Our broken education system.

[blimpo]

I love all these -shoot from the hip- solutions. We are a nation of sound bites where rational thinking is becoming a lost art.

The list problems teachers face trying to educate students in the U.S. would bog this forum down to where it wouldn't work. Solutions are few and far between.

A start might be raising kids that can see past the noses on their faces and that there is life beyond texting and cellphones. Most are so out of touch with the real world, they think they are owed a life laying across a chair playing video games all day. Getting them to turn off these contraptions and thinking about their futures would help. Getting them to actually care about becoming educated would make a huge difference.

Rebuilding the family unit, which has collapsed as a vital force of support for kids that desperately need guidance and control. Here, we are paying for the divorces and the live-in boyfriends and girlfriends. What role models we now have for kids. It's ok to 'shack up'. Live for today worry about the future later...

 

[eflatminor]

The list problems teachers face trying to educate students in the U.S. would bog this forum down to where it wouldn't work.

Exactly, I agree, which is why NO central planners are capable of running the entire education system, from what's in the text books to how many tater tots are served at lunch.

Competition and free markets on the other hand, do not rely on central planners to make the choices between these "few and far between" solutions. Thousands of entrepreneurs make decisions that they believe will best serve their students and their families. You get to choice and the industry get innovation, creativity, and efficiency. Costs fall and results soar...that is, IF we end the government monopoly of affordable K-12 education.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Only one way to do that: competition. More government control of education is the antithesis to competition.

But hey, maybe YOUR politicians have magic beans???

The search for eligible college students is already VERY competitive. Trust me, I end up having to deal with a larger and larger number of recruiting events and activities each year.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Competition and free markets on the other hand, do not rely on central planners to make the choices between these "few and far between" solutions. Thousands of entrepreneurs make decisions that they believe will best serve their students and their families. You get to choice and the industry get innovation, creativity, and efficiency. Costs fall and results soar...that is, IF we end the government monopoly of affordable K-12 education.

Competition and Free Market principals are not the solution to every problem, and are ill suited to long term projects that require heavy investment before seeing profit. The United States internet infrastructure is proof of that.

Now, in a market that is large enough, I'd agree that competition is the way to go for education. Where I'm at now, I'm looking at 4 different private schools for my son when he starts Kindergarten in a year, plus a public school. Competition has compelled innovation where I am at.

However, when I was a kid I grew up in a pretty rural small town. There simply wouldn't have been a market for even 1 school. Handing the responsibility for education off the Free Market forces would have resulted in a single massive school serving everyone in about a 2 hour drive's radius, a horrible solution.

If you don't believe this, check out the hospital situation in small rural areas. In a big city, you may have 4-5 choices in town. In the backwoods, you're lucky if there's a hospital within an hour's drive and typically it's only there as it is a state funded institution.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How did Lorenzo de' Medici do it without the UFT?

How?

 

[eflatminor]

Only one way to do that: competition. More government control of education is the antithesis to competition.

But hey, maybe YOUR politicians have magic beans???

The search for eligible college students is already VERY competitive. Trust me, I end up having to deal with a larger and larger number of recruiting events and activities each year.

I'm sure it is. Don't doubt that. Of course, that has nothing to do with the failure of government's monopolization of K-12, which is severely lacking anything resembling competition.

 

[eflatminor]

Competition and free markets on the other hand, do not rely on central planners to make the choices between these "few and far between" solutions. Thousands of entrepreneurs make decisions that they believe will best serve their students and their families. You get to choice and the industry get innovation, creativity, and efficiency. Costs fall and results soar...that is, IF we end the government monopoly of affordable K-12 education.

Competition and Free Market principals are not the solution to every problem, and are ill suited to long term projects that require heavy investment before seeing profit. The United States internet infrastructure is proof of that.

Tell that to the thousands of families that lost their businesses along Route 66 after the interstate highway system brought us a McDonald's every seven miles. Wonderful.

Now, in a market that is large enough, I'd agree that competition is the way to go for education. Where I'm at now, I'm looking at 4 different private schools for my son when he starts Kindergarten in a year, plus a public school. Competition has compelled innovation where I am at.

