Neoliberalism, New Democrats, Third Way

[GoBills808]

I'm curious about the defense of any position which denies poor families the ability to seek the best possible education for their children, and instead asserts that the state owns them for the good of the state.

In what way does the state acknowledge this?

[TakeYouToTasker]

In what way does the state acknowledge this?

The state doesn't have to acknowledge it.

[GoBills808]

I would be interested in hearing how the public education system denies poor families the ability to seek the best possible education for their children and subjects them to state ownership.

[GG]

I would be interested in hearing how the public education system denies poor families the ability to seek the best possible education for their children and subjects them to state ownership.

 

You're kidding, right?

 

What choice does a parent of a kid in an underperforming public school district have?

[TakeYouToTasker]

I would be interested in hearing how the public education system denies poor families the ability to seek the best possible education for their children and subjects them to state ownership.

You've never heard the argument against charter schools, empowering parents to make the key decisions surrounding their children's education, and tax dollars following the student?

 

I find that hard to believe.

 

I find it more likely that you simply dislike the sunlight disinfecting the big government view on education.

[row_33]

 

You're kidding, right?

 

What choice does a parent of a kid in an underperforming public school district have?

 

Those parents have no choice whatsoever, their kids are being babysat until they are 17 years old.

 

That's the best thing that can happen to these kids.

 

Kids at private and church schools are being taught how to read and think and study.

Edited July 11, 2017 by row_33

[GoBills808]

 

You're kidding, right?

 

What choice does a parent of a kid in an underperforming public school district have?

I think the conservative position would be to move into a better district.

You've never heard the argument against charter schools, empowering parents to make the key decisions surrounding their children's education, and tax dollars following the student?

 

I find that hard to believe.

 

I find it more likely that you simply dislike the sunlight disinfecting the big government view on education.

I have to know how you're defining charter school first.

[row_33]

Most people honestly do not care that their children are learning nothing in school.

They have a bigger fear of roughly 13 horrible things that can routinely happen that will basically ruin their child's life.

 

So where did the Clintons and Trumps and Obamas send their children?

[TakeYouToTasker]

I think the conservative position would be to move into a better district.

I think I see the problem. You've confused conservatism with bumper sticker slogans.

 

I have to know how you're defining charter school first.

A school which receives tax-payer funding and is independent from the public school system.

Edited July 11, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker

[GoBills808]

 

 

I think I see the problem. You've confused conservatism with bumper sticker slogans.

 

Am I wrong? Your contention seems to be with DOE administration efficacy, and I can certainly sympathize. I'm less convinced that privatizing that process will enure to the benefit of the majority of students in the country. My goal would be a more equitable funding mechanism independent from local property values to start.

[GG]

 

 

 

Am I wrong? Your contention seems to be with DOE administration efficacy, and I can certainly sympathize. I'm less convinced that privatizing that process will enure to the benefit of the majority of students in the country. My goal would be a more equitable funding mechanism independent from local property values to start.

 

 

How many times does it need to be repeated that the biggest failures in public education have nothing to do with budgets?

[GoBills808]

 

How many times does it need to be repeated that the biggest failures in public education have nothing to do with budgets?

EVERYTHING has to do with budgets. I'm a product of the public school system and I've seen it firsthand.

 

It starts with teachers, which is to say it starts with salary, which is a budget line item. Better pay for better teachers, better results.

[GG]

EVERYTHING has to do with budgets. I'm a product of the public school system and I've seen it firsthand.

 

It starts with teachers, which is to say it starts with salary, which is a budget line item. Better pay for better teachers, better results.

 

Baloney. It was always and always will start and end with dedicated parents.

[grinreaper]

EVERYTHING has to do with budgets. I'm a product of the public school system and I've seen it firsthand.

 

It starts with teachers, which is to say it starts with salary, which is a budget line item. Better pay for better teachers, better results.

Horseshit! Google what a D.C. high school teacher makes and then Google District education rankings.

[GoBills808]

Horseshit! Google what a D.C. high school teacher makes and then Google District education rankings.

Explain how you think making <$50K living in DC working to educate our youth is a reasonable premise for declaring teacher pay isn't an issue. I'll wait.

Edited July 11, 2017 by GoBills808

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Am I wrong? Your contention seems to be with DOE administration efficacy, and I can certainly sympathize. I'm less convinced that privatizing that process will enure to the benefit of the majority of students in the country. My goal would be a more equitable funding mechanism independent from local property values to start.

 

My contention is with government using it's monopoly on force to create a monopoly on education, which is then inescapable, especially for those without means, while well-intentioned &#33;@#&#036;s dictate policy from their ivory towers while generation after generation of lives are squandered.

 

Meanwhile your goal of "more equitable funding" works to deny those whom have already broken away from a legacy poverty the ability to educate their own children in the way they feel will best serve continuing familial success.

