Studies show Republicans privatizing of public schools a costly failure

[Ariux]

Charter schools, which are also government schools, do about as well, and they do it with several thousand dollars less of taxpayer money per student, while still being burdened by nearly everything that burdens other public schools. Maybe charter schools suffer even more from stupid Political Correctness, as they look for ways to differentiate themselves, "We have smaller class sizes!"

Also, Charter schools improve the performance of regular public schools (competition).

As usual, liberals have shit for brains.

 

[kwc57]

So, I looked at the link. The bias is overwhelming. Your little chart was put together by "Teach For America", who describes themselves as "...the national corps of recent college graduates who commit to teach for two years in urban and rural public schools".

A group dedicated to public schools...just how open minded would they be to anything less than full on government run education?

How about comparing actual PRIVATE schools with the various forms of government run schools (traditional and semi-outsourced)? Yea, wouldn't look so good for the central planners would it?

OK, give us an "unbiased" link to "real" data. I'm interested in knowing.

Really? That's a first!

 

[starcraftzzz]

Charter schools, which are also government schools, do about as well, and they do it with several thousand dollars less of taxpayer money per student,

Nope incorrect Charter schools get more money from the govt then do public schools; and in fact they get 50% more money in total

C

Also, Charter schools improve the performance of regular public schools (competition).

As usual, liberals have shit for brains.

Incorrect again charter schools actually have worse performance then publci schools

Yes you having no idea what you are talking about means other people are stupid

 

[Synthaholic]

This was a very eye opening editorial from Gail Collins, over the weekend. I had barely heard of Pearson before this.

I wonder why the politicians on both sides never told us about this?

A Very Pricey Pineapple



*snip*

Now — finally — we have tumbled into my central point. We have turned school testing into a huge corporate profit center, led by Pearson, for whom $32 million is actually pretty small potatoes. Pearson has a five-year testing contract with Texas that’s costing the state taxpayers nearly half-a-billion dollars.

This is the part of education reform nobody told you about. You heard about accountability, and choice, and innovation. But when No Child Left Behind was passed 11 years ago, do you recall anybody mentioning that it would provide monster profits for the private business sector?

Me neither.

It’s not just the tests. No Child Left Behind has created a system of public-funded charter schools, a growing number of which are run by for-profit companies. Some of them are completely online, with kids getting their lessons at home via computer. The academic results can be abysmal, but on the plus side — definitely no classroom crowding issues.

Pearson is just one part of the picture, albeit a part about the size of Mount Rushmore. Its lobbyists include the guy who served as the top White House liaison with Congress on drafting the No Child law. It has its own nonprofit foundation that sends state education commissioners on free trips overseas to contemplate school reform.

An American child could go to a public school run by Pearson, studying from books produced by Pearson, while his or her progress is evaluated by Pearson standardized tests. The only public participant in the show would be the taxpayer.

If all else fails, the kid could always drop out and try to get a diploma via the good old G.E.D. The General Educational Development test program used to be operated by the nonprofit American Council on Education, but last year the Council and Pearson announced that they were going into a partnership to redevelop the G.E.D. — a nationally used near-monopoly — as a profit-making enterprise.

“We’re a capitalist system, but this is worrisome,” said New York Education Commissioner King.


*snip*

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Charter schools, which are also government schools, do about as well, and they do it with several thousand dollars less of taxpayer money per student,

Nope incorrect Charter schools get more money from the govt then do public schools; and in fact they get 50% more money in total

C

Also, Charter schools improve the performance of regular public schools (competition).

As usual, liberals have shit for brains.

Incorrect again charter schools actually have worse performance then publci schools

Yes you having no idea what you are talking about means other people are stupid

This is why we need to close the US Department of Education, eliminate the UFT and let the parents, communities and the various states figure out how to run the schools without the Federal government

 

[dblack]

This is why we need to close the US Department of Education, eliminate the UFT and let the parents, communities and the various states figure out how to run the schools without the Federal government

What? But that would have parents teaching their kids however they saw fit!?! They might forget to teach them how awesome it is to have the government making all our decisions for us. Then where would we be?