There has always been K-12 competition for those that can afford a private education. Not the case for affordable education.

However, when I was a kid I grew up in a pretty rural small town. There simply wouldn't have been a market for even 1 school. Handing the responsibility for education off the Free Market forces would have resulted in a single massive school serving everyone in about a 2 hour drive's radius, a horrible solution.

Not necessarily true. In fact, highly unlikely. In a free market, even in a small town, there could be all kinds of schools, from small groups to a one-size-fits-all approach. Either way, it would be actual educational customers choosing, not some central planner.

If you don't believe this, check out the hospital situation in small rural areas. In a big city, you may have 4-5 choices in town. In the backwoods, you're lucky if there's a hospital within an hour's drive and typically it's only there as it is a state funded institution.

I'm sorry, but did you just reference the healthcare industry as an example of how free markets respond? Really?

Bottom line, Carolyn Lockhead got it right:

"Public educators, like Soviet farmers, lack any incentive to produce results, innovate, to be efficient, to make the kinds of of difficult changes that private firms operating in a competitive market must make to survive."

 

[signelect]

Too many realte education to spending, both sides have been throwing money at it for years and it continues to decline. Parents do give a S### they think it is not their responsibility that they children learn to read and write and learn the difference between right and wrong. They think they can buy it. We rank last in Texas and our country ranks about 25th in the world. Money won't fix this until we start cariing. Demand that your child behaves in school instead of threating to sue the teacher for trying to get them to pay attention instead of bullng the kid next to them that can actually read.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Competition and free markets on the other hand, do not rely on central planners to make the choices between these "few and far between" solutions. Thousands of entrepreneurs make decisions that they believe will best serve their students and their families. You get to choice and the industry get innovation, creativity, and efficiency. Costs fall and results soar...that is, IF we end the government monopoly of affordable K-12 education.

Competition and Free Market principals are not the solution to every problem, and are ill suited to long term projects that require heavy investment before seeing profit. The United States internet infrastructure is proof of that.

Tell that to the thousands of families that lost their businesses along Route 66 after the interstate highway system brought us a McDonald's every seven miles. Wonderful.



There has always been K-12 competition for those that can afford a private education. Not the case for affordable education.

However, when I was a kid I grew up in a pretty rural small town. There simply wouldn't have been a market for even 1 school. Handing the responsibility for education off the Free Market forces would have resulted in a single massive school serving everyone in about a 2 hour drive's radius, a horrible solution.

Not necessarily true. In fact, highly unlikely. In a free market, even in a small town, there could be all kinds of schools, from small groups to a one-size-fits-all approach. Either way, it would be actual educational customers choosing, not some central planner.

If you don't believe this, check out the hospital situation in small rural areas. In a big city, you may have 4-5 choices in town. In the backwoods, you're lucky if there's a hospital within an hour's drive and typically it's only there as it is a state funded institution.

I'm sorry, but did you just reference the healthcare industry as an example of how free markets respond? Really?

Bottom line, Carolyn Lockhead got it right:

"Public educators, like Soviet farmers, lack any incentive to produce results, innovate, to be efficient, to make the kinds of of difficult changes that private firms operating in a competitive market must make to survive."

"Public educators, like Soviet farmers, lack any incentive to produce results, innovate, to be efficient, to make the kinds of of difficult changes that private firms operating in a competitive market must make to survive."

There's a good reason too, because public educators and Soviet farmers all work for the same people

 

[regent]

