UT opinion article on SB 1021 and Prop 30

User Forum Topic
Submitted by Coronita on April 3, 2014 - 11:03pm

Haven't done enough research on it...Real or memorex?

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/apr/...

A common refrain in California is that it’s awfully difficult to raise taxes because of Proposition 13 and other laws. But the reality is these obstacles have often been overcome. That’s why we have among the nation’s highest income, sales and gasoline taxes.

Because of Proposition 13’s limits on how much assessments can increase from year to year, California is in the middle of the pack nationally when it comes to property taxes. But now state Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis, is backing SB 1021, which would change the rules under which school districts can impose higher parcel taxes if two-thirds of local voters give their approval. Because of a dubious legal finding, the measure only requires majority approval by the Legislature, not the two-thirds approval required for many tax measures.

The key to the complex bill is that it would allow parcel tax rates to vary by category and size of property, instead of being standardized — long the California norm. The measure gives school bureaucrats some discretionary authority to determine how parcels are categorized and thus what their taxes would be; for example, adjacent properties owned by the same party could be grouped in the same category even if one is developed and one isn’t. This is a recipe for chaos.

SB 1021 is also an invitation to discriminatory treatment, in which those without property vote to sock it to certain types of landowners. But as bad as this legislation appears, it looks even worse when one considers the larger picture of taxes and the warped traditions that govern California’s schools.

Remember, it was less than two years ago that state voters were persuaded to impose higher sales taxes on everyone and higher income taxes on the wealthy with the promise that additional revenue would go to beef up school programs.

Instead, as critics predicted, revenue generated by Proposition 30 appears to have gone mostly toward compensation for teachers, whose unions are the most powerful forces in state politics.

Now these unions are lining up behind another revenue grab — one that will be marketed with the same assurances that “it’s all about the kids.”

Don’t believe it. The way school districts operate in California all but guarantees the money will go to employee compensation. Teachers typically get raises in 15 of their first 20 years on the job simply by showing up. They can also spike their pay by doing additional academic courses — and the classes don’t even have to be in the field they teach. There is no evidence of any substance that this makes them better teachers, but their pay goes up anyway.

Meanwhile, a 1971 state law requiring that student performance be a factor in evaluations of teachers — and thus implicitly a factor in how much they are paid — is simply ignored.

This status quo benefits teachers — not the public, and certainly not students. Until it is reformed, new taxes should not be added to funnel more money to schools — whether they’re bureaucratic nightmares like Sen. Wolk’s parcel tax or much simpler proposals.

Submitted by CA renter on April 3, 2014 - 11:47pm.

When they say money should go "to the classrooms," exactly what do they think they are advocating for? More of the iPad debacle? Additional changes to the curriculum (VERY expensive, with no proof that there are any benefits at all)?

If they want smaller class sizes, which I think is a good idea, that results in more teachers. Naturally, payroll goes up as a result. Do they want to blame the unions for that, too?

As for the step increases, where pay goes up by a very small amount based on number of years of service, they need that to keep experienced teachers in the classroom. There is no way for teachers to move up unless they leave the classroom, so step increases are used to try to keep experienced teachers where they are needed -- in the classroom. The teaching profession already has one of the highest attrition rates around, so they have to do whatever they can to keep people from leaving.

Sorry, but the UT has no credibility, whatsoever, where public service and public funding is concerned. Doug Manchester has been one of the biggest recipients of govt largesse. His agenda is to destroy unions so that there is more money left for him and his cronies.

Here is just one of the latest in a long list of transactions where Doug Manchester has benefited at the expense of taxpayers. And I can assure you that he as taken far more from taxpayer than any teacher, firefighter, or cop ever has.

He's one of the big movers in the privatization movement -- those who are NOT taxpayer advocates, but want to create a society where the govt contracts with private corporations that pay their employees peanuts while the well-connected "owners" skim million (or billions) from these often very obscure deals.

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

According to documents posted online by the state, the California School Finance Authority board will meet this morning at 11 to vote on a loan "not to exceed $37 million" to an entity called Partnership with Parents, LLC, controlled by Classical Academy, Inc., and the associated Classical Academy High Schools, Inc.

The cash would be raised by issuing debt in the form of so-called Charter School Revenue Bonds, both taxable and tax exempt, according to an agency staff report accompanying today's item. Underwriter RBC Capital Markets LLC would sell the bonds, expected to be rated BB+, in a limited public offering, the report says.