 

[wjmacguffin]

Charter schools lack red tape but also lack oversight. Therefore, they can be better or worse than their traditional counterparts. Yes, there's been outright fraud by people starting charter schools but there's also been incredible success. It all depends on the person(s) writing the charter.

That said, charters are not automatically better than their traditional counterparts. (I don't call them public because charters are technically public schools as well.) Many charters I've seen (my data, not empirical) have the ability to easily expel students whereas many traditional school cannot. That means jackass students are usually not found in charters and instead go to traditional schools. This skews the results.

 

[Stephanie]

^A Standard study on charter schools found 37% of charter schools saw less educational gain then public schools compared to 17% that did better., meaning if you were to extrapolate the data turning all charter schools to public schools would increase educational quality by 20%.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/education/31kipp.html?_r=1&ref=us
^KIPP private charter schools receive more taxpayer dollars per student then public schools do. They get around 8% more. When you include private funding the reason that KIPP charter schools do so well is because they have 50% more funds then public schools do, and because of those extra funds they are able to extend class times mon-fri and have class on Saturday.

About Those Milwaukee Vouchers | ThinkProgress
^Milwaukee students who take vouchers and go to private schools score anywhere from 10-30% lower on standardized tests.

Public Schools Outperform Private Schools in Math Instruction
^ILL researchers have found that public school students outscore private score students in math because public schools have more certified teachers, and curriculum that de-emphasized learning by rote methods.

Vouchers don’t change a thing in Washington DC
Vouchers Get a Failing Grade
Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Impacts After One Year - Introduction

The Milwaukee Voucher Failure | ThinkProgress
^Vouchers fail in Milwaukee

Vouchers in Arizona lead to corruption; Vouchers completely fail.
Vouchers lead to tax fraud, and voucher money goes to enriching CEO's
Voucher FAIL in Arizona | ThinkProgress

----------------------vouchers

think progress..

 

[bodecea]

The day the Public Schools can tell parents that their children are no longer welcome at their particular school (like private schools do), that will be the day that schools start improving.

 

[Katzndogz]

Charter schools don't do nearly as well as private schools. It's just a fact. They CAN do as welll, but they choose not to.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Charter schools, which are also government schools, do about as well, and they do it with several thousand dollars less of taxpayer money per student,

Nope incorrect Charter schools get more money from the govt then do public schools; and in fact they get 50% more money in total

C

Also, Charter schools improve the performance of regular public schools (competition).

As usual, liberals have shit for brains.

Incorrect again charter schools actually have worse performance then publci schools

Yes you having no idea what you are talking about means other people are stupid

This is why we need to close the US Department of Education, eliminate the UFT and let the parents, communities and the various states figure out how to run the schools without the Federal government

Local communities already run their schools. Further more ending the US department of education would result in schools having less money and would hurt the economy because of cuts to pre-school and other education programs

 

[eflatminor]

Local communities already run their schools.

Not entirely. The money they get from the federal government most certainly comes with strings attached. The feds may not yet have direct control over local public schools, but they certainly effect the manner in which they're run. 'No child left behind' is but one example.

Further more ending the US department of education would result in schools having less money...

Let's get this straight: The idea of taking money from taxpayers, running it through Washington bureaucracies, then doling it out to state education departments with strings attached is an efficient use of money? Please.

...and would hurt the economy because of cuts to pre-school and other education programs

The tremendous increase in tax dollars to government run schools (fed, state and local) sure as hell hasn't resulted in improvement to the economy. Maybe it's time to have competition and choice in the business of education? After all, having government run the entire education system, from what's in the text books to how many tater tots are served at lunch is producing less than stellar results with costs that far outpace the rate of inflation. More taxpayer dollars isn't the answer; competition is.

 

[Flopper]

Private schools by their nature segregate students by, race, income level, ethnicity, and religion, not a good thing for the country.

 

[Stephanie]

Private schools by their nature segregate students by, race, income level, ethnicity, and religion, not a good thing for the country.

wow...

 

[eflatminor]

Private schools by their nature segregate students by, race, income level, ethnicity, and religion, not a good thing for the country.