America's schools are still pretty much controlled by states and local school districts. One of the big changes in education came about in the Fifties, the cry was "keep em in school, we don't want em on the streets causing trouble. The school I attended graduated about 25% of the student body, and that 25% was probably fairly competent. I, like all in my group, dropped after the ninth grade.
With pressure on to keep em in school, things changed, social promotions came into the picture, lower standards, easier grades, pleas were made to kids to stay in school, text books became easier, special classes created with less students. Of course with less students in the special classes the regular classes had to take more students. So for the less able student small classes and the regular large classes.
We lowered the drop-out rate but at what cost? But keeping em in school is just one of the many many school problems. But now the Republicans have a really simple solution: get rid of unions, and then get rid of tenure and bingo our educational problems are over. Sort of like advocating getting rid of the AMA and then another bingo and our medical problems are solved.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Competition and free markets on the other hand, do not rely on central planners to make the choices between these "few and far between" solutions. Thousands of entrepreneurs make decisions that they believe will best serve their students and their families. You get to choice and the industry get innovation, creativity, and efficiency. Costs fall and results soar...that is, IF we end the government monopoly of affordable K-12 education.

Competition and Free Market principals are not the solution to every problem, and are ill suited to long term projects that require heavy investment before seeing profit. The United States internet infrastructure is proof of that.

Tell that to the thousands of families that lost their businesses along Route 66 after the interstate highway system brought us a McDonald's every seven miles. Wonderful.

Your answer has nothing to do with mine. The US Internet infrastructure is the laughing stock of the developed nations. There are still places in the USA where the only available internet access is via dial up. That is one of the many things killing our economy. More and more services, jobs, and sales are internet driven, and yet we have folks that can't access it.

Why is this?

Our internet infrastructure was built by free market forces and NOT centrally planned. As such it is cobbled together and fails to support whole communities.

There absolutely is a place for Government planning.

And as for the Interstate, I much prefer it to traveling via US XX roads across nation. Should I feel bad for the businesses that failed to adapt? Mother of God, we must bail out the Pony Express!

There has always been K-12 competition for those that can afford a private education. Not the case for affordable education.

I don't see where privatizing education would make it affordable for all. If anything, it would pretty much ensure that poor folks stayed poor as education is the absolute best method for social advancement. Without a way to get the kids who absolutely can't afford it into a good private school, 100% privatization would never work.

However, when I was a kid I grew up in a pretty rural small town. There simply wouldn't have been a market for even 1 school. Handing the responsibility for education off the Free Market forces would have resulted in a single massive school serving everyone in about a 2 hour drive's radius, a horrible solution.

Not necessarily true. In fact, highly unlikely. In a free market, even in a small town, there could be all kinds of schools, from small groups to a one-size-fits-all approach. Either way, it would be actual educational customers choosing, not some central planner.

No. There won't be. As it is in small towns you're lucky to have more than one mechanic, vet, pharmacy, etc. You have either never lived in a truly small town or are just being an ideologue.

I agree given a big enough market and a way to pay for the education of the poor (vouchers) privatization would work, but ask anyone in a small town about the realities of free market competition in a small economy and they'll laugh. Because there is no competition to really drive a free market economy.

If you don't believe this, check out the hospital situation in small rural areas. In a big city, you may have 4-5 choices in town. In the backwoods, you're lucky if there's a hospital within an hour's drive and typically it's only there as it is a state funded institution.

I'm sorry, but did you just reference the healthcare industry as an example of how free markets respond? Really?

Actually, yes. The reason I mentioned it is because the private hospitals simply DO NOT EXIST without a potentially large market to support them. At this point, small towns are actively pursuing medical students and advertising for "Medical Mission" teams because they can not get a family doctor to open a practice within these small communities. The hospitals that do exist in the rural areas do so because of central planning. Otherwise, nothing.

Bottom line, Carolyn Lockhead got it right:

"Public educators, like Soviet farmers, lack any incentive to produce results, innovate, to be efficient, to make the kinds of of difficult changes that private firms operating in a competitive market must make to survive."

Spoken like someone that is completely clueless.

Teachers have to undergo continuing education and actively seek graduate credits to qualify for raises and promotion. School boards can and do add new requirements to the job all the time. School boards are constantly adopting new technology that teachers do have to spend time mastering.

And don't blather on about "but tenure", because a teacher absolutely can be fired even if they have tenure, and are. Tenure isn't complete job security, it's access to an appeals process so you can defend your job performance.

 

[eflatminor]

Competition and Free Market principals are not the solution to every problem, and are ill suited to long term projects that require heavy investment before seeing profit. The United States internet infrastructure is proof of that.