The estimated $2.28 million annual payment for the life of the bonds, maturing in 2043, would come from a combination of public funds, including "block grant and categorical block grant apportionments," and "a pledge of the gross revenues of the Schools."

According to financial information included in the report, in 2012 the Classical Academy, Inc. and Classical Academy High School, Inc. operation got more than $5 million in state appropriation, $2.75 million "in lieu of property taxes," along with federal revenue of $181,157, other state revenue of $888,786, and local revenue of $469,118.

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/weblogs/ne...

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 12:02am.

And "Mr. Anti-Tax" has no problem promoting large military expenditures, especially when it involves the development of military installations and related public "investments." He also has no problem forcing taxpayers to pay for new stadiums, hotels, and other infrastructure, whether or not the local people want it or can afford to pay for it.

After Mr. Manchester bought the newspaper last November, he brought in Mr. Lynch, a radio executive who, like Mr. Manchester, believed that a new stadium for the Chargers was crucial to the city’s future. In an interview soon after the purchase, Mr. Lynch told Mr. Davis the sports pages should advocate for a new stadium and “call out those who don’t as obstructionists.”

A longtime sports columnist, Tim Sullivan, was skeptical. He noted that the previous stadium deal had not worked out well for the city and wrote that if a new stadium was to be erected, due caution was required.

A week ago Friday, he was brought in to the editor’s office and fired. A huge uproar ensued, with posts on Facebook and Twitter and many calls of protest to the newspaper. Mr. Sullivan has since entered negotiations over his departure and would not discuss the specifics of his firing. But in the days after he was let go, he did comment to a local blog on what he believed was behind his dismissal.

“Mr. Lynch appears to be of a mind to make the stadium happen and bulldoze the opposition or even those who raise questions,” Mr. Sullivan told the Sherman Report, a sports media blog...

...The reporters and others have pointed to the frantic level of promotion for various political candidates as over-the-top and damaging to the paper’s credibility. For instance, The U-T presented a wraparound of a sample ballot for the conservative, pro-development candidates it endorsed on the Sunday before the election and again last Tuesday, the day of the election. On Monday, there was a front-page editorial in support of Carl DeMaio, the candidate for mayor that Mr. Manchester supports.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/11/busine...

-----------

Lynch, a former radio station owner with a linebacker’s build at age 65, speaks bluntly. He recently wrote to Scott Peters, a Port of San Diego commissioner and Democratic nominee for Congress, demanding to know his position on a shipping contract to unload bananas that could complicate the publisher’s plans for the downtown waterfront redevelopment. He wanted an exit clause.

“Otherwise this will become a major issue in the campaigns and the UT will be forced to lead a campaign to disband the PORT,” he wrote.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/10/...

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 12:06am.

CAR, first, Doug Manchester didn't write that. But even if he did, do you think that would be any different than your opposition?

iPad debacle is as bad as the teachers in the rubber room. The iPad debacle is prime example of why giving more money to public school is not the answer. The answer is very simple, I can say it in one word: "voucher". It's not that complicated.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 12:10am.

But let's get back to the nuts-and-bolts of the issue. The #1 expense in education is teacher compensation. (DUH!!!!)

If you want to reduce class sizes, increase the availability of classes at the secondary level and at junior colleges, etc., then the obvious result is higher teacher compensation because they ONLY way to do that is to increase the number of teachers. That's where the Prop 30 money has gone, and that's where voters/taxpayers wanted it to go. Again, DUH!

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 12:14am.

CA renter wrote:
But let's get back to the nuts-and-bolts of the issue. The #1 expense in education is teacher compensation. (DUH!!!!)

If you want to reduce class sizes, increase the availability of classes at the secondary level and at junior colleges, etc., then the obvious result is higher teacher compensation because they ONLY way to do that is to increase the number of teachers. Again, DUH!


I thought the administrative cost is pretty high up there too?

FYI, no one say teachers should get paid less. I think great teachers should get paid a lot more while bad teachers should be fired quickly. It's really not that complicated. Just look at every other private organization for example. The status quo is... bad teachers will get paid just as much as good teachers. Sometimes, a lot more if the good teachers are young and the bad teachers are old. That's is as ass backward as it gets.

Submitted by paramount on April 4, 2014 - 12:14am.

Part of the solution is school choice/vouchers.

The article mentions how voters are persuaded to vote for taxes.

In California, think about the % of voters who are welfare queens or directly dependent on the govt - basically Obama voters.

As a group they will always vote for more benefits for themselves, and I believe this group far outnumbers true tax payers.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 12:17am.

Here's the salary table for SD Unified's teachers. Under no circumstances are teachers overpaid.

http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/...

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 12:22am.

AN wrote:

I thought the administrative cost is pretty high up there too?

FYI, no one say teachers should get paid less. I think great teachers should get paid a lot more while bad teachers should be fired quickly. It's really not that complicated. Just look at every other private organization for example. The status quo is... bad teachers will get paid just as much as good teachers. Sometimes, a lot more if the good teachers are young and the bad teachers are old. That's is as ass backward as it gets.

Administrative costs can be high, but they're nowhere near as high as teachers' salaries because there are so many more teachers than administrators in most districts.

And the notion that there are a bunch of "bad" teachers out there is BS. I've worked in four different schools and can easily count on one hand the total number of "bad" teachers I've seen. Most of the time, a "bad" teacher is labeled that way because they are willing to stand up to parents and administrators instead of eagerly following the newest trends and fads in education (which, BTW, happen to cost taxpayers a tremendous amount of money).

A teacher who's spent 20 or 30 years in a classroom absolutely knows more about teaching and education that some yuppie know-it-all mother with ZERO teaching experience or education, or the 23 year-old who's spent one or two years in the classroom before pursuing administrative positions.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 12:34am.

CA renter wrote:
Here's the salary table for SD Unified's teachers. Under no circumstances are teachers overpaid.

http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/94/salaryschedules/teachers.pdf


Under no circumstances? Really? I can name a few teachers I had who shouldn't be teaching at all, much less getting paid to teach. Not to mention other people I know and their stories about bad teachers. My cousin who had a teacher who told her she'll amount to nothing. Now, she's a Standford grad. My wife had a teacher who gave her a B on a paper and when she came to talk to her about why she got the B, the teacher told her that she doesn't always get an A. No other reason except that. I had one teacher who basically talked to the board the minute class start till the last minute class ends. No one pays attention in class, yet it was super easy to get an A. I can go on, but you get the idea.

Then there are great teachers who inspired us to be great. Those teachers should be paid a lot more than they're currently being paid.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 12:38am.

CA renter wrote:
And the notion that there are a bunch of "bad" teachers out there is BS. I've worked in four different schools and can easily count on one hand the total number of "bad" teachers I've seen. Most of the time, a "bad" teacher is labeled that way because they are willing to stand up to parents and administrators instead of eagerly following the newest trends and fads in education (which, BTW, happen to cost taxpayers a tremendous amount of money).

A teacher who's spent 20 or 30 years in a classroom absolutely knows more about teaching and education that some yuppie know-it-all mother with ZERO teaching experience or education, or the 23 year-old who's spent one or two years in the classroom before pursuing administrative positions.

Totally and utterly BS. Some of the teachers I stated are quite old (50+), which means they're at least 10-20+ years of experience. As a student, you know who are the good and the bad teachers. It's not that hard. The good teachers are those who inspired. The bad teachers are the ones who don't care or plain old mean or even worse.

BTW, how many years have you been a teacher?

Also, since you say "Mr. Anti-Tax" have no credibility in tax mater because he pushes privatization, do you think all teachers who are part of a union have no credibility when it comes to teachers union mater?

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 12:56am.

CA renter wrote:
If you want to reduce class sizes, increase the availability of classes at the secondary level and at junior colleges, etc., then the obvious result is higher teacher compensation because they ONLY way to do that is to increase the number of teachers. That's where the Prop 30 money has gone, and that's where voters/taxpayers wanted it to go. Again, DUH!
Think outside the box for just 1 little second and maybe you'll have an aha moment. To reduce class size, offer a voucher system. There are many private school have a much smaller class size than public school AND charges the parents less than what public school are spending per student. Also, keep in mind these private school do not have the advantage of scale that public school have when it comes to administrative cost and supply cost.

Currently, SDUSD is spending $9,846 per student. A good (not elite) private school cost about $9-10k. With this cost, the class size range for 10-1 to 20-1 teachers to student ratio. This is from K-12 we're talking about here. So, yeah, if it's about class size, offer a $9846 yearly voucher to parents and their kids can have class size between 10-20 per teacher depending on grade. Sounds like an easy win IMHO.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:29am.

