:
Ah yes, parental involvement. The excuse of choice for teacher guild protectionism. Except when the parents don't do what the teacher guild wants.

Parents like the program, according to the governor’s office, with 93 percent approval from parents (mostly single moms) whose kids were awarded vouchers. Ninety percent of the recipients are minorities, which in Louisiana means they are overwhelmingly black. While most of the program’s students are in New Orleans, there are recipients everywhere from urban areas like Baton Rouge and Shreveport to the rural parishes north and south. Early results for the statewide program show improvement: From 2011 to 2013, students in “scholarship schools” did better on literacy and math tests than they did in their old schools, with a 7 percent increase in students performing at grade level in those areas.:peace
Click to expand...

Excellent post! :thumbs:

Michelle Rhee, former Chancellor of the DC school system, felt she had a moral obligation which she termed "Students First." Unfortunately she ran afoul of the teachers unions when she adopted the voucher system which gave poor and middle class students the opportunity to escape failing DC public schools. Sad...

Good evening, Jack. :2wave:
 
polgara said:
Excellent post! :thumbs:

Michelle Rhee, former Chancellor of the DC school system, felt she had a moral obligation which she termed "Students First." Unfortunately she ran afoul of the teachers unions when she adopted the voucher system which gave poor and middle class students the opportunity to escape failing DC public schools. Sad...

Good evening, Jack. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Thanks. Good evening, Polgara.:2wave:
 
Jack Hays said:
Yes, I've raised some.
Click to expand...

Yet, you remove any responsibly from them.

There's a district up here where students get 55% for an assignment before they even do it. They get that even if they don't do the assignment. Yet, you remove responsibility from parents.

You favor allowing movement with tax dollars to Charter Schools that aren't better. Shouldn't they be better with selected students? If they aren't, they're actually worse.

My point is there's more than one issue here.
 
Boo Radley said:
Yet, you remove any responsibly from them.

There's a district up here where students get 55% for an assignment before they even do it. They get that even if they don't do the assignment. Yet, you remove responsibility from parents.

You favor allowing movement with tax dollars to Charter Schools that aren't better. Shouldn't they be better with selected students? If they aren't, they're actually worse.

My point is there's more than one issue here.
Click to expand...

Yes, there are. Therefore free up the system to allow choice and innovation.
 
Boo Radley said:
Yet, you remove any responsibly from them.

There's a district up here where students get 55% for an assignment before they even do it. They get that even if they don't do the assignment. Yet, you remove responsibility from parents.

You favor allowing movement with tax dollars to Charter Schools that aren't better. Shouldn't they be better with selected students? If they aren't, they're actually worse.

My point is there's more than one issue here.
Click to expand...

Good evening, Boo Radley. :2wave:

I'm intrigued. Why do they get 55% for an assignment they haven't even done yet? Wouldn't that show them they don't even have to try? :shock:
 
Jack Hays said:
Yes, there are. Therefore free up the system to allow choice and innovation.
Click to expand...

Innovation is largely taking place in public schools. They have the freedom. Private schools being for profit play it safe. Innovation is not safe.

You can't do what you want without public dollars. That moves the private to he public, and will lead to government run education. Private will be less private. The selective ones will likely stay selective, but moving public problems to private won't correct those problems. All of the players and there problems remind the same because we still won't have addressed them. Students, parents, teachers, administrators, communities, poverty, violence, drugs, political leaders, and our culture won't change. All of it has to be addressed.
 
polgara said:
Good evening, Boo Radley. :2wave:

I'm intrigued. Why do they get 55% for an assignment they haven't even done yet? Wouldn't that show them they don't even have to try? :shock:
Click to expand...


Parents want it that way. Their children can't fail. You'll find parents and not schools behind pass along efforts. I've only ever been sued once in my life, and it was by a parent because her 18 year old child failed. He turned in no work, didn't even come to class, but his failure had to be my fault. Much of blame the teacher is really about parents and students and the community not taking responsibility.

Don't get me wrong. There are poor teachers. But we lose better ones because we so demonize the teacher (not to mention other issues mentioned in an article I posted above).
 
Boo Radley said:
Innovation is largely taking place in public schools. They have the freedom. Private schools being for profit play it safe. Innovation is not safe.

You can't do what you want without public dollars. That moves the private to he public, and will lead to government run education. Private will be less private. The selective ones will likely stay selective, but moving public problems to private won't correct those problems. All of the players and there problems remind the same because we still won't have addressed them. Students, parents, teachers, administrators, communities, poverty, violence, drugs, political leaders, and our culture won't change. All of it has to be addressed.
Click to expand...

Maybe yes, maybe no, but beside the point. The school choice at issue in Louisiana is mostly public-to-public. That is what the administration is trying to block.:peace
 
Jack Hays said:
Why not give the good students trapped in bad schools the opportunity to escape?
Click to expand...

Why not fix the school so no one needs to escape?
 
Jack Hays said:
Maybe yes, maybe no, but beside the point. The school choice at issue in Louisiana is mostly public-to-public. That is what the administration is trying to block.:peace
Click to expand...

I don't Obama is involved in that. He'd have to single out Louisiana as such choices are quite common across the country. Though they have no effect in improving education.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is plenty of money in the system for good schools now: highest cost per pupil in the world. First step is for the Obama administration to stop denying resources to the poor.:peace
Click to expand...

I have not experience "plenty of money" in fact, I've found the opposite to be true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom