O'Reilly gives a spot on assessment of the Ferguson situation.

[Lucrum]

...The sad fact is there is zero correlation between funding and outcomes, as desperately as liberals like to pretend there is. There is a strong correlation between family respect for education and outcomes...

Absolutely correct

 

[dbphoenix]

Schools are typically funded county by county, with state and federal aid larded on top of that. Poor black areas do not have the same funding base. At the same time, local control and funding of schools is a fundamental value that most people support. Better off whites are willing to accept higher property taxes to fund their local schools. They aren't so willing to see that money flushed down the toilet in a district like Ferguson where the culture regards education as "acting white."

I suspect DB's stats ignore state and federal funding, which disproportionately flows to poorer districts.

The sad fact is there is zero correlation between funding and outcomes, as desperately as liberals like to pretend there is. There is a strong correlation between family respect for education and outcomes. I would argue there is also a negative correlation between the amount of slack given troublemakers in schools and outcomes. In typical liberal fashion though, the administration is pushing schools to tolerate more and more abusive and disruptive behavior under the guise of civil rights. Liberals will always opt for coddling a minority even if it means ruining the chance for a decent education for every other kid in the class.

Gee, no prejudices there.

 

[fhl]

Most of us have seen those sample questions from eighth or ninth grade tests from the early part of the twentieth century. Very difficult questions in my view.

All they had back then was a teacher and a desk and a few books.

That's all you need. The rest is a complete waste and it's nothing more than a fraud to funnel money to teachers and administrators.

The public sector used to make less money in return for security. Now they make more and still have more security.

 

[dbphoenix]

Most of us have seen those sample questions from eighth or ninth grade tests from the early part of the twentieth century. Very difficult questions in my view.

All they had back then was a teacher and a desk and a few books.

That's all you need.

Yeah. And they were expected to stay only up through the fifth grade. After all, the kids worked either on the farm on in factories. How much education do you need for that?

 

[fhl]

Yeah. And they were expected to stay only up through the fifth grade. After all, the kids worked either on the farm on in factories. How much education do you need for that?

Enough to pass the, as I said, exceedingly difficult question on the tests, i guess.

 

[dbphoenix]

Enough to pass the, as I said, exceedingly difficult question on the tests, i guess.

Not if it didn't matter whether one passed the test or not.

 

[dbphoenix]

Recommended reading . . .

Hardcover – January 1, 1974
by Otto Bettmann 71 customer reviews

This book explains why the "good old days" were only good for a privileged few and why they were unrelentingly hard for most. Sobering, actually. Check it out.

 

[jem]

except for the commies and cronies... times were far better after Reagan's policies were introduced for the next 25 years.

 

[DHOHHI]

You were pretty much stomped on in the other thread by DHOHHI when it came to the argument about funding at schools. Bringing the point back up in another thread doesn't give it more truth.

He doesn't get it at all ... there may be occasional school districts where funding is not perfect but to be redundant .... District Superintendents are graded and evaluated on how ALL students in their districts perform. And school boards, who evaluate the Superintendent, love to see schools that excel and ace state wide tests. Yes, those schools tend to be in middle and middle upper class areas. And WHY is that? Hmmmm, maybe because their is a much higher percentage of 2 parent households, the parents tend to be well educated and hold well paying jobs, want their own children to excel, help them with homework from day one and set rules in the household. Kids at schools that are failing are different ... parents tend to be less educated, employed in low paying jobs (if employed at all), rarely have 2 parents in the home, and much less discipline due to the prior point, often don't help their kids with school work either because they don't care, don't make the time or can't even do the work themselves. This is NOT my opinion, rather my experiences. So once again Douche Bag shoots from the hip with no real world experience. Back to the school boards ... they put pressure on the district to get the underperforming schools test scores up to a minimum of 'Fair' or some equivalent. To do that they allocate more resources to said schools. Only so much $$$ in a district, without raising taxes, so when the failing schools need more $$$ some other schools give money up. And even with all the extra resources many students continue to fail, mainly due to the factors I cited above. And you can't blame the middle (or upper class) on these outcomes. People CHOOSE to bring kids into the world. If you don't have the financial resources, an adequate homelife, and the ongoing support to truly raise a child then don't have one.

 

[DHOHHI]

Except that it's actual data and not just the unsubstantiated opinion of one volunteer in one school.

Anyone can find an obscure article to post a link here. Heck anyone can blog, post on Salon, Huffington Post or any other number of liberal sites crying for equality ... sad FACT is that 99% of the time these people have no credibility. Just as you have none. Difference between you and I in education is that "I do" and you sit on your ass and post drivel. I've forgotten more about failing schools than your sorry ass will even know.