AN wrote:
CA renter wrote:
Here's the salary table for SD Unified's teachers. Under no circumstances are teachers overpaid.

http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/94/salaryschedules/teachers.pdf


Under no circumstances? Really? I can name a few teachers I had who shouldn't be teaching at all, much less getting paid to teach. Not to mention other people I know and their stories about bad teachers. My cousin who had a teacher who told her she'll amount to nothing. Now, she's a Standford grad. My wife had a teacher who gave her a B on a paper and when she came to talk to her about why she got the B, the teacher told her that she doesn't always get an A. No other reason except that. I had one teacher who basically talked to the board the minute class start till the last minute class ends. No one pays attention in class, yet it was super easy to get an A. I can go on, but you get the idea.

Then there are great teachers who inspired us to be great. Those teachers should be paid a lot more than they're currently being paid.

While these teachers might not have inspired you, it doesn't mean that they didn't inspire other students. I've signed up for teachers that other students said were great, but they did nothing for me, and vice versa. Personally, as a student, I do very well with teachers who "teach to the board," and don't do as well with teachers who are more "crafty and creative." I like very organized, disciplined teachers, too. I always did best with the "hard" teachers, as well. But that's just me. Some students can't stand that style.

I agree that some teachers are truly exceptional while others are truly bad. Both extremes, especially at the far ends of the spectrum, are rare. Most teachers are quite good.

People need to separate teaching and personality styles from what is "good" and "bad." It's all a matter of perspective, IMO.

And no, I was not an older teacher when I left the profession. It's just that I've seen things from the inside and know how many people tend to cling to fads which make them think that those who don't follow the fads are somehow "bad" teachers.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:18am.

AN wrote:
CA renter wrote:
If you want to reduce class sizes, increase the availability of classes at the secondary level and at junior colleges, etc., then the obvious result is higher teacher compensation because they ONLY way to do that is to increase the number of teachers. That's where the Prop 30 money has gone, and that's where voters/taxpayers wanted it to go. Again, DUH!
Think outside the box for just 1 little second and maybe you'll have an aha moment. To reduce class size, offer a voucher system. There are many private school have a much smaller class size than public school AND charges the parents less than what public school are spending per student. Also, keep in mind these private school do not have the advantage of scale that public school have when it comes to administrative cost and supply cost.

Currently, SDUSD is spending $9,846 per student. A good (not elite) private school cost about $9-10k. With this cost, the class size range for 10-1 to 20-1 teachers to student ratio. This is from K-12 we're talking about here. So, yeah, if it's about class size, offer a $9846 yearly voucher to parents and their kids can have class size between 10-20 per teacher depending on grade. Sounds like an easy win IMHO.

We've already discussed vouchers, charter schools, and school choice issues here:

http://piggington.com/ot_how_one_school_...

...and here:

http://piggington.com/ot_the_radical_gay...

...and here:

http://piggington.com/44_annual_salary_i...

Probably more threads out there, but I'm too tired to search for them all right now.

Basically, we'll have to agree to disagree. Public schools have the best track record for student outcomes at the lowest cost when taking into consideration the students' SES and demographic backgrounds. Many studies show this while I have yet to see a study showing that vouchers or private charters perform better than public schools *given the same student populations.*

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:26am.

AN wrote:
CA renter wrote:
And the notion that there are a bunch of "bad" teachers out there is BS. I've worked in four different schools and can easily count on one hand the total number of "bad" teachers I've seen. Most of the time, a "bad" teacher is labeled that way because they are willing to stand up to parents and administrators instead of eagerly following the newest trends and fads in education (which, BTW, happen to cost taxpayers a tremendous amount of money).

A teacher who's spent 20 or 30 years in a classroom absolutely knows more about teaching and education that some yuppie know-it-all mother with ZERO teaching experience or education, or the 23 year-old who's spent one or two years in the classroom before pursuing administrative positions.

Totally and utterly BS. Some of the teachers I stated are quite old (50+), which means they're at least 10-20+ years of experience. As a student, you know who are the good and the bad teachers. It's not that hard. The good teachers are those who inspired. The bad teachers are the ones who don't care or plain old mean or even worse.

BTW, how many years have you been a teacher?

Also, since you say "Mr. Anti-Tax" have no credibility in tax mater because he pushes privatization, do you think all teachers who are part of a union have no credibility when it comes to teachers union mater?

