Your solution is to throw more money at a flawed system. The system is run by the teacher's unions who are focussed on the welfare of teachers and not on the quality of education. We already spend more per student per year than most other countries at ~ $13K per year. There are only 5 countries which spend more are significantly smaller than the US (Luxemboerg is only ~ 500,000 people, Lichtenstein is only ~36,000, Norway is ~ 5 million, Switzerland is ~ 8 million, and Austria is ~ 8 million). http://www.politifact.com/florida/s...nited-states-spend-more-student-most-countri/
I never said throw money at a flawed system?? I said we don't have enough money, or will not appropriate enough money, to create a world-class public education system. If the unions run the education system then the union must go. It costs a lot of money to do business in the USA...including government and public education...
we always had enough money for good education systems, if not the crony capitalists of today would not be educated enough to legally steal through banking scams. the money for quality education of the people was transferred to the rich, and made a minimum wage plantation that they want to replace with robots instead of living wages.
What does the above ^^ mean ?? Charter schools do a better job with half the allocation per student. And their presence results in improvements in the public schools. Your reasoning is akin to arguing that IBM should be the only PC manufacturer in the world and if those PC's are not delivering a good computing product that the gov should "invest" more money into IBM. Better education will be the result of competition not spending more money on a "one choice for all" system which is failing to provide quality educational choices for all students. - - - Updated - - - I agree with you on that point.
this is true!! Only Republican capitalist life and death competition can provide the incentive to maintain and improve standards on a day in and day out basis. A child can understand this!!
NOBODY in the USA is suggesting "throw more money at a flawed system". My bet today is that we're disadvantaged by having a significant population that has no respect for education. Would Lichtenstein or Austria or Norway nominate Trump, or disparage universities as hot beds of evil? Looking at our end product and then claiming that it is the fault of "the system" hits me as just more disrespect for education - something of which we already have a seemingly endless supply. In fact, that very pattern of "investigation" is ridiculous. If you want to figure out what the problem is, then do some actual analysis. Are US students attacking their homework like Swiss kids are? Are parents following up with teacher recommendations like Norwegian parents do? Is US education as competitive as Luxemboerg is when they attempt to attract the brightest and most capable to become teachers? Maybe you've done your homework and can speak to these issues in support of your claim. But, for the most part I just see crap analysis after crap analysis followed by blaming it on unions, which in my state have essentially zero control over what is taught or who is fired - unlike in Norway, where union involvement in what is taught is a significant component of success in education and where, unlike here, unions don't have to be in constant defense mode against a state and a population where the major concern about education is how to cut its budget.
There are a great many that do that everyday when they advocate for increased spending on the existing public school system and advocate against competition in education. That has nothing to do with Trump. I've done my homework on this. What is the process in your state for firing a teacher ??
The problem isn't with firing teachers, it is with hiring them. I only know my state (WA) and OR. In neither state is it hard to fire a teacher. The problem is in finding strong educators who will accept low salary instead of accepting positions in corporations. Hiring decisions often get made by principles who may have as little as 2 years experience in education. So, the lack of systems such as we find in the private sector (where there is a career path for added responsibility based on capability) is a source of the "firing problem". I have no idea what you are referring to by "competition in education". Even in high tech, the primary reasons for employees getting fired has to do with ability to work together toward a shared solution. We need an emphasis on collaborative techniques throughout education. Rarely is there any problem so small in industry that a single professional will supply the whole solution. It has everything to do with Trump when he fails to support and promote education.
I've NEVER seen a request for additional spending on education that said "X million to throw at education". EVERY TIME there is a specific improvement toward which the money is directed. It is directed toward teacher salary (so we can retain and attract good educators). It is directed toward improvements in infrastructure (such as crumbling facilities). Etc. Yet when that happens, guys like YOU come along and suggest that is "throwing money at a failed education system". I SERIOUSLY detest those who say such stuff. If you don't like how something is done, then find those who will promote a solution (even if you won't). Be part of the solution. Work toward the next bill that will make some increment of progress - even if it costs money!
progress would come like a flood from Republican capitalism. Life and death competition breeds excellence. Do you understand.
The charters don't seem to have a problem attracting good teachers. And the salary for 9 months of work is quite good. My wife is a retired teacher. Really, when you shop for an smart phone do you only have one choice ?? When parents shop for an education for their kids they deserve more than one choice and the voucher money to pay for those choices. Where has Trump indicated that he does not support and promote quality education ??