Tell that to the thousands of families that lost their businesses along Route 66 after the interstate highway system brought us a McDonald's every seven miles. Wonderful.

Your answer has nothing to do with mine. The US Internet infrastructure is the laughing stock of the developed nations. There are still places in the USA where the only available internet access is via dial up. That is one of the many things killing our economy. More and more services, jobs, and sales are internet driven, and yet we have folks that can't access it.

Why is this?

Our internet infrastructure was built by free market forces and NOT centrally planned. As such it is cobbled together and fails to support whole communities.

There absolutely is a place for Government planning.

And as for the Interstate, I much prefer it to traveling via US XX roads across nation. Should I feel bad for the businesses that failed to adapt? Mother of God, we must bail out the Pony Express!



I don't see where privatizing education would make it affordable for all. If anything, it would pretty much ensure that poor folks stayed poor as education is the absolute best method for social advancement. Without a way to get the kids who absolutely can't afford it into a good private school, 100% privatization would never work.



No. There won't be. As it is in small towns you're lucky to have more than one mechanic, vet, pharmacy, etc. You have either never lived in a truly small town or are just being an ideologue.

I agree given a big enough market and a way to pay for the education of the poor (vouchers) privatization would work, but ask anyone in a small town about the realities of free market competition in a small economy and they'll laugh. Because there is no competition to really drive a free market economy.

I'm sorry, but did you just reference the healthcare industry as an example of how free markets respond? Really?

Actually, yes. The reason I mentioned it is because the private hospitals simply DO NOT EXIST without a potentially large market to support them. At this point, small towns are actively pursuing medical students and advertising for "Medical Mission" teams because they can not get a family doctor to open a practice within these small communities. The hospitals that do exist in the rural areas do so because of central planning. Otherwise, nothing.

Bottom line, Carolyn Lockhead got it right:

"Public educators, like Soviet farmers, lack any incentive to produce results, innovate, to be efficient, to make the kinds of of difficult changes that private firms operating in a competitive market must make to survive."

Spoken like someone that is completely clueless.

Teachers have to undergo continuing education and actively seek graduate credits to qualify for raises and promotion. School boards can and do add new requirements to the job all the time. School boards are constantly adopting new technology that teachers do have to spend time mastering.

And don't blather on about "but tenure", because a teacher absolutely can be fired even if they have tenure, and are. Tenure isn't complete job security, it's access to an appeals process so you can defend your job performance.

Overall, I could not disagree with just about everything you've written here. You sound just like a nanny state sheeple looking for a dear leader with magic beans. Good luck.

Specifically, you say America's lack of access to the internet is what is killing the economy. Hard to respond without rolling eyes and mumbles of "Is he serious?". Anyway, feel free to back up your claim with some verifiable proof.

Glad to hear about your love of the interstate. After all, what are thousands of businesses and jobs compared to your convenience. That there is NO authority in the Constitution for building roads means little. Certainly, when the next central planner comes along with a big idea that's against the law, you'll not raise a fuss at all...

Regarding private education, if you want to make a case for giving money to poor families in order to pay for education, fine. But the idea that government should RUN education is ridiculous, as our piss poor results, skyrocketing costs, lack of innovation, efficiency and choice prove. But hey, maybe YOUR central planners has those magic beans, eh?

 

[blimpo]

America's schools are still pretty much controlled by states and local school districts. One of the big changes in education came about in the Fifties, the cry was "keep em in school, we don't want em on the streets causing trouble. The school I attended graduated about 25% of the student body, and that 25% was probably fairly competent. I, like all in my group, dropped after the ninth grade.
With pressure on to keep em in school, things changed, social promotions came into the picture, lower standards, easier grades, pleas were made to kids to stay in school, text books became easier, special classes created with less students. Of course with less students in the special classes the regular classes had to take more students. So for the less able student small classes and the regular large classes.
We lowered the drop-out rate but at what cost? But keeping em in school is just one of the many many school problems. But now the Republicans have a really simple solution: get rid of unions, and then get rid of tenure and bingo our educational problems are over. Sort of like advocating getting rid of the AMA and then another bingo and our medical problems are solved.