[GG]

Explain how you think making <$50K living in DC working to educate our youth is a reasonable premise for declaring teacher pay isn't an issue. I'll wait.

 

Then by your standards, teachers in suburban DC are compensated at twice the level that DC teachers are since the results are double that of DC schools.

 

We'll wait.

[row_33]

OH BOY, six different views on what to pay teachers, that will solve...

 

 

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

EVERYTHING has to do with budgets. I'm a product of the public school system and I've seen it firsthand.

 

It starts with teachers, which is to say it starts with salary, which is a budget line item. Better pay for better teachers, better results.

 

So wrong, not funny.

[GoBills808]

My contention is with government using it's monopoly on force to create a monopoly on education, which is then inescapable, especially for those without means, while well-intentioned !@#$s dictate policy from their ivory towers while generation after generation of lives are squandered.

 

Meanwhile your goal of "more equitable funding" works to deny those whom have already broken away from a legacy poverty the ability to educate their own children in the way they feel will best serve continuing familial success.

How so?

 

 

 

Then by your standards, teachers in suburban DC are compensated at twice the level that DC teachers are since the results are double that of DC schools.

 

We'll wait.

Definitely not following. I'm saying pay educators more, period. Hadn't even begun discussing performance yet.

[GG]

How so?

 

 

Definitely not following. I'm saying pay educators more, period. Hadn't even begun discussing performance yet.

You made a declarative statement that the biggest problem with public education is funding, specifically that teachers are underpaid.

 

Yet data shows that teacher pay is lower in better performing schools than in worse performing schools.

 

We can wait.

[GoBills808]

You made a declarative statement that the biggest problem with public education is funding, specifically that teachers are underpaid.

 

Yet data shows that teacher pay is lower in better performing schools than in worse performing schools.

 

We can wait.

I believe the data shows that there is no correlation between teacher pay and student performance, as opposed to the inverse relationship you suggest.

 

And I agree with the earlier that engaged parents are an important component, no doubt. But when it boils down to most bang for your educational buck I believe the money is best spent on the people doing the educating, and that making the position more attractive financially will raise the talent pool.

[Benjamin Franklin]

I believe the data shows that there is no correlation between teacher pay and student performance, as opposed to the inverse relationship you suggest.

 

And I agree with the earlier that engaged parents are an important component, no doubt. But when it boils down to most bang for your educational buck I believe the money is best spent on the people doing the educating, and that making the position more attractive financially will raise the talent pool.

It's not as simple as either one of the premises, yours or his, of course.

 

Teacher salary will attract better teachers...somewhat.

 

But can better teachers get a class of North Philly kids admitted to Princeton?

 

The salaries at many private schools are not a lot more than private counterparts and even worse in suburbs of big cities, but the students perform better.

 

Wealthier students will perform better depends on family, safety, nutrition, and a gajillion other reasons.

 

So the social engineering isn't as easy as pay teachers more and get better student results. Better pay only helps so much.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Benjamin Franklin

[GG]

I believe the data shows that there is no correlation between teacher pay and student performance, as opposed to the inverse relationship you suggest.

 

And I agree with the earlier that engaged parents are an important component, no doubt. But when it boils down to most bang for your educational buck I believe the money is best spent on the people doing the educating, and that making the position more attractive financially will raise the talent pool.

 

Please tell me if I understand your position properly.

 

You say above that there's no correlation between teacher pay and student performance. Yet your solution to fixing education is to pay teachers more.

 

Does that cover it?

 

And then you wonder why you're called an idiot?

[GoBills808]

It's not as simple as either one of the premises, yours or his, of course.

 

Teacher salary will attract better teachers...somewhat.

 

But can better teachers get a class of North Philly kids admitted to Princeton?

 

Wealthier students will perform better for family, safety, nutrition, and a gajillion other reasons. The salaries at many private schools are not a lot more than private counterparts and even worse in suburbs of big cities, but the students perform better.

 

So the math isn't as easy as pay teachers more and get better student results. Better pay only helps so much.

Of course. But students from families with higher incomes and wealthier communities are predisposed to succeed academically. I'm simply talking about raising the quality of educators to the benefit of children in the public school system.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Of course. But students from families with higher incomes and wealthier communities are predisposed to succeed academically. I'm simply talking about raising the quality of educators to the benefit of children in the public school system.

Show me what result comes from raising the salary. Teaching isn't that hard. Dedication. Presentation. Creativity. Empathy. Those bits can't be taught and paid for without offering a fortune and have more to do with success teaching 6th grade than a 4.0 from an Ivy.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Benjamin Franklin

[GoBills808]

Show me what result comes from raising the salary. Teaching isn't that hard. Dedication. Presentation. Creativity. Empathy. Those bits can't be taught and paid for without offering a fortune and have more to do with success teaching 6th grade than a 4.0 from an Ivy.