I don't know about that. Why would the good people of say, Harlem, want their children educated by rich white guys in Washington and the state capital? Segregation in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing as long as it's based on individual choice. Local communities are better able to education their own than central planners in my humble opinion. Schools voluntarily segregated (without violating any individual rights of course) can structure their efforts far more efficiently than attempting to be all things to all students.

Further, the educational results produced by the central planners and the exorbitant costs associated with government monopolies are clearly failing our children. Choice is needed, which only a free market can provide.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Let's get this straight: The idea of taking money from taxpayers, running it through Washington bureaucracies, then doling it out to state education departments with strings attached is an efficient use of money? Please.

One of the DOE biggest programs is pre-k education and other early education programs of which for every dollar spent creates 10 dollars in economic benefits

..and would hurt the economy because of cuts to pre-school and other education programs-----
The tremendous increase in tax dollars to government run schools (fed, state and local) sure as hell hasn't resulted in improvement to the economy.

I see so according to you have an educated labor force doesn't help the economy.

Maybe it's time to have competition and choice in the business of education?

Its already been tried and has failed horribly

. More taxpayer dollars isn't the answer; competition is.

Most of Americans failing schools are schools that do not get enough education funding because they are in poor areas.
Here is how you improve Americans education system
1) Governments should mandate that in teachers represent the same ethnicity as their students; because this is shown to increased education outcomes by 13%.
2) Provided all poor children with pre-k education and early education programs; of which created 10 dollars in benefits for every dollar spent
3) Regulate textbook costs and new editions/requirements like UK and Japan does which reutls in books costing 50%
4) Eliminate abstinence sex education, which results in more STD's and teen pregnancies
5) Mandate that school food not contain too much sugar, salt, fat and be hethier which has shown to increased education outcomes by 5% and reduce obesity/sicknesses
6) Government could mandate school uniforms which in Long beach reduced misconduct by 86% and increased attendance by 4%
7) Mandate every school have elementary school students attend a anti-bully program which in Seattle caused bullying to drop by 72%
8) Crack down on for profit colleges that leave students with lots of debt poor job prospects and subpar education
9) Move away from a grade based system to a more comprehensive informative system were learning is elevated instead of getting an A
The real ways to improve education would be to do all of the above.

 

[MeBelle]

Private schools by their nature segregate students by, race, income level, ethnicity, and religion, not a good thing for the country.

Agreed!!

All politicians need to send their children to a public school.
They must walk the talk.

 

[eflatminor]

Let's get this straight: The idea of taking money from taxpayers, running it through Washington bureaucracies, then doling it out to state education departments with strings attached is an efficient use of money? Please.

One of the DOE biggest programs is pre-k education and other early education programs of which for every dollar spent creates 10 dollars in economic benefits

..and would hurt the economy because of cuts to pre-school and other education programs-----
The tremendous increase in tax dollars to government run schools (fed, state and local) sure as hell hasn't resulted in improvement to the economy.

I see so according to you have an educated labor force doesn't help the economy.

Maybe it's time to have competition and choice in the business of education?

Its already been tried and has failed horribly

. More taxpayer dollars isn't the answer; competition is.

Most of Americans failing schools are schools that do not get enough education funding because they are in poor areas.
Here is how you improve Americans education system
1) Governments should mandate that in teachers represent the same ethnicity as their students; because this is shown to increased education outcomes by 13%.
2) Provided all poor children with pre-k education and early education programs; of which created 10 dollars in benefits for every dollar spent
3) Regulate textbook costs and new editions/requirements like UK and Japan does which reutls in books costing 50%
4) Eliminate abstinence sex education, which results in more STD's and teen pregnancies
5) Mandate that school food not contain too much sugar, salt, fat and be hethier which has shown to increased education outcomes by 5% and reduce obesity/sicknesses
6) Government could mandate school uniforms which in Long beach reduced misconduct by 86% and increased attendance by 4%
7) Mandate every school have elementary school students attend a anti-bully program which in Seattle caused bullying to drop by 72%
8) Crack down on for profit colleges that leave students with lots of debt poor job prospects and subpar education
9) Move away from a grade based system to a more comprehensive informative system were learning is elevated instead of getting an A
The real ways to improve education would be to do all of the above.