You have done a great job of describing the major changes in education.

Also, all the high stakes testing forces all energy on the bottom feeders leaving the upper students with little to do as the others try to catch up.

 

[Unkotare]

Whining about high-stakes testing is just ridiculous.

 

[Douger]

Maybe a little segregation is the order of the day ?

 

[editec]

We do not have AN educational system, we have over 15,000 EDucational systems in this nation.

Some of the are broken.

Some of them never worked in the first place.

Some of them are doing just fine, thank you very much.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

@eflatminor: learn to read. The screwed up Internet infrastructure is one of the reasons jobs are going overseas and businesses are finding themselves unable to reach larger customer bases. I never said it was the only reason the economy is stuck in recession, but it is one of the factors.

Second: the Constitution specifically provides for roads and projects to provide for the common defense. Since the interstate was organized under Ike to facilitate quick military transport, the interstate system is entirely Constitutional.

Last: education is a State enumerated power and should absolutely be left to the States. You're the one who keeps inserting central planners into this.

 

[squeeze berry]

Whining about high-stakes testing is just ridiculous.

Blimpo isn't whining.Blimpo is telling it as it is.

The prolbem with our public education is .............. drum roll

unrealistic expectations.

Every president since Kennedy has banged the " university for all " drum.

Public education worked quite well during my parents time.

What changed?

1. all students are expected to graduate and not drop out until age 18
2. all students go on to a 4 year college
3. all students are capable of high achievement
4. if students don't achieve at the highest level it's the fault of bad teachers, unions, racism, classism, sexism or lack of school choice
5. unrealistic laws and unfunded mandates from the federal and state govts.
6. litigation gone wild
7. parents playing lawyer for their child, lack of parental and student responsibility
8. having to educate everyone no matter how low their ability/ motivation or disruptiveness

 

[eflatminor]

@eflatminor: learn to read. The screwed up Internet infrastructure is one of the reasons jobs are going overseas and businesses are finding themselves unable to reach larger customer bases. I never said it was the only reason the economy is stuck in recession, but it is one of the factors.

Ah, yet another one that can't resist childish name calling. So typical. In any case, I say you're wrong that internet access is killing the economy. And by the way, the economy is no longer in recession...unless of course it's me that just can't read...

Second: the Constitution specifically provides for roads and projects to provide for the common defense. Since the interstate was organized under Ike to facilitate quick military transport, the interstate system is entirely Constitutional.

Everyone knows how they shoved the interstate highway though. And my how the sheeple believed them, that this was how we were going to transport military equipment across the country. That interstate highway also goes through Hawaii. A lot of tanks making their way from Iowa to Honolulu? Good grief! As though it had nothing to do with Detroit's desire to instill a car culture in this country, something you Lefties are constantly bitching about. Oh the irony! Of course in reality, the military uses airplanes to transport equipment across the country, which was always going to be the case, so let's not bullshit anyone about what the interstate highway was really all about.

Last: education is a State enumerated power and should absolutely be left to the States. You're the one who keeps inserting central planners into this.

No, the federal government keeps inserting themselves into this. The feds confiscate ungodly amounts of taxpayer money, run it through DC buracracies, then dole it out to state schools with strings attached. And isn't that working out just beautifully!

Central planners pal are at every level of government, from the top of the pile in Washington, to mayors that are just sure they know what's best for everyone in 'their' city. Heck, you talk like a central planner...perhaps someone that really wanted to be a hall monitor in grade school, still really pissed off you weren't chosen to tell others what to do.

Sad.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You really do know absolutely zero about the interstate system do you? I mean just zero. Zilch. Nada.

You know of course the interstate system has designated sections that can serve as emergency landing strips to facilitate emergency military or disaster support, right? You do realize the military does use the system for transit between local bases, right?

One day you'll grow up and realize that yes, there actually is a place for Government planning. Till then feel free to move to Somalia and escape all that intrusive central planning.