Teachers know far more about education than Doug Manchester does. Additionally, they aren't trying to fool the masses, like Manchester does, by using the "taxpayer advocate" label while trying to push their agenda. I can assure you that most citizens benefit far more from the teachers' unions than they do from Doug Manchester's actions.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:27am.

AN wrote:
My cousin who had a teacher who told her she'll amount to nothing. Now, she's a Standford grad. My wife had a teacher who gave her a B on a paper and when she came to talk to her about why she got the B, the teacher told her that she doesn't always get an A. No other reason except that.

Your cousin remembers that story, too. Not justifying it (not at all), but many people will point to a situation where someone telling them that they couldn't do something was what pushed them to perform. Perhaps her teacher telling her this pushed her to do better.

Maybe your wife's teacher was trying to push your wife even further because that teacher saw that your wife was just lucky, intellectually, and was skating because of her natural intelligence...and wanted her to work harder and reach for more (again, NOT justifying it!).

It wouldn't be the first time a naysayer pushed someone to go beyond what they would have done without this experience.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:30am.

CA renter wrote:
While these teachers might not have inspired you, it doesn't mean that they didn't inspire other students. I've signed up for teachers that other students said were great, but they did nothing for me, and vice versa. Personally, as a student, I do very well with teachers who "teach to the board," and don't do as well with teachers who are more "crafty and creative." I like very organized, disciplined teachers, too. But that's just me. Some students can't stand that style.

I agree that some teachers are truly exceptional while others are truly bad. Both extremes, especially at the far ends of the spectrum, are rare. Most teachers are quite good.

People need to separate teaching and personality styles from what is "good" and "bad." It's all a matter of perspective, IMO.

And no, I was not an older teacher when I left the profession. It's just that I've seen things from the inside and know how many people tend to cling to fads which make them think that those who don't follow the fads are somehow "bad" teachers.

It wasn't just me. All the students knows it was an easy A but you won't learn much. It was AP Chem, so the student body wasn't your average. He taught both AP Chem class. Out of 60+ students, only 11 dare to take the AP test. None past. That kinda give you a glimpse at the quality of the teacher.

I wasn't referred to fad. I'm talking about truly bad teachers. Teachers who told their 2nd grade student that they'll amount to nothing, so they should just stop trying. That, is what I call a bad teacher. I'm sure you're aware of something called a bell curve. With that said, most teachers in the middle of the bell curve are average. The quite good are on the one end and the quite bad are on the other.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:33am.

I know about the bell curve, but would argue that most teachers are quite good. The average (and most below-average) ones are those who tend to leave the profession early on. It's a VERY tough gig.

Also, teachers are under a lot of scrutiny the first few years, so the administrators tend to weed them out before they're tenured.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:32am.

CA renter wrote:
Basically, we'll have to agree to disagree. Public schools have the best track record for student outcomes at the lowest cost when taking into consideration the students' SES and demographic backgrounds. Many studies show this while I have yet to see a study showing that vouchers or private charters perform better than public schools *given the same student populations.*
There's no way to prove this one way or the other, unless you actually have it happen, since no other country have our student population. So, your "study" doesn't exist.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:34am.

Read the links from the above posts. We've already done this before.

I'm referring to the same student populations (SES/demographic backgrounds) from within this country.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:37am.

CA renter wrote:
Your cousin remembers that story, too. Not justifying it (not at all), but many people will point to a situation where someone telling them that they couldn't do something was what pushed them to perform. Perhaps her teacher telling her this pushed her to do better.

Maybe your wife's teacher was trying to push your wife even further because that teacher saw that your wife was just lucky, intellectually, and was skating because of her natural intelligence...and wanted her to work harder and reach for more (again, NOT justifying it!).

It wouldn't be the first time a naysayer pushed someone to go beyond what they would have done without this experience.

Both are completely wrong assumptions. If your definition of a quite good teacher is one who tell an elementary kid they'll amount to nothing, then we'll just have to agree to disagree, because your definition of quite good is quite lacking.

As for my wife, that same teacher recently went through a divorce and most of the time in class, all she did was show movies. A separate but similar incident, she told my wife that "not everyone will like you", as if that has anything to do with her grades.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:39am.

And this one's for paramount because he keeps (wrongly) insisting that Prop 30 hasn't helped kids in the classroom.

CA renter wrote:
AN wrote:
We're paying on par w/ some of the private school (excluding the elite LJCD, Bishops, etc). Those schools have class size that's 1/2 of what the public school kids have to deal with. Why?

