Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Gov. Chris Christie's deep cuts to state school aid last year left New Jersey's schools unable to provide a "thorough and efficient" education to the state's nearly 1.4 million school children, a Superior Court judge found today.
Gov. Chris Christie's office said that Judge Doyne himself acknowledged that the Supreme Court limited his inquiry by excluding consideration of the state's budget crisis.
"Critically, he also noted that, despite the fact New Jersey meets or exceeds all other states in spending for 'at-risk' students, many of those students continue to fail to meet basic educational proficiency," said spokesman Michael Drewniak. "The Supreme Court should at last abandon the failed assumption of the last three decades that more money equals better education, and stop treating our states fiscal condition as an inconvenient afterthought."Christie slashed state aid by $820 million last year, and Doyne found that altogether, the state would have needed twice that much $1.6 billion to fully fund the School Funding Reform Act formula.
The state Attorney General's Office argued that the cuts were necessary because of New Jersey's dire financial situation. Doyne acknowledged that, but still found against the state.
"The difficulty in addressing New Jersey's fiscal crisis and its constitutionally mandated obligation to educate our children requires an exquisite balance not easily attained," Doyne wrote. "Something need be done to equitably address these competing imperatives. That answer, though, is beyond the purview of this report. For the limited question posed to the Master, it is clear the State has failed to carry its burden." from OP
Interesting dilemma. New Jersey has some of the nicest schools and parks and outrageous property taxes. Princeton is beautiful, Camden a disaster. But Reagan raised taxes in lots of areas, why can't republicans today do the same.
A multi-million dollar school and highly paid teachers do not guarantee a better education.
Tell me why do children who are home schooled at a kitchen table out perform children who attend a "modern" school and are taught by "professionals"?
Academic Achievement and Demographic Traits of Homeschool Students: A Nationwide Study » Academic Leadership Journal
"The difficulty in addressing New Jersey's fiscal crisis and its constitutionally mandated obligation to educate our children requires an exquisite balance not easily attained," Doyne wrote. "Something need be done to equitably address these competing imperatives. That answer, though, is beyond the purview of this report. For the limited question posed to the Master, it is clear the State has failed to carry its burden." from OP
Interesting dilemma. New Jersey has some of the nicest schools and parks and outrageous property taxes. Princeton is beautiful, Camden a disaster. But Reagan raised taxes in lots of areas, why can't republicans today do the same.
A multi-million dollar school and highly paid teachers do not guarantee a better education.
Tell me why do children who are home schooled at a kitchen table out perform children who attend a "modern" school and are taught by "professionals"?
Academic Achievement and Demographic Traits of Homeschool Students: A Nationwide Study » Academic Leadership Journal
Some thoughts (in random order)...
Public Schools exist as a "safety net" net for homeschoolers. If homeschooling doesn't work for the parents, then the kids can be enrolled in Public Schools. Those failed cases then would show up in public school scores. In other words homeschool is a self-selection for success process, parents select it and if it works they continue. If the situation fails then those students (in most cases) end up in public schools.
By definition, homeschooling parents are going to be much more engaged with their children and that child's education. Parental involvement is probably one of the biggest factors in raising an educated child.
Teacher:Student ratios have a huge impact on on student performance. In a homeschool you have basically a 1:1 ratio on the subject being taught. That ensures maximum engagement between the teacher and the student. Much more difficult for students to get off task when total engagement occurs. On the other hand public schools in elementary have 20-30 students, in the high schools classes may be about the same size but will rotate through so a teacher there might be trying to work with 100-150 students per day. Take unprepared "amateurs" used to dealing with 1:1 ratios and put them in a room with 20-30 students or in a rotating class schedule where they have 100-150 students per day and then compare their performance with "professionals". Personally I doubt they (the students) will do as well.
Homeschool students, when compared on an individual basis, do not always outperform public school counterparts. Homeschool students performance compares favorably with public school performance when comparing populations. As previously mentioned homeschool success tends to be a self-selection process, public schools have no option - they must take all comers. I think a more accurate comparison might occur if you compare self-selection process to self-selection process. Compare homeschool middle and high school student to self-selecting public school students in advanced, honors, AP, and IB curriculum, in such an apples to apples comparison my premise is that the difference would not be as pronounced.
[DISCLAIMER: I am not downplaying the importance or effectiveness of homeschooling. I'm simplying trying to point out some logical, analytic, non-emotion driven, non-partisan reasons for why homeschoolers (as a population) may perform better on standard measurements then public school students (as a general population). And no this isn't being written to defend public school teachers.]
>>>>
Gov. Chris Christie's deep cuts to state school aid last year left New Jersey's schools unable to provide a "thorough and efficient" education to the state's nearly 1.4 million school children, a Superior Court judge found today.
Gov. Chris Christie's office said that Judge Doyne himself acknowledged that the Supreme Court limited his inquiry by excluding consideration of the state's budget crisis.
"Critically, he also noted that, despite the fact New Jersey meets or exceeds all other states in spending for 'at-risk' students, many of those students continue to fail to meet basic educational proficiency," said spokesman Michael Drewniak. "The Supreme Court should at last abandon the failed assumption of the last three decades that more money equals better education, and stop treating our states fiscal condition as an inconvenient afterthought."Christie slashed state aid by $820 million last year, and Doyne found that altogether, the state would have needed twice that much $1.6 billion to fully fund the School Funding Reform Act formula.
The state Attorney General's Office argued that the cuts were necessary because of New Jersey's dire financial situation. Doyne acknowledged that, but still found against the state.
Christie's budget cuts left N.J. schools unable to provide 'thorough and efficient' education, judge rules | NJ.com
Big blow for Christie. And the taxpayers of NJ. It's not just the unions folks. Here in NJ, every out of control spending program has been legislated by the bench.
