Ann Romney wants to throw out public education. What a SLUNT!

Anne was irresponsibly spouting highly ideological political drivel on an issue that should not be ideological, but should be fact driven IMHO. That is to be expected considering she is the wife of a presidential candidate. Her statements are half truths. At least her heart is in the right place, maybe, but her head is screwed on sideways in this area.

The charter schools have some answers, but far from all. Unions have prevented some (both good and bad) "reforms" but certainly aren't the main thing blocking educational improvement. What the right is arguing for in the workplace and also in education is dictatorship - plain and simple. They basically want to get rid of unions and teacher's right to organize. Management and administration organizes every day. It is like going to war without communications, officers or a general against a well organized and led army. It guarantees certain defeat, which is what they want. They basically want to get rid of all workers or teachers unions if possible and thus their rights. Then anything to do with work or money will be dictated by the bosses. In many ways that is as close to communism (or monarchy/oligarchy) or what actually passed for communism in Russia and China all over again. So they are against anybody's right to associate, speak or vote as long as it has to do with work (unless it is to agree with the bosses), right?

The "system" isn't the Teacher's Unions. There are many top national school systems that have strong teacher's unions and the U.S. schools had strong teachers unions when they were the best in the world as well. Busting the unions won't improve education, it is an ideological red-herring and until all sides get together, as Bush and Kennedy at least tried to do, and decide that education, like foreign policy and defense should not be partisan, it ain't going to happen. I'm so sick and tired of everybody bashing the teachers when it is the administrators and parents who have abdicated their responsibility in helping educate the kids and just heaped it on the teachers. Have no home life? Teacher will fix it. Have no discipline in school? Teacher will take care of it. Teachers have to deal with administrators, parents (who these days will not discipline their kids or even believe their kids act up) AND the kids (little rat bastards in many cases) and get no thanks and not great pay for the long, long hours most of them put in (work starts for many when 7 hours of school ends).

Yes, there are some bad teachers, but they can be fired (it just isn't easy), however, administrators often are lazy don't want to hassle with a documented and fair process. They just want to be able to fire, "cause I say so" and BTW, if they feel like firing a good teacher who calls them on bullshit and holds their feet to the fire on doing them job, then so be it. I've seen it happen. A lot of administrators are ex-coaches and home-ec teachers who didn't much like kids or teaching and got a masters so they didn't have to deal with it anymore and could get a better salary, cush job and more retirement. They often don't care about reading, writing or arithmetic (academics) either. Hey, my solution is to fire all the bad administrators!!!

Read this:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people...#ixzz2At2z7QsJ

"The transformation of the Finns’ education system began some 40 years ago as the key propellent of the country’s economic recovery plan."

The "system" is the administration, school board, parents/voters, teachers, their union and the kids. Throwing one part of it out (and yes, teachers unions have sometimes impeded some progress) won't fix the "system". The whole system needs to be addressed, particularly the leadership (administrators, principles, central office, school board). Charter schools were originally proposed to find innovations that would find their way into public schools, but the administration has not done that in most cases, guess its the teacher's unions fault. Instead political partisans have used charter schools to try to replace public schools in many cases.

Why argue without stating any rationale or facts (as Anne Romney did - she didn't say why unions were the entire problem or why getting rid of them would fix the entire system - she just restated a shibboleth of the right, unions are all bad and we will all be better if they are all gone) when WE ALL AGREE THAT EDUCATION NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED? The only thing we don't agree on is how to improve them and charter schools do have some of the answers (some are abysmal failures or unremarkable mediocrities as well.... like the public schools) and Finland has some answers too (though they don't have our size, poverty or melting pot which presents its own problems).

Post the story, the link and the opinion, and Im the idiot?

Get real people. All your blathering and bloviating will mean precisely dick come Tuesday.

I think we're seeing the beginning of the Romney free fall right now, and there's nothi you can do about it, but froth at the mouth.

I've been reading your drivel for months. YOUR TURN BOYS AND GERMS!

good post, austxjr!
it seems like most politicians just spout old lines that bring about nods and "yeah! she/he's correct!" instead of laying out the problems and proposing real solutions.

like education vouchers so that parents can withdraw their kids from low performing schools and then send them to high performing schools.
that sounds like a good idea.
but, what happens when that high performing school hits maximum capacity?
how do they select who gets it? are they going to expand that school? if so, where will the teachers come from??
ok, just set up more charter schools. but what's their success rate these days??

it just seems to me that many in the republican party believe that private industry can solve everything, including schools. private industry/companies are great but i dont believe they are the silver bullet that the republicans claim.

good post, austxjr!
it seems like most politicians just spout old lines that bring about nods and "yeah! she/he's correct!" instead of laying out the problems and proposing real solutions.

like education vouchers so that parents can withdraw their kids from low performing schools and then send them to high performing schools.
that sounds like a good idea.
but, what happens when that high performing school hits maximum capacity?
how do they select who gets it? are they going to expand that school? if so, where will the teachers come from??
ok, just set up more charter schools. but what's their success rate these days??

it just seems to me that many in the republican party believe that private industry can solve everything, including schools. private industry/companies are great but i dont believe they are the silver bullet that the republicans claim. Originally Posted by pmdelites

The Republicans have been fighting for vouchers for decades. The Democrats hate vouchers because the teachers unions hate them. The teachers unions own the Dimos. Steve Jobs was a huge advocate for a full voucher system, transitioning into a privatized system; he hated the teachers unions.

