- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: There are pockets where public schools are doing well
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:07 pm to Jcorye1
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:07 pm to Jcorye1
quote:
I completely disagree. Home life is the biggest indicator, but to say teachers, staff, and administration have no affect is laughable
Jesus Christ can any of you people read? Teachers and staff absolutely make a difference. The problem is they are capable of moving and they tend to follow the same route as parents do when selecting where to land
It becomes a self-fulfilling cycle. Sure you can throw money at a bunch of them and get them to go to horrible school districts and make those districts slightly better but they will still be poor-performing. Just slightly better poor-performing.
1
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:08 pm to anc
News flash, public schools near poor, trashy families tend to provide poor, failing education.
Next you're going to tell me public schools in affluent areas provide better education?
Next you're going to tell me public schools in affluent areas provide better education?
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:08 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
I'm simply saying that they will never be equal or even close to the good schools.
But we don’t need them to be “equal.” We just need them to get kids to proficiency. So if a kid graduates and can do the reading, writing, math thing, that’s what we need. We don’t need them writing a discourse on Medieval French literature. That’s why I clearly included that metric above.
No, the city school will never offer the education that Mary Institute and St Louis Country Day School will. We don’t need it to.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:10 pm to the808bass
quote:
But now you’re arguing at the margins
What do you mean?
quote:
And you’re also abandoning the “home as the determinant” argument
LOL. Nope
Home and community dictate the population that will attend to school
That dictates how prepare the students show up from square one
That dictates the type of teacher who will be attracted to said district
Now as we have both pointed out you can throw some incentives at teachers and faculty to get them to choose differently than they would choose all things being equal
But then good districts will still get all of the good teachers they need. So their kids will continue to kick arse
The bad districts if you throw all this money up them will get slightly better. That's all.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:10 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Sure you can throw money at a bunch of them and get them to go to horrible school districts and make those districts slightly better but they will still be poor-performing. Just slightly better poor-performing
Or they could go from 30% students at proficiency to 75% students at proficiency.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:10 pm to anc
Even Gordon Ramsey can’t make chicken salad out of chicken shite.
Chefs vary in their chicken salad skills but none can make it out of chicken shite
Chefs vary in their chicken salad skills but none can make it out of chicken shite
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:11 pm to the808bass
quote:
But we don’t need them to be “equal.” We just need them to get kids to proficiency
Kids with an 80 IQ are always going to be hard to get to proficiency
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:11 pm to ShortyRob
Sure. But even in a poor district, 80 isn’t going to be 80% of the kids.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:12 pm to the808bass
quote:
Or they could go from 30% students at proficiency to 75% students at proficiency
In many districts this is pure fantasy Land.
The valedictorian of a Birmingham area high school a couple of years ago took 3 shots at the ACT and her best score was a 17
I don't care who the frick you put in that school and you aren't going to get 75% results
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:13 pm to the808bass
quote:
Sure. But even in a poor district, 80 isn’t going to be 80% of the kids
In a great many districts I suspect that you would find that more than half of the students are sub-100 IQ
Way more than half
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:15 pm to the808bass
quote:
Sure. But even in a poor district, 80 isn’t going to be 80% of the kids.
By the way you know what would help these districts more than throwing money at teachers? Getting rid of the kids who are lost causes
Because even in these horrible districts there is a subset of kids who might have a chance. But you lose them because their school is out of control.
We are seeing that at a local school here in Huntsville that used to be well rated. It's on the decline because it's student body has slowly changed and now they're losing even they're middle-of-the-road kids to the social dysfunction of the school
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:17 pm to ShortyRob
I want to add to that point about the kids who are a problem
They are a problem on both the student and the teacher side
Violent and disruptive students make learning environments suck and violent and disruptive students make teachers seek other alternatives
my friend that I mentioned specifically chose a challenge school because he thought he wanted that
after being physically assaulted three times in one year and having his car vandalized he left
You have to get rid of these kids and save the ones that are savable
They are a problem on both the student and the teacher side
Violent and disruptive students make learning environments suck and violent and disruptive students make teachers seek other alternatives
my friend that I mentioned specifically chose a challenge school because he thought he wanted that
after being physically assaulted three times in one year and having his car vandalized he left
You have to get rid of these kids and save the ones that are savable
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:26 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
By the way you know what would help these districts more than throwing money at teachers? Getting rid of the kids who are lost causes
100%
We need to leave some kids behind.
