I take back my earlier post about Obama getting a clue. He is an idiot.

peilthetraveler

peilthetraveler

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100927/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama

Obama wants longer school years now. Just when I thought he was starting to show signs of intelligence and not be a complete idiot, he opens his mouth and removes all doubt that he is one.

Does he really think kids are not passing classes because they cant get enough study time in? That these kids are reading and writing as fast as they can and they are saying to themselves "If only we had an extra month to learn this..."

No. These kids are not passing because they are just sitting in class & not doing the work. Only an idiot would think that making them sit in class for an extra month would improve that. At least he got the part right about firing bad teachers though. I will still give him credit for that, but maybe I better wait until tommorrow. Who knows what he will say to screw that up.
 
Some school districts were going to 4 day school week (lack of funds). OTH, Obama want to increase the school year = need more funds to unions and a way to justify more funds.

Somewhere in Obama's message, he is opening up negotiations with the unions.
 
Increasing the length of the school year (shortening the summer break) is old news now, older than Obama. I noted this myself long ago, when I first heard of teachers (and parents) pushing for it. And, I thought how sad it would be for kids to lose those long, dreamy summers off.
 
Do any of you really think that obama or the education establishment gives a crap about kids?

It's about money and power, and they know few parents can resist an appeal "for the children."

For the democrats, teachers unions are an essential voting bloc and source of funds and volunteers for both local and national races. What they want in return, they get, no questions asked.

They wanted a federal Education Departement and Jimmy Carter was only too happy to give it to them. Has education improved since? No, but we sure spend a lot more on it, plus we've wrested control away from local school districts, where parents actually cared about and could monitor results, and given it to Washington-based power brokers.

Anyone with any experience knows the key to education results is involved parents. The amount of money spent per pupil has no statistical significance. In fact, there is likely a negative relationship because the most spending tends to occur in urban, unionized, low-performing districts. Calling out parents for their dysfunctional lives is considered bad form and racist, so we spend money instead. Good luck with that.
 
Agreed.

The teachers unions are the most powerful in the country, they get whatever they want from democrats, and if there is to much pushback from a republican, they use our kids in what could only be considered a hostage negotiation.

Its nice watching Christie atleast get somewhere with them, though i think the only reason he is getting anywhere is because they know how silly they will look if they go on strike because they didnt get their 5% raise in this economy.

And what does christie get in return for standing up to them? 6 million in negative adds towards him from the teachers union in 2 months. All for the sake of our children i guess....

Dont know if you saw this video i posted earlier but this was refreshing to watch him slap these thugs around.

<object style="height: 344px; width: 425px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PkuTm-ON904?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PkuTm-ON904?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></object>
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Do any of you really think that obama or the education establishment gives a crap about kids?

It's about money and power, and they know few parents can resist an appeal "for the children."

For the democrats, teachers unions are an essential voting bloc and source of funds and volunteers for both local and national races. What they want in return, they get, no questions asked.

They wanted a federal Education Departement and Jimmy Carter was only too happy to give it to them. Has education improved since? No, but we sure spend a lot more on it, plus we've wrested control away from local school districts, where parents actually cared about and could monitor results, and given it to Washington-based power brokers.

Anyone with any experience knows the key to education results is involved parents. The amount of money spent per pupil has no statistical significance. In fact, there is likely a negative relationship because the most spending tends to occur in urban, unionized, low-performing districts. Calling out parents for their dysfunctional lives is considered bad form and racist, so we spend money instead. Good luck with that.
More...
 
Quote from Hello:

Agreed.

The teachers unions are the most powerful in the country, they get whatever they want from democrats, and if there is to much pushback from a republican, they use our kids in what could only be considered a hostage negotiation.

Its nice watching Christie atleast get somewhere with them, though i think the only reason he is getting anywhere is because they know how silly they will look if they go on strike because they didnt get their 5% raise in this economy.

And what does christie get in return for standing up to them? 6 million in negative adds towards him from the teachers union in 2 months. All for the sake of our children i guess....

Dont know if you saw this video i posted earlier but this was refreshing to watch him slap these thugs around.
More...

Again, that is a great video clip. But let's keep it in context. Overall, labor, and that includes unions' rank and file, has been in retreat for nearly 30 years.
 
Lets be honest, this is about getting free daycare and 2 free meals (breakfast and lunch) year round for his voting base.
 
Quote from achilles28:

Privatize education with a public voucher funded by the State, and education would be a lot better off.
More...

"Existing research supporting the relationship between student achievement and vouchers is extremely problematic. Research on privately financed voucher programs shows no consistent pattern of improvement in achievement across subject, grade, and the length of time. In a comprehensive study of a large-scale private school voucher program in New York City during the 1990s, the leading think-tank Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. found an at-best weak relationship between vouchers and improved school performance for students receiving vouchers. "On standardized tests," Mathematica found, "students offered a scholarship generally performed at about the same level as students in the [non-voucher] control group."

"Research on publicly financed voucher programs is also problematic. The official research team designated by the Wisconsin state legislature to analyze the Milwaukee voucher program concluded that voucher students performed no differently on standardized tests than Milwaukee Public School students. Students who received vouchers did no better than those who applied but didn't receive them. Research on the Cleveland voucher program finds that there may have been improvements in science and language, but there was no improvement in other subject areas.

"The non-partisan federal Government Accountability Office (GAO) concluded recently that research on the academic benefits of public voucher programs is inconclusive. "None of the findings" made so far by academic researchers, the GAO concluded, "can be considered definitive."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top