Offer choices. That will solve the problem. What is wrong with a voucher system ?? Why should parents have to send their kids to schools that are falling apart populated by teachers who get no respect from the kids, are unsupported by school administrators, and threatened by both kids and their parents. Why is their a lottery system to fill the desks in the Harlem Success Academy ?? Why can't every child in the US have a choice like the Harlem Success Academy ?? Why did the D's kill the DC charter school increases in one of the countries poorest locations ?? Where is the concern for the kids ?? What I detest is the hypocrisy of the teachers unions who run the education system by "paying off" D legislators who benefit in turn from the teacher union campaign contributions coming from union dues. The unions are concerned only with the teachers and not the welfare of students. The system that you so love has failed to fix the problems you identify despite the US spending ~ $13K per student per year. Give that money as a voucher to each child and watch the magic happen as it has happened in many locations around the US.
crony capitalist competition in education leaves children behind just as much as overpaid crony teacher unions. giving the parents living wages instead of minimum wages would allow disposable income to afford private schools, or better home lives so that overpaid public union teachers can relax since learning starts and ends with the individual.
Nothing is stopping private enterprise today. You can open your own school. In fact, if you have success, others will follow. And, I think you skipped the fact that a major requirement is that those coming out of our schools need to excel at working collaboratively rather than those trained to dominate in a life/death competition. So, yes I understand - but I don't agree.
Voucher programs I've seen tend to be a sick joke. Private middle and high schools around here have tuition of around $20K. If you have 3 kids, that means $60K per year. With a $5,000 voucher, that leaves the family about $45K per year short. So in the end it is no more than a way to give some money to wealthy parents. Trump demonstrated his ideas on private education with Trump University. And, I hope he pays a price for that.
I don't know the specific charters you reference. One problem with some charter programs is that they siphon off dollars from the public school system to benefit a few students, leaving the rest of the system to struggle with fewer dollars and kids who have been less prepared for school or have other issues - factors that make successful education more expensive per student. I don't know of any system run by teacher's unions. For the most part it seems those who hate teacher's unions are interested in paying teachers less. And, focusing on paying employees less is not how a corporation would go about improving its product.
Charter schools are not the same as private schools. A voucher will cover the cost for each student to charter schools.
You should read more. Charter schools do not siphon off funds for public schools. However if no kids elect to attend specific public schools they will be shut down. That's creative destruction which is the process responsible for the great advances in the standard of living that humans have enjoyed in the last few hundred years and indeed since civilization began. No one is advocating paying teachers less. What is being advocated is paying teachers unions less.
how can parents shopping with their own money be a joke? Why should Nazi govt tell parents where their kids go to school, especially if it is a union ghetto liberal school where no learning takes place???
It does not mean throwing money at failed education systems. IMO just about every program in the USA, every budget line item, excluding military spending, needs twice as much money to see any appreciable improvements. In all areas we have horrific waste and duplication etc. yet the people involved are incapable of changing this. How much does it cost for every school facility to be world-class? How much does it cost to educate, train and put in place better teachers? How much does it cost to equip all schools with state-of-the-art computers, equipment, etc.? Whether the spending is by government or the private sector...it will require a lot of spending. I floated this idea once which requires such a paradigm shift that it is impossible to adopt. If we truly want to educate every child, and do this without consideration of parents and communities and environment, deal with nutritional issues, perhaps improve truancy issues, and solve the baby-sitting issue that schools perform, all public education schools need to become 'boarding schools'. Arrive at school Monday morning by 7am and leave school Friday at 5PM. There are no homework assignments, no school work whatsoever on Sat and Sun. Not sure what grade this should start? And I don't believe in this system we need to go to grade 12...maybe grade 9-10 is enough then onto the military, or trade school, or college...
OMG!!! child-like libsocialist naivety at best!!!! soviet engineers would have told you that they were incapable of making a better car too. Subject them to the daily life and death environment of capitalism and all of the sudden you get a competitive car. 1+1=2. Do you understand??
The US is already spending more per student than the very great majority of countries in the world. Doubling the spending without competition will do no good. That's like saying that if we had only spent double the price of IBM PC's we'd be way ahead in global PC technology. There is no progress without creative destruction and it is time for the US public education system to be forced to compete for it's students and their funding. Progress is not made by doubling spending of entrenched bureaucracies with no competition driving efficiency, innovation, cost effectiveness, and results. Bureaucracies are not capable of significant innovation - their strength is the ability to grow out of control and the effect of that is the degradation of the education product they are chartered to be responsible for. That has not happened and is not going to happen.