"I believe very strongly that if the country gave each parent a voucher…several things would happen. Number one, schools would start marketing themselves like crazy to get students. Secondly, I think you’d see a lot of new schools starting…. I believe that they would do far better than any of our public schools would. The third thing you’d see is…the quality of schools again, just in a competitive marketplace, start to rise."

Steve Jobs

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/10/11/...school-choice/

austxjr:

Yes, there are some bad teachers, but they can be fired (it just isn't easy), however, administrators often are lazy don't want to hassle with a documented and fair process. They just want to be able to fire, "cause I say so" and BTW, if they feel like firing a good teacher who calls them on bullshit and holds their feet to the fire on doing them job, then so be it. I've seen it happen. A lot of administrators are ex-coaches and home-ec teachers who didn't much like kids or teaching and got a masters so they didn't have to deal with it anymore and could get a better salary, cush job and more retirement. They often don't care about reading, writing or arithmetic (academics) either. Hey, my solution is to fire all the bad administrators!!!


Basically what it really boils down to is Teachers only want to teach the smart kids. The majority of teachers don't want to deal with the kids that aren't learning or don't want to learn. It's true it's hard to fire teachers that are tenured or are under the protective umbrella of unions. But in order for teachers to teach well they must be motivated, and for kids to learn they must be motivated. It's a viscious cycle that always needs evaluation.

Whatzup, you posted the blog talking about what Anne Romney said. I posted the original story from the original source.

The Teachers Union has become part of the system. They approve the curriculum, they approve the grading practices, they approve the promotion system, they have considerable influence on hiring and firing, they spend taxpayer money and teachers dues on political candidate who support them. They use their students to promote their agenda with their parents. Look what happened in Chicago just a few weeks ago. The Teachers Union shitcanned the students, the parents, and common sense in order to get their way. The Teachers Union is the system.

Whatzup, you posted the blog talking about what Anne Romney said. I posted the original story from the original source.

The Teachers Union has become part of the system. They approve the curriculum, they approve the grading practices, they approve the promotion system, they have considerable influence on hiring and firing, they spend taxpayer money and teachers dues on political candidate who support them. They use their students to promote their agenda with their parents. Look what happened in Chicago just a few weeks ago. The Teachers Union shitcanned the students, the parents, and common sense in order to get their way. The Teachers Union is the system. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

the thought of you promoting your agenda through your students is pretty fucking scary

How is Ann wrong; I think she is 100% correct, the EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IS BROKE. A new approach is required.

The left wants to keep our children dumb and dependent.

Read it yourself.

Im tired of handfeeding you dipshits...

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/10...out-education/

she's got a lot of opinions about YOU PEOPLE. And yes, tea baggers, she's talking about you too!

What a SLUNT! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You have been headfeeding the wrong end. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSKPJuSXcXI

You're a total waste of time. Why not just get IBCrying to make a cartoon for you?

Same shit over and over and over...

And over and over and over...

austxjr:

Yes, there are some bad teachers, but they can be fired (it just isn't easy), however, administrators often are lazy don't want to hassle with a documented and fair process. They just want to be able to fire, "cause I say so" and BTW, if they feel like firing a good teacher who calls them on bullshit and holds their feet to the fire on doing them job, then so be it. I've seen it happen. A lot of administrators are ex-coaches and home-ec teachers who didn't much like kids or teaching and got a masters so they didn't have to deal with it anymore and could get a better salary, cush job and more retirement. They often don't care about reading, writing or arithmetic (academics) either. Hey, my solution is to fire all the bad administrators!!!


Basically what it really boils down to is Teachers only want to teach the smart kids. The majority of teachers don't want to deal with the kids that aren't learning or don't want to learn. It's true it's hard to fire teachers that are tenured or are under the protective umbrella of unions. But in order for teachers to teach well they must be motivated, and for kids to learn they must be motivated. It's a viscious cycle that always needs evaluation. Originally Posted by acp5762

Teachers essentially can't be fired in most cases. The legal cost to fire a teacher is approximatley two hundred thousand dollars, because the teachers unions fight it in court. Some school districts literally pay some teachers to stay home, because they can't fire them, and they can't let them teach.

