I'm happy that he's doing something about education.
I appreciate that it's moving away from a levee based system to one based on numbers of children. (If you want more funding, fund all the kids... not just the ones in the rich neighborhoods that can support higher levees.)
I'm excited that parents have options opposed to "deal with it, pay your taxes"
From your list of points: (Even I, the unprofessional arguer, ran into this information looking into the plan.)
- He's stated that parents can basically veto the school's direction and turn it over to the state to run.. like they do now. [state board instead of continuing to let the school run things their way]
- He's stated that parents can get together and decide to change the hours of operation, length of the school year, experiment...etc. [fundamental change]
- Replacing staff with new hires, neighboring districts. [staff concerns]
Teach for America seems to be getting results. I see no issue bringing those results here.
You talked about unfunded charter schools. I provided a link to show funding.
The only things I did not really touch on were your stories about people who don't like it... but opinions are like assholes... etc.
Did I miss anything, oh great one?
Thank you.
I'm happy that he's doing something about education.While I agree that something needs to be done about education in the State of Ohio and elsewhere, I personally disagree with Governor Kasich's proposed remedies, because I do not believe they will be effective. It is fine if you support him, just as it is fine that I don't. I doubt either of us will truly persuade the other, but one of the purposes of this thread is to rationally discuss why we hold certain beliefs.
I appreciate that it's moving away from a levee based system to one based on numbers of children. (If you want more funding, fund all the kids... not just the ones in the rich neighborhoods that can support higher levees.)I'd like to make three points if I could here. First, moving away from the unconstitutional levee system is good. Second, I think we should adopt a school funding system from a different state that works or at least a model substantially based on it rather than what I see as a largely untried system I'm unsure about. Third, I am very skeptical that we can currently do an education funding system in Ohio based upon payment per pupil, because we just don't have the resources. Our state is $8 Billion upside down and is cutting spending every which way. The reason we haven't switched to a per pupil funding situation before is because it's expensive and I don't see how we're going to go to an expensive funding plan when we have no funding. I guess, "where is the money going to come from?" That's my basic question given that we couldn't do this for 23 years previously when we had money, and now we are somehow supposed to do so when we are broke? Something doesn't add up if you ask me....
I'm excited that parents have options opposed to "deal with it, pay your taxes"
From your list of points: (Even I, the unprofessional arguer, ran into this information looking into the plan.)
- He's stated that parents can basically veto the school's direction and turn it over to the state to run.. like they do now. [state board instead of continuing to let the school run things their way]
- He's stated that parents can get together and decide to change the hours of operation, length of the school year, experiment...etc. [fundamental change]
- Replacing staff with new hires, neighboring districts. [staff concerns]My whole point is that in theory it sounds good, but I just don't believe it is well defined enough currently and its scope is too narrow. If you believe that it is then fine, but I think the Governor needs to address
the mechanics of how he is going to actually give parents a choice in a meaningful, far more detailed way on a large scale. The keywords I'm seeing are "he stated," but I'm not seeing how this is going to practically work. For example, say you replace 70% of the school staff and replace them with "new hires" then what? What are the new hires going to do that the old ones didn't. How are things going to be different? These are valid questions that are currently unanswered. His approach seems to be far too simplistic to work and even then these things only apply to people who are in the bottom 5% of schools. This means that the other 95% of parents in school districts don't have a choice..... What about them?
I hope we can agree that a the program only providing choice for 5% is a valid concern.... Its scope is very narrow. Really it only gives 5% of parents a choice and that's only if a majority of the parents in that bottom 5% all vote to basically overthrow the school district....
Teach for America seems to be getting results. I see no issue bringing those results here.I have a lot of worries about using "Teach for America." Ok, you're using kids from colleges with good grades. That doesn't mean they know how to teach necessarily and I am worried that they only get 5 weeks of training, which I don't think is enough. Currently, you have to go through a lot of training to be a teacher in ... just about every state and there's a reason for that. We're basically saying ditch the training by cutting it down to 5 weeks. I'm worried about this, aren't you?
You talked about unfunded charter schools. I provided a link to show funding.I assume you mean this:
http://www.politifact.com/ohio/promises/kasich-o-meter/promise/782/promote-school-choice/I get that funding for charter schools may have doubled. I'm saying that even with this doubling the amount is trivial and very small compared to the overall school problem. It is a drop in the bucket that won't solve the problem.
I posted this link before about problems with vouchers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_voucher#Legal_challenges. The link even talks about a specific Ohio case..... Additionally, they don't solve the larger problems in the state's educational system. They are a very targeted system. It's like trying to plow a highway with a snowshovel. Sure the shovel gets the snow off the highway but doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. What we need is a snowplow. Otherwise we aren't going to make a dent in the problem.
Did I miss anything, oh great one?
Also, You are coming off very harsh/elitist IMHO. Past history or whatever, I don't care, I would like it to stop though.
Simple solution, don't put words in my mouth and don't talk past me/at me.
If you ignore my posts to talk past me again, or put words in my mouth, then I'm going to call you on it again for as many times as you do it. I am taking time out of my day to write serious replies to your postings and I expect the same if you actually want to talk about an issue with me. If you do not ignore my posts or put words in my mouth, then I will have no reason to call you on these things and you will have no trouble from it. You have been told in the past that if you want people to take you seriously that you should avoid certain behaviors by the OP herself. I have already quoted this previously today. Failing to heed Vector's advice is not advisable.
My anger is directed towards Governor Kasich's very conservative and in my opinion counter productive policies, not you. This thread is called "Progressive Rage Thread." One should expect a tad of rage at such policies.
I recommend we drop this portion of the discussion and learn from it.