For one thing, Prop 30 has enabled many schools to bring back class size reduction.

http://www.dailynews.com/social-affairs/...

-------

In San Diego, the union has been pushing for class size reduction, but the school board is fighting it. Not sure about the latest news, as this is a few months old.

The resolution was a deeply inadequate response to SDEA’s action at the Oct. 1 Board meeting, where roughly 150 union members packed the room to deliver a petition signed by nearly 2,000 members. The petition called on the Board to protect $20 million in state funding by immediately returning K-3 class size to 24:1. The state budget requires SDUSD to work towards a 24:1 K-3 student-to-teacher ratio. But Superintendent Cindy Marten and the School Board are moving in the opposite direction by increasing K-3 class size. Increasing K-3 class size could result in a loss of $20 million in state funding – and that’s bad for all students!

http://www.sdea.net/2013/10/district-dou...

-------

But many districts have already lowered class sizes, so private schools don't have half the number of students (in many cases, class size is comparable).

Why did we lose class size reduction? Because the financial crisis hit all public agencies extremely hard. It's pretty difficult to maintain services at a certain level when have record drops in revenue while demand for public services and welfare programs skyrocket.

The budget gaps result principally from weak tax collections. The Great Recession that started in 2007 caused the largest collapse in state revenues on record. Since bottoming out in 2010, revenues have begun to grow again but are still far from fully recovered. As of the first quarter of 2012, state revenues remained 5.5 percent below pre-recession levels, and are not growing fast enough to recover fully soon.

Meanwhile, states’ education and health care obligations continue to grow. States expect to educate 540,000 more K-12 students and 2.5 million more public college and university students in the upcoming school year than in 2007-08.[1] And some 4.8 million more people are projected to be eligible for subsidized health insurance through Medicaid in 2012 than were enrolled in 2008, as employers have cancelled their coverage and people have lost jobs and wages.[2]

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=711

http://piggington.com/ot_how_one_school_...

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:40am.

CA renter wrote:
Teachers know far more about education than Doug Manchester does. Additionally, they aren't trying to fool the masses, like Manchester does, by using the "taxpayer advocate" label while trying to push their agenda. I can assure you that most citizens benefit far more from the teachers' unions than they do from Doug Manchester's actions.
I've never heard any teacher who are part of the teacher's union say any critical about the teacher's union. That's as bias as it comes.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:47am.

CA renter wrote:
Read the links from the above posts. We've already done this before.

I'm referring to the same student populations (SES/demographic backgrounds) from within this country.

Then how do you explain Preuss School UCSD? Yes we've talked about this many times before. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. FYI, you can't state public school is the best and cheapest when it's absolutely not true. When I see private school have 12-1 teacher to student ratio while public school have 24-1 or 30-1, how can you even say with a straight face that public school is the cheapest.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:45am.

AN wrote:
CA renter wrote:
Your cousin remembers that story, too. Not justifying it (not at all), but many people will point to a situation where someone telling them that they couldn't do something was what pushed them to perform. Perhaps her teacher telling her this pushed her to do better.

Maybe your wife's teacher was trying to push your wife even further because that teacher saw that your wife was just lucky, intellectually, and was skating because of her natural intelligence...and wanted her to work harder and reach for more (again, NOT justifying it!).

It wouldn't be the first time a naysayer pushed someone to go beyond what they would have done without this experience.

Both are completely wrong assumptions. If your definition of a quite good teacher is one who tell an elementary kid they'll amount to nothing, then we'll just have to agree to disagree, because your definition of quite good is quite lacking.

As for my wife, that same teacher recently went through a divorce and most of the time in class, all she did was show movies. A separate but similar incident, she told my wife that "not everyone will like you", as if that has anything to do with her grades.

Neither one of us knows about the particular circumstances, nor do we know what prompted the teachers to say these things. Again, I'm not justifying it and have never said these types of things to either my students or my own kids (unfortunately, many parents do). But we need to know the context in order to ascertain what was going on at that given moment with the teacher and your wife.

FWIW, some movies are incredibly educational and can explain certain concepts in a way that a teacher never can. These movies often incorporate technology and can utilize some of the world's most knowledgeable speakers who can present the information in a truly unique and relevant way. Again, not saying kids should just sit and watch movies, but you and I don't know what was going on in that classroom. (And I've shown perhaps one movie/year in my classroom, if that.)

