|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 5:51 am Post subject: KC to close half its schools |
 |
|
Mises mentioned this on The Depression Thread, but it deserves a thread of its own.
How the heck do you get $2B extra and still have to close half your schools???
Kansas City wants to close half its public schools
Mar 7 01:17 PM US/Eastern
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) - The once flush-with-cash Kansas City school district is considering a radical plan to close nearly half its schools to stay afloat.
Schools officials say the cuts are necessary to keep the district from plowing through what little is left of the $2 billion it received as part of a groundbreaking desegregation case.
A final plan presented last week calls for closing 29 out of 61 schools to eliminate a projected $50 million budget shortfall. Superintendent John Covington also has said he wants to cut about 700 of the district's 3,000 jobs. The school board vote is Wednesday.
The proposal has rattled the community into activism. Public hearings on the plan have been filled with hundreds of parents, students and community members holding signs and chanting in protest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In what universe does 'wants to close' equal 'to close'? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
How they got to this point involves typical nonsense:
| Quote: |
| Kansas City was held up as a national example of bold thinking when it tried to integrate its schools by making them better than the suburban districts where many kids were moving. The result was one school with an Olympic-sized swimming pool and another with recording studios. |
Suburban schools have better academic performance because the students are better. Not because they have swimming pools or recording studios (wtf?).
| Quote: |
| Kansas City is among the most striking examples of the challenges of saving urban school districts. The city used gobs of cash to improve facilities, but boosting lagging test scores and stemming the exodus of students were more elusive. |
I guess they should build another pool and a few recording studios (wft?). Then these yout' will perform like the suburban kids.
| Quote: |
| At the height of spending in 1991-92, Kansas City invested more than $11,700 per student � more than double that year's national average of $5,001, according to U.S. Census figures. Today, the district spends an average of $15,158 on each student, compared to a national average of $9,666 in 2006-07, the latest figures available. |
But they still can't boost test scores. No matter what they spend.
Never the less, Orwell is rushing to the rescue:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/08/education/08educ.html?hpw |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rocket_scientist
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Location: Prague
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wow, mises - that was a very disturbing article. It looks aggressive and accusatory. It looks really bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is old news. Well, not so much the KC school system having to close all these schools down but the money poured into them and their lack of success. I remember watching 60 minutes doing a story on it when I was a young teenager. Ever since then I have remembered that more money does not mean better schools. Not by a long shot.
Shocking to hear, but it is all about the teacher.
Good (but long) NY Times article on education and teaching.
| Quote: |
| [A] new generation of economists devised statistical methods to measure the �value added� to a student�s performance by almost every factor imaginable: class size versus per-pupil funding versus curriculum. When researchers ran the numbers in dozens of different studies, every factor under a school�s control produced just a tiny impact, except for one: which teacher the student had been assigned to. |
And getting a degree in education? Might as well put your money in a pile and light it up.
| Quote: |
| The most damning testimony comes from the graduates of education schools. No professional feels completely prepared on her first day of work, but while a new lawyer might work under the tutelage of a seasoned partner, a first-year teacher usually takes charge of her classroom from the very first day. One survivor of this trial by fire is Amy Treadwell, a teacher for 10 years who received her master�s degree in education from DePaul University, a small private university in Chicago. She took courses in children�s literature and on �Race, Culture and Class�; one on the history of education, another on research, several on teaching methods. She even spent one semester as a student teacher at a Chicago elementary school. But when she walked into her first job, teaching first graders on the city�s South Side, she discovered a major shortcoming: She had no idea how to teach children to read. �I was certified and stamped with a mark of approval, and I couldn�t teach them the one thing they most needed to know how to do,� she told me. |
A history of education? Courses in children's lit? What research does a teacher do?? Perhaps some, but do you really need to take a class on it??Talk about a waste of time, effort, and money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Obviously there are good and bad teachers, but the most important factor in a childs education is the family. If the family values education and acts accordingly, good things wilf follow. If the kids come from broken homes where nobody cares, the best teachers, swimming pools and recording studios wont make a bit of difference.
I also remember that 60 minutes story. KC tried to get white families to stay and/or return to urban schools by creating these ridculous over the top facilities. Didnt work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| No professional feels completely prepared on her first day of work, but while a new lawyer might work under the tutelage of a seasoned partner, a first-year teacher usually takes charge of her classroom from the very first day. |
When I was in school, I remember a number of student teachers, still in college, who came into our school. They observed lessons at first, and then transitioned to teaching under supervision, and then to teaching without supervision, as practice. Maybe that's just something they did in my state, but it seems like a much better idea to me than what seems to be described in this article. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Obviously there are good and bad teachers, but the most important factor in a childs education is the family. |
100% correct. Teacher skill and overall curriculum decisions (like spending more time each day on math) can have an impact, but first and foremost what matters is the student being an active, willing participant in the process, which is determined by how they have been raised and the culture from which they are from. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Obviously there are good and bad teachers, but the most important factor in a childs education is the family. |
100% correct. Teacher skill and overall curriculum decisions (like spending more time each day on math) can have an impact, but first and foremost what matters is the student being an active, willing participant in the process, which is determined by how they have been raised and the culture from which they are from. |
Good grief. The conversation isn't about student performance, it's about the utter failure of state govts to provide a decent education at a decent price.
Using some nebulous idea about who is responsible for the students' educational outcomes as an argument against this failure, is just silly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
Good grief. The conversation isn't about student performance, it's about the utter failure of state govts to provide a decent education at a decent price.