Probably 70% of the time of the administration gets taken by 3% of the kids. And they’re largely unsalvageable.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:27 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
In many districts this is pure fantasy Land.
But not all. Come to the STL and I’ll give you a tour.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:29 pm to the808bass
quote:
100%
We need to leave some kids behind.
Probably 70% of the time of the administration gets taken by 3% of the kids. And they’re largely unsalvageable
I'm one of these people who has never understood the focus on graduation rate. I don't give a damn about graduation rate.
I think the high school diploma should be a document that any person upon seeing it has a good idea of what the holder's floor is.
you know why almost no one actually asks you to prove that you graduated high school? Because it doesn't really matter. A high school diploma doesn't actually tell me if I'm going to discover you can't really read and write to anything vaguely resembling a standard
I say make the diploma mean something again and if you end up with a 65% graduation rate so be it.
And once you get out of the idea that you have to focus on graduation rate you then get out of the idea that you have to keep trying with 10th grade Johnny who reads at the 3rd grade level and deals drugs in his spare time
This post was edited on 12/30/19 at 12:31 pm
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:29 pm to ShortyRob
Not to mention it probably helps the troubled kid in rare occasions to make it worth not retaining them. When you retain kids in the education system that shouldn't be there it has an adverse effect on that kid.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:32 pm to claremontrich
In Louisiana they treat AP like it is the greatest thing ever. Students I know have benefited from dual enrollment way more than AP. However, most districts do not want dual enrollment because AP is what counts when it comes to accountability and SPS.
Posted on 12/30/19 at 12:40 pm to ShortyRob
The bottom line is that a slightly comparable analogy is to look at college football
Bottom of the barrel FBS schools will occasionally hire a better coach and put together a couple of decent seasons before he leaves and then they have to hope to get lucky and hire another unknown coach who turns out as well.
Middle of the road schools who tend to attract mostly three star players will tend to attract coaches with some level a proven track record and occasionally get it right and have slightly better than normal seasons.
But the first group isn't going to make a habit out of beating the second group and the second group isn't going to make a habit out of beating the top-tier schools
The second teachers prove themselves as better than average they become attractive to better school districts.
So just like in college football you end up with a tiered system whether you like it or not
And we've left out one other factor. a school that has a good reputation already attracts more of the kind of student that made it good in the first place.
Meanwhile a school that begins to falter starts to discover that fewer and fewer high caliber parents move to their district.
We have a school not far from where I am that used to get 10 out of 10 on greatschools.net. Now it's hovering around 6 or 7 and it's just going to get worse.
Why?
Well because there are two very good schools in the area and when new people move here they choose those districts. And kids already in the other district have parents who are trying to move too when they have the ability.
This just makes matters worse
What are you going to do to stop it?
Bottom of the barrel FBS schools will occasionally hire a better coach and put together a couple of decent seasons before he leaves and then they have to hope to get lucky and hire another unknown coach who turns out as well.
Middle of the road schools who tend to attract mostly three star players will tend to attract coaches with some level a proven track record and occasionally get it right and have slightly better than normal seasons.
But the first group isn't going to make a habit out of beating the second group and the second group isn't going to make a habit out of beating the top-tier schools
The second teachers prove themselves as better than average they become attractive to better school districts.
So just like in college football you end up with a tiered system whether you like it or not
And we've left out one other factor. a school that has a good reputation already attracts more of the kind of student that made it good in the first place.
Meanwhile a school that begins to falter starts to discover that fewer and fewer high caliber parents move to their district.
We have a school not far from where I am that used to get 10 out of 10 on greatschools.net. Now it's hovering around 6 or 7 and it's just going to get worse.
Why?
Well because there are two very good schools in the area and when new people move here they choose those districts. And kids already in the other district have parents who are trying to move too when they have the ability.
This just makes matters worse
What are you going to do to stop it?
Posted on 12/30/19 at 1:13 pm to anc
quote:
...he refused to listen to the high priced consultants - he brought in the wait staff and hostesses and asked them what was wrong.
Kind of like how he's now blowing off top military brass and speaking to the enlisted folks?
Posted on 12/30/19 at 1:18 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
The bad districts if you throw all this money up them will get slightly better. That's all.
Actually, they won't get any better at all. The Shawnee Mission case proved that.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News