common sense education reform

[dafenstein]

I say middle school and high school students that test out of a class should be given scholarships worth half the cost of teaching said class, while the other half should be given to the school to lower class sizes. This proposal is a real petition that will be publicly addressed by the white house if it gets enough signatures within one month, but first it needs 150 signatures before it will be shown on the official white house petition page without needing a link to get to it. here's the link

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...-class-other-half-school-lower-class/51mPq5XD

I do hope that you'll leave your opinion on this proposal whether or not you agree with it.
and if you do agree with it, don't forget to click the button to share it on face book or promote it in general... it's gonna need it!

 

[eflatminor]

I say we should get government out of the business of running the market for education. But hey, the DMV-like approach, increasing federal oversight, and spending more per student than just about any other country is producing wonderful results, right?

 

[dafenstein]

well, I think that we have to look at what's possible. and I think we have to look at whether or not this proposal (which takes less than 1 minute to sign!) does any harm. does it? I think between now and the time that we become enlightened enough to do EVERYTHING we should, that this will only do good, and is worth the minute it will take to sign. what do you think?

 

[dafenstein]

I say we should get government out of the business of running the market for education. But hey, the DMV-like approach, increasing federal oversight, and spending more per student than just about any other country is producing wonderful results, right?

I was wondering if you didn't see my question because I didn't quote you. the question was, A) what's the harm, and B) what else should be done instead (and is that even possible given current political circumstances)

also, is that higher spending adjusted for currency exchange rates? also, I heard that charter schools aren't necessarily better, and I think the free market might not necessarily be able to provide better results partly because ruthless cost cutting is such a major part of the free market and because schools that are already established may have a sort of monopoly on a certain areas the way hospitals do, which means they wouldn't really have to compete at all.

 

[eflatminor]

I say we should get government out of the business of running the market for education. But hey, the DMV-like approach, increasing federal oversight, and spending more per student than just about any other country is producing wonderful results, right?

I was wondering if you didn't see my question because I didn't quote you. the question was, A) what's the harm,

I don't believe we should try to fix problems brought about by central planners by introducing more central planning. They always do more harm than good. I'm interested in voluntary choice.

and B) what else should be done instead (and is that even possible given current political circumstances)

Start by getting the Feds completely out of the education system. Then work on ending the states' monopoly on affordable education. It isn't working. You want to make a case for the redistribution of wealth to poor families for the purpose of paying for an education? Fine, but the idea that government RUNS the schools, from what's in the text books to how many tater tots get served at lunch is the real problem. There is no CHOICE.

also, is that higher spending adjusted for currency exchange rates?

Yes

also, I heard that charter schools aren't necessarily better,

Charter schools are not free market alternatives.

and I think the free market might not necessarily be able to provide better results partly because ruthless cost cutting is such a major part of the free market

The cost of education has FAR outpaced the overall rate of inflation. What the hell is wrong with providing a service at a price people can afford? With free market education, you'd get all kinds of schools, from cut rate operations sticking to the basics to fancy schools that cost a lot.

and because schools that are already established may have a sort of monopoly on a certain areas the way hospitals do, which means they wouldn't really have to compete at all.

Which is why we should end that monopoly. Let communities, families and individuals decide if a school is worth their education dollar. If it isn't they should be be free to choose an alternative school. That is not the case with the government running the education market.

 

[dafenstein]

Thanks for the response. (first of all, I realize that currency exchange thing was not a point at all cuz it's actually the other way around with ours being the more valuable currency). My point is, there must be specific things that can be done to make our education system better, given the vast amount of cheaper education systems that are more effective, that can be proven to the people. after all, isn't this a government by the people for the people? we just got to throw away the bong and get organized. And if you think about it, testing out kind of is taking government out of the equation. I just figure some of it should go back to the school cuz how else is it gonna get passed in this political environment? And besides, maybe greater spending is just how we need to do things in this country. Look at California - funds got massively cut, education rank plummeted. I think the real travesty is the lack of science in our parenting culture, but hey, when you need everyone to know something, that's what public education is for. can you imagine if we had to implement new curriculum school by school?

I say we should get government out of the business of running the market for education. But hey, the DMV-like approach, increasing federal oversight, and spending more per student than just about any other country is producing wonderful results, right?