Using some nebulous idea about who is responsible for the students' educational outcomes as an argument against this failure, is just silly. |
I don't think you understand the exchange that occured. Our commentary on student responsibility for education doesn't argue against a condemnation against the government for wasting money as it did on these schools, it enhances it, because it means government spending is simply an outright ineffective way to meaningfully combat poor educational results (and that's obviously even more true when the spending in question is on things like swimming pools and recording studios, done in the hopes of luring the educationally focused back into those schools). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rocket_scientist
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Location: Prague
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Obviously there are good and bad teachers, but the most important factor in a childs education is the family. |
100% correct. Teacher skill and overall curriculum decisions (like spending more time each day on math) can have an impact, but first and foremost what matters is the student being an active, willing participant in the process, which is determined by how they have been raised and the culture from which they are from. |
Good grief. The conversation isn't about student performance, it's about the utter failure of state govts to provide a decent education at a decent price.
Using some nebulous idea about who is responsible for the students' educational outcomes as an argument against this failure, is just silly. |
I don't think its so silly. You offer nothing. Every time a new failure crops up we chase whatever explanation is offered at the time. I think its time for hari-kari and other forms of honor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Obviously there are good and bad teachers, but the most important factor in a childs education is the family. |
100% correct. Teacher skill and overall curriculum decisions (like spending more time each day on math) can have an impact, but first and foremost what matters is the student being an active, willing participant in the process, which is determined by how they have been raised and the culture from which they are from. |
Good grief. The conversation isn't about student performance, it's about the utter failure of state govts to provide a decent education at a decent price.
Using some nebulous idea about who is responsible for the students' educational outcomes as an argument against this failure, is just silly. |
The US does by and large provide a good education for free. And in KC they also even provided top notch facilities. The problem is too many people choose not to untilize this solid, free education. If people dont value education there is absolutely nothing the government can do to force them to learn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
This is old news. Well, not so much the KC school system having to close all these schools down but the money poured into them and their lack of success. I remember watching 60 minutes doing a story on it when I was a young teenager. Ever since then I have remembered that more money does not mean better schools. Not by a long shot.
Shocking to hear, but it is all about the teacher.
Good (but long) NY Times article on education and teaching.
| Quote: |
| [A] new generation of economists devised statistical methods to measure the �value added� to a student�s performance by almost every factor imaginable: class size versus per-pupil funding versus curriculum. When researchers ran the numbers in dozens of different studies, every factor under a school�s control produced just a tiny impact, except for one: which teacher the student had been assigned to. |
And getting a degree in education? Might as well put your money in a pile and light it up.
| Quote: |
| The most damning testimony comes from the graduates of education schools. No professional feels completely prepared on her first day of work, but while a new lawyer might work under the tutelage of a seasoned partner, a first-year teacher usually takes charge of her classroom from the very first day. One survivor of this trial by fire is Amy Treadwell, a teacher for 10 years who received her master�s degree in education from DePaul University, a small private university in Chicago. She took courses in children�s literature and on �Race, Culture and Class�; one on the history of education, another on research, several on teaching methods. She even spent one semester as a student teacher at a Chicago elementary school. But when she walked into her first job, teaching first graders on the city�s South Side, she discovered a major shortcoming: She had no idea how to teach children to read. �I was certified and stamped with a mark of approval, and I couldn�t teach them the one thing they most needed to know how to do,� she told me. |
A history of education? Courses in children's lit? What research does a teacher do?? Perhaps some, but do you really need to take a class on it??Talk about a waste of time, effort, and money. |
Wow, BB does the knowledge. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Obviously there are good and bad teachers, but the most important factor in a childs education is the family. |
100% correct. Teacher skill and overall curriculum decisions (like spending more time each day on math) can have an impact, but first and foremost what matters is the student being an active, willing participant in the process, which is determined by how they have been raised and the culture from which they are from. |
Good grief. The conversation isn't about student performance, it's about the utter failure of state govts to provide a decent education at a decent price.
Using some nebulous idea about who is responsible for the students' educational outcomes as an argument against this failure, is just silly. |
The US does by and large provide a good education for free. And in KC they also even provided top notch facilities. The problem is too many people choose not to untilize this solid, free education. If people dont value education there is absolutely nothing the government can do to force them to learn. |
This is stupid and this sort of thinking needs to be stamped out. Nothing is "Free". Schools paid for through taxes. Where do taxes come from? People who produce value.
The govt produces no value. It simply redirects value from other people into areas that it deems appropriate. And it usually (in the over whelming majority of cases) does it very, very poorly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| The govt produces no value. It simply redirects value from other people into areas that it deems appropriate. |
By this logic, corporations also produce no value. No matter how you look at it, there's only a given amount of labor society can perform. Any economic activity comes at the cost of other potential economic activity. Saying governments don't produce value without making the same case against corporations is silly; they do the exact same thing, take your money and provide goods and services in return.
And no, no one forces you to live in a given country and pay taxes in return for services. If you think you aren't getting enough value in return for your tax dollars, leave, just like you would in any other economic arrangement you were unhappy with. Countries compete for quality citizens just like businesses compete for quality workers; if you're a skilled, reasonably well educated, intelligent individual, plenty of countries would no doubt love to have you.
In short, this too-often repeated Libertarian talking point is just plain disingenuous. If you want to make the case that only individual human beings can produce value, and that any organization only directs the creation of said value, fine. But that isn't the case you're making. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