Teachers shouldn't get tenure. They should be judged on performance and if they can't cut it, they should be fired, just like everyone else in the real world. We coddle the teachers and the students suffer. Our educational system is failing, largely because of teachers unions. We need education reform and the unions won't allow it.

http://thehiddencostsoftenure.com/st...play&id=295712

http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/23/th...hitty-teachers

You're a total waste of time. Why not just get IBCrying to make a cartoon for you?

Same shit over and over and over...

And over and over and over... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

and to your polling data "Gallup polling shut down after Superstorm Sandy hits swing states

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/pol...#ixzz2AwDFd01t

here is a cartoon for you shit for brains

pathetic. But I guess when all you have are pawns, you use them.

This shit is SO over! Americans will choose between a commander on chief and a robber baron who has managed to piss off everybody at home and abroad.

Herman Cain would have been more genuine. Ahhhh Chucky Ducky!

If a school is doing well above the others it only makes sense to me to give vouchers to poor performing students so they can transfer to the good school and drag it down.you sure wouldn't want to fix the problem with the other school.

Teachers essentially can't be fired in most cases....

Teachers shouldn't get tenure. They should be judged on performance and if they can't cut it, they should be fired, just like everyone else in the real world. We coddle the teachers and the students suffer. Our educational system is failing, largely because of teachers unions. We need education reform and the unions won't allow it. Originally Posted by joe bloe

Your opinion on tenure, but I'll grant tenure has gotten out of hand when granted too early in some cases and not on very high standards. There are some definitely advantages to tenure if handled correctly. Teachers can be fired for all sorts of things. Performance is often not one of them because it is notoriously hard to measure accurately since there are so many things that go into it and affect it. Teachers Unions are against being able to fire teachers for performance (and performance bonuses) because it usually leads to management favoritism and a popularity contest. Some Teacher's unions in some cities and states have gone too far in blocking some reforms, but we no reform will work if it is done on the backs of teachers and they leave the profession. Most studies show that the critical factor in good education is excellent teachers. The question is how to make many more teachers excellent. I don't think it is by firing them. Is that how the private sector creates excellent employees, by threatening to fire them and firing them ("the beatings will continue until morale improves"? Great teachers don't grow on trees and most of the people that would be great teachers have gone into banking, law, medicine or business. You are citing the old right wing saw of a couple of anecdotes as a case for getting rid of all unions and tenure.

Best Teacher awards are usually a popularity contest as well. The four best teachers I ever had never got Best Teacher awards (except nominated for national ones based on Merit Scholars recommendations) which instead went to really nice teachers everyone loved (especially the dumb kids because the teachers didn't push them hard). I had a family member who taught and was chairperson of the department and only ever got grief, but for years students who went to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT, etc.. would come up in restaurants and say, "M. Teacher, I hated you in school, but thanks, I never would have gotten where I am if you weren't so hard on me."

Teaching is also not a thing you are either good at or not. It is not even that you can be trained well or not. It is collaborative between teacher, teaching staff, admin, parents, student, even community. Degrees in Education don't teach you to teach. Degrees in a subject don't teach you to teach. Other teachers, experience, team teaching, etc.. teach one to teach. Often teachers don't collaborate and this is set up by leadership which doesn't demand best practices. New teachers have so much to deal with with new lesson plans, parents, administrators, their subject (usually now what they were most familiar with in college) not to mention the students and learning how to teach that they often drown and many just give up and leave before they get to 5 years and anyone finds out if they are actually any good or not.

What you are advocating is tearing down a system that is actually working pretty well for 80% of the students (the real problems are mostly in city schools with predominantly poor populations - surprise, surprise) based on anecdotes and your beliefs which are unsupported by research or real world examples. I'm just not willing to risk a key foundation of our society on your unfounded beliefs.

Now if you want to talk about real solutions, then we can do that. Three of the most promising things I've seen lately are:

• Increase availability of early pre-schooling. Evidence indicates it decreases unemployment in 20's by 30 to 50% and also decreases LE involvement and convictions by similar rates - that is best bang for buck.
• Use student evaluations to rate teacher performance - recently saw surprising data that done correctly student evaluations of teachers correlated well with actual student academic improvement.
• Teach analytic writing and thinking (need good reading to do it too) much earlier and across the board (writing essays and grading them in history, math, science as well as english - which is what my family member used to do a lot of) as it teaches and reinforces good thinking necessary for science, math, tests, college, life, etc..... Students can't really do science and math without good reading and writing skills.. after all they are taught from a book or written materials usually. Recent studies of this approach have shown a great deal of promise.

BTW, we wouldn't want to help bad teachers be good teachers or understand why they are bad/ineffective teachers now would we? That much less correct the problems, right? Tough love is the best way, just fire them and let them figure it out for themselves.