I disagree with just about everything you've written here. You obviously worship at the alter of the central planners. Good luck with that. Personally, I'll stick with choice, competition and liberty.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Let's get this straight: The idea of taking money from taxpayers, running it through Washington bureaucracies, then doling it out to state education departments with strings attached is an efficient use of money? Please.

One of the DOE biggest programs is pre-k education and other early education programs of which for every dollar spent creates 10 dollars in economic benefits



I see so according to you have an educated labor force doesn't help the economy.


Its already been tried and has failed horribly

. More taxpayer dollars isn't the answer; competition is.

Most of Americans failing schools are schools that do not get enough education funding because they are in poor areas.
Here is how you improve Americans education system
1) Governments should mandate that in teachers represent the same ethnicity as their students; because this is shown to increased education outcomes by 13%.
2) Provided all poor children with pre-k education and early education programs; of which created 10 dollars in benefits for every dollar spent
3) Regulate textbook costs and new editions/requirements like UK and Japan does which reutls in books costing 50%
4) Eliminate abstinence sex education, which results in more STD's and teen pregnancies
5) Mandate that school food not contain too much sugar, salt, fat and be hethier which has shown to increased education outcomes by 5% and reduce obesity/sicknesses
6) Government could mandate school uniforms which in Long beach reduced misconduct by 86% and increased attendance by 4%
7) Mandate every school have elementary school students attend a anti-bully program which in Seattle caused bullying to drop by 72%
8) Crack down on for profit colleges that leave students with lots of debt poor job prospects and subpar education
9) Move away from a grade based system to a more comprehensive informative system were learning is elevated instead of getting an A
The real ways to improve education would be to do all of the above.

I disagree with just about everything you've written here. You obviously worship at the alter of the central planners. Good luck with that. Personally, I'll stick with choice, competition and liberty.

I see so you are against improving the education system. The reason being is that if people are educated that wont be conservatives

 

[rdean]

FCAT tests the performance of region's charter schools vs. public schools
By HEATHER CARNEY
Naples Daily News
Posted April 22, 2012 at 6 p.m.

Lexey Swall/Staff Third grade students work to solve a math problem as their teacher, Melissa Moore, helps the class prepare for the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) at Bonita Springs Charter School on Friday. A report done by the Florida Department of Education shows that students in charter schools tend to score better on the FCAT than students in traditional public schools. Bonita Springs Charter School, an A+ school, is one of the best examples of the study.

There's close competition between local charter and traditional public schools to see which students can perform best on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test as testing wraps up this week.

But statewide, charter school students are pulling ahead, according to an April report by the Florida Department of Education. The report, using 2010-11 FCAT data, determined that students who attend charter schools tend to outscore their traditional public school peers in almost every subject.

Local charter schools don't all mirror that trend. Charter schools like Marco Island Middle and Bonita Springs Charter are consistently high-performing, whereas others like Immokalee Community School lag behind the state average.

FCAT tests the performance of region's charter schools vs. public schools » Naples Daily News

Did you read your entire link? I did. There are a lot of interesting quotes:

However, charter schools can limit enrollment and turn away students if the school doesn't have the services to meet a child's needs. This often pertains to students with severe learning or physical disabilities.

"A traditional public school must educate everybody," Collier chief instructional officer Beth Thompson said.

What they are telling you is they can "pick out" the best students and do.

Bette Heins, education professor at Stetson University in DeLand, said the major determining factor of a student's success is socioeconomic background, not whether the student attends a charter or traditional public school.

And finally:

"Both traditional and charter are performing about the same in most of those categories when you incorporate demographics," Heins said.

----------------------------------------

What they are saying is charter schools get to "cherry pick" the best students but aren't really doing any better.

Now I thought this was the most hilarious part:

They are considered public schools and receive state funding like traditional public schools.

You see? Charter schools are receiving money like any other public school. Only they are run by private companies. And they aren't doing any better? Guess that's another Republican theory that should be put to bed.