I was wondering if you didn't see my question because I didn't quote you. the question was, A) what's the harm,

I don't believe we should try to fix problems brought about by central planners by introducing more central planning. They always do more harm than good. I'm interested in voluntary choice.



Start by getting the Feds completely out of the education system. Then work on ending the states' monopoly on affordable education. It isn't working. You want to make a case for the redistribution of wealth to poor families for the purpose of paying for an education? Fine, but the idea that government RUNS the schools, from what's in the text books to how many tater tots get served at lunch is the real problem. There is no CHOICE.



Yes



Charter schools are not free market alternatives.

and I think the free market might not necessarily be able to provide better results partly because ruthless cost cutting is such a major part of the free market

The cost of education has FAR outpaced the overall rate of inflation. What the hell is wrong with providing a service at a price people can afford? With free market education, you'd get all kinds of schools, from cut rate operations sticking to the basics to fancy schools that cost a lot.

and because schools that are already established may have a sort of monopoly on a certain areas the way hospitals do, which means they wouldn't really have to compete at all.

Which is why we should end that monopoly. Let communities, families and individuals decide if a school is worth their education dollar. If it isn't they should be be free to choose an alternative school. That is not the case with the government running the education market.

 

[dafenstein]

I also want to point out that nothing is ever perfect and no matter what game your playing, different strategies can work as long as you know how to use those strategies... i.e. if you work on it you can make it better, if you change it completely then you're just back to square one and you'll have to work on it even more to make it as good as it could have been with the old strategy... it's like, if you work to destroy government then it's never going to be good government (common sense). When Herbert Hoover jacked up tariffs on imports, the economy took a hit. When Bill Clinton did the exact opposite, the economy took a hit.

 

[Unkotare]

well, I think that we have to look at what's possible. and I think we have to look at whether or not this proposal (which takes less than 1 minute to sign!) does any harm. does it? I think between now and the time that we become enlightened enough to do EVERYTHING we should, that this will only do good, and is worth the minute it will take to sign. what do you think?

I think you are pissing into the wind, and should get back to your computer games as soon as possible.

 

[dafenstein]

thanks for the comment. I'm just wondering why you think it's a bad idea?

well, I think that we have to look at what's possible. and I think we have to look at whether or not this proposal (which takes less than 1 minute to sign!) does any harm. does it? I think between now and the time that we become enlightened enough to do EVERYTHING we should, that this will only do good, and is worth the minute it will take to sign. what do you think?

I think you are pissing into the wind, and should get back to your computer games as soon as possible.

 

[dafenstein]

actually you have to create an account with the white house petition site (to sign), I didn't realize because I already had an account. all it is is copying/pasting a url address in an e-mail they send you. then you just click the sign button on any petition. It's worth it because these petitions have an actual chance of being acknowledged by the white house (if they get a certain number of signatures within a certain period of time)

 

[Justleftmovie]

Not sure about this. However, at least it's an idea that has potential in that it moves driven students to do well and move ahead more quickly... While teachers are left with the "slower" and less motivated students? Hmmmm.

 

[JCO4O1]

Common sense would be to get rid of the money black hole that is the department of education, and let money follow the children to allow school choice. When schools have to compete, the bad schools will close, and the good schools will expand. There are too many restricting rules and regulations in education that handcuffs teachers, and the unions are holding the kids captive in underperforming schools.

 

[BobPlumb]

I say middle school and high school students that test out of a class should be given scholarships worth half the cost of teaching said class, while the other half should be given to the school to lower class sizes. This proposal is a real petition that will be publicly addressed by the white house if it gets enough signatures within one month, but first it needs 150 signatures before it will be shown on the official white house petition page without needing a link to get to it. here's the link

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...-class-other-half-school-lower-class/51mPq5XD

I do hope that you'll leave your opinion on this proposal whether or not you agree with it.
and if you do agree with it, don't forget to click the button to share it on face book or promote it in general... it's gonna need it!

I like the idea of testing out. With the internet a motivated smart kid doesn't really need a classroom. The kids need desire and motivation to learn. With proper motivation many kids could finish high school by age 15. Kahn academy. ... Learn anything for free.