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:48am.

AN wrote:
CA renter wrote:
Teachers know far more about education than Doug Manchester does. Additionally, they aren't trying to fool the masses, like Manchester does, by using the "taxpayer advocate" label while trying to push their agenda. I can assure you that most citizens benefit far more from the teachers' unions than they do from Doug Manchester's actions.
I've never heard any teacher who are part of the teacher's union say any critical about the teacher's union. That's as bias as it comes.

While they might not criticize the union, per se , they DO criticize certain teachers and the possible union protection they might get when they don't deserve it.

I've known a couple of teachers who were anti-union, but they are few and far between because the union is the only thing protecting teachers from some very dangerous, power-hungry, and domineering administrators and parents.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:48am.

CA renter wrote:
While they might not criticize the union, per se, they DO criticize certain teachers and the possible union protection they might get when they don't deserve it.
They why don't they do something about it? Talk is cheap.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:49am.

CA renter wrote:
I've known a couple of teachers who were anti-union, but they are few and far between because the union is the only thing protecting teachers from some very dangerous, power-hungry, and domineering administrators and parents.
It's called life.

Submitted by CA renter on April 4, 2014 - 1:53am.

AN wrote:
CA renter wrote:
Read the links from the above posts. We've already done this before.

I'm referring to the same student populations (SES/demographic backgrounds) from within this country.

Then how do you explain Preuss School UCSD? Yes we've talked about this many times before. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. FYI, you can't state public school is the best and cheapest when it's absolutely not true. When I see private school have 12-1 teacher to student ratio while public school have 24-1 or 30-1, how can you even say with a straight face that public school is the cheapest.

Already done that one, too! ;)

CA renter wrote:
Regarding Preuss, it's the third requirement that explains why they do well. The first two simply mean that they accept the **highest performing students with the most dedicated parents** from low-income families where the parents don't have college degrees. The students need a teacher's recommendation from their previous school, and, "student applicants must demonstrate high motivation and potential to attend an academically competitive university or college," which most likely means they have a better-than-average I.Q.

You cannot compare Preuss with a typical public school in a low-income neighborhood. They are not even close. Preuss enjoys the benefits of having VERY wealthy, private donors, in addition to the typical funds given to public or charter schools. They also have use of the UCSD campus and many of the university's ammenities (there's a cost component there), and UCSD students who provide FREE tutoring to these students -- we use tutors for our kids, and I can assure you, it is EXTREMELY expensive. They have top-of-the-line classrooms, technology, sports facilities/equipment, and materials. Do you have any idea what all of that costs? I can assure you, their program costs more than twice what the typical public school costs.

As I've mentioned before, you have to consider ALL sources of income when comparing what schools spend on students. With traditional public schools, most of those income sources and costs are public information; there is very little private money, compared to what private (or special charter) schools get. Read the bottom of the piece linked here, to see how much things cost, and how they are trying to get PRIVATE funding to provide these things. It's nice when you're a high-profile component of a very wealthy community, with nice, wealthy people who want to "do good" in their communities. How many rich people are willing to consistently donate millions of dollars to support a single school in the gang-infested parts of the inner city?

Here is a small sampling of what Preuss offers (regular public schools can't even begin to offer all of this, or the state would have been broke decades ago):

The Tutoring Program
To give its students extra academic help with its challenging curriculum, the Preuss School also conducts a tutoring program in partnership with the University. The program employs two different groups of tutors. One is enrolled in a class through UCSD's Teacher Education Program; the class awards credit for a certain number of hours of tutoring per month. The other is made up of UCSD student volunteers from Thurgood Marshall College. Through these avenues, the Preuss School typically has 150-200 tutors available to help assist students at any given time.
Counseling Program
The Preuss School's counseling staff plays a central role in the school, seeing to it that those students who are lagging behind get academic help as soon as possible and providing guidance in the college selection and application process. Students living in poverty often confront many difficult issues that call for support beyond regular school counseling, however. To help them, UCSD professor Peter Gourevitch established an endowed fund in memory of his late wife, Lisa Hirschman, a teacher and psychologist. The Hirschman Fund enables two psychotherapists and an intern to work with Preuss School students, providing them with the psychosocial services they need to overcome the problems they face.