I don't see why paying more for talent is such a difficult concept. Teaching may not be that 'hard', but I consider it important and certainly worthy of an income above the median.

[GG]

Of course. But students from families with higher incomes and wealthier communities are predisposed to succeed academically. I'm simply talking about raising the quality of educators to the benefit of children in the public school system.

 

Please tell me more about this "predisposed" term

[TakeYouToTasker]

I don't see why paying more for talent is such a difficult concept. Teaching may not be that 'hard', but I consider it important and certainly worthy of an income above the median.

You've already argued, just a few posts back, that teacher salary doesn't correlate with student performance. Edited July 12, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker

[GoBills808]

 

Please tell me more about this "predisposed" term

More likely to have a stable upbringing, more likely to go to preschool. The fact that higher income parents will spend 7x as much as low income parents on their childrens' education. Better nutrition. Healthier and thus able to function cognitively at higher levels. And that's without mentioning how public funding of education disenfranchises low income communities.

You've already argued, just a few posts back, that teacher salary doesn't corolate with student performance.

I referenced that study, but I think it's pretty clear that correlating performance to a salary range of roughly $35K on the low end and around $75K on the high isn't a dilemma if we're talking about substantially raising teacher pay.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I referenced that study, but I think it's pretty clear that correlating performance to a salary range of roughly $35K on the low end and around $75K on the high isn't a dilemma if we're talking about substantially raising teacher pay.

So is doesn't correlate, except when it does as relates to arbitrary and undefined salary increases?

Edited July 12, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker

[GG]

More likely to have a stable upbringing, more likely to go to preschool. The fact that higher income parents will spend 7x as much as low income parents on their childrens' education. Better nutrition. Healthier and thus able to function cognitively at higher levels. And that's without mentioning how public funding of education disenfranchises low income communities.

I referenced that study, but I think it's pretty clear that correlating performance to a salary range of roughly $35K on the low end and around $75K on the high isn't a dilemma if we're talking about substantially raising teacher pay.

 

And in the same breath that you insist that there's no correlation between teacher pay and student performance, you introduce an argument that more parental involvement predisposes kids to do better in school.

 

Keep arguing.

[GoBills808]

So is doesn't corolate, except when it does as relates to arbitrary and undefined salary increases?

I wouldn't be surprised if there's no correlation in performance in NFL wideouts making between the vet minimum and whatever...say $775,000. But once you get into the guys making $2.5M and above, they're of a higher caliber.

[grinreaper]

FWIW:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/23/the-dramatic-inequality-of-public-school-spending-in-america/?utm_term=.80a6f5621c72https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/23/the-dramatic-inequality-of-public-school-spending-in-america/?utm_term=.80a6f5621c72https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/23/the-dramatic-inequality-of-public-school-spending-in-america/?utm_term=.80a6f5621c72

 

To drill down to the school district-level, these are the per-pupil rates in the highest-spending school systems with more than 40,000 students. Seven of the top 18 are in Maryland:

Edited July 11, 2017 by grinreaper

[GoBills808]

 

And in the same breath that you insist that there's no correlation between teacher pay and student performance, you introduce an argument that more parental involvement predisposes kids to do better in school.

 

Keep arguing.

Never argued that parental involvement wasn't a factor in how children perform in school. Much like income, it plays a huge role.

[GG]

I wouldn't be surprised if there's no correlation in performance in NFL wideouts making between the vet minimum and whatever...say $775,000. But once you get into the guys making $2.5M and above, they're of a higher caliber.

 

So you're proposing a system where good performers are paid market rate and the under-performers are tossed when they can't contribute?

[Benjamin Franklin]

I don't see why paying more for talent is such a difficult concept. Teaching may not be that 'hard', but I consider it important and certainly worthy of an income above the median.

This article just out.

 

School funding not always linked to results - BBC News

https://apple.news/AoftJBMCcTZGzyMzeBsLUog

 

Not citing it as definitive but again: High pay is not directly linked to better results. The soup that makes up student performance has a lot of ingredients.

[TakeYouToTasker]

This article just out.

 

School funding not always linked to results - BBC News

https://apple.news/AoftJBMCcTZGzyMzeBsLUog

 

Not citing it as definitive but again: High pay is not directly linked to better results. The soup that makes up student performance has a lot of ingredients.

 

The overwhelming majority of those ingredients are found in the home, and there is nothing the state can do to replace it.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

This article just out.

 

School funding not always linked to results - BBC News

https://apple.news/AoftJBMCcTZGzyMzeBsLUog

 

Not citing it as definitive but again: High pay is not directly linked to better results. The soup that makes up student performance has a lot of ingredients.

 

Problem is, you have the NEA filling the airwaves on TV and radio attempting to convey just that message.

[row_33]

 

Problem is, you have the NEA filling the airwaves on TV and radio attempting to convey just that message.

 

TV, yay.