Mutual Benefits
The benefits of the relationship between the school and UCSD are extensive and reciprocal. For example, University students volunteer at the Preuss School as tutors and mentors, and many have found the experience so rewarding that they are now considering careers in teaching. Preuss School students do internships on campus with UCSD faculty to gain experience in fields that interest them and also interact with professors when they are researching senior papers. At the same time, UCSD mathematics faculty have been turning to the school to help determine how students best learn the subject, and social sciences faculty have been examining the academic performance of Preuss School students compared with that of peers who were not selected by the lottery. Preuss School teachers have received training at the University, and students in UCSD's teacher education program observe classes at the school. UCSD undergraduates serve as tutors for students and interns for teachers. Engineering faculty help with the school's robotics teams.

Shared Resources
Access to such outstanding University resources as its library, athletic fields and San Diego Supercomputer Center translates into unprecedented opportunities for students and teachers. As one example, in 2003, the school dedicated a visualization center that will provide a virtual reality gateway to the world, eventually enabling students to interact in real time with images stored thousands of miles away, such as a fly-over of the surface of Mars and navigating deep inside a human cell. The center, part of the National Science Foundation's OptiPuter project, has brought together the San Diego Supercomputer Center, the California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technology (a partnership between UCSD and UCI) and the Visualization Center at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Connected to a high-performance network, it will permit students to work collaboratively with University faculty and graduate students on research projects.

http://www.sarahlifton.com/pdf/case_stat...
-----------------------------

From that same link, some possible evidence that "old, tenured teachers" are NOT the problem:

Master Teachers/Teacher Supplements
While the teachers at the Preuss School are dedicated, enthusiastic and innovative, a high percentage are comparatively new to the field. The school's limited funds for personnel have hampered its ability to attract more experienced teachers, who command higher salaries. As a consequence, the younger teachers on the faculty, who could benefit from mentoring by the most experienced, highest-caliber teachers, lack access to this important resource for career development.

To address this need, one of the Preuss School's highest priorities is to generate private support for teacher salary supplements and/or hiring bonuses in order to add more veteran teachers to the faculty. Specifically, the school is seeking funds to hire teacher leaders in all the core subject areas, including a literacy chair, who will be responsible for mentoring other teachers in the area of literacy.
In addition, the school is seeking contributions to implement a formal resident scholar program, providing release time for UCSD professors to work with the Preuss School faculty in their subject areas to ensure that curriculum and content are state of the art and preparing students properly for college.

http://piggington.com/do_you_agree_with_...

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 1:59am.

CA renter wrote:
Neither one of us knows about the particular circumstances, nor do we know what prompted the teachers to say these things. Again, I'm not justifying it and have never said these types of things to either my students or my own kids (unfortunately, many parents do). But we need to know the context in order to ascertain what was going on at that given moment with the teacher and your wife.

FWIW, some movies are incredibly educational and can explain certain concepts in a way that a teacher never can. These movies often incorporate technology and can utilize some of the world's most knowledgeable speakers who can present the information in a truly unique and relevant way. Again, not saying kids should just sit and watch movies, but you and I don't know what was going on in that classroom. (And I've shown perhaps one movie/year in my classroom, if that.)

No, I might not have been there but my wife and cousin were. There's a reason why they remember those incident and those teachers so clearly a couple of decades later. And let me tell you, it wasn't because they were inspired.

If a movie can do a better job than a teacher teaching, then why they hell are we paying so much for teachers? We can just sit them in front of a TV for 8 hours and they can learn everything there for a lot cheaper.

Submitted by an on April 4, 2014 - 2:03am.

CA renter wrote:
AN wrote:
CA renter wrote:
Read the links from the above posts. We've already done this before.

I'm referring to the same student populations (SES/demographic backgrounds) from within this country.

Then how do you explain Preuss School UCSD? Yes we've talked about this many times before. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. FYI, you can't state public school is the best and cheapest when it's absolutely not true. When I see private school have 12-1 teacher to student ratio while public school have 24-1 or 30-1, how can you even say with a straight face that public school is the cheapest.

Already done that one, too! ;)

FYI, all you said is (SES/demographic backgrounds). If you bring in IQ and desire to learn, does your other study also make sure all students have similar IQ and similar desire to learn? If you seriously think that's a good argument, then it can be used to reject ALL studies thus far relating to school choice.

CA renter wrote:
Here is a small sampling of what Preuss offers (regular public schools can't even begin to offer all of this, or the state would have been broke decades ago):
Why? If Preuss can do it, why can't public school? If there's no way public school can do it, why not open 100+ more Preuss?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.