Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Devos Confirmation

Trust me, I see it the same way. In fact I whole heartedly agree. As taboo it is to say, US educators overall are not well educated. But when it comes to executing misguided and backward principals in our schools (like mandated testing) they do it well.

Privatization won't fix the core issue, but it might at least give a few students a chance at something other then public. I Personally would have given my major organs to attend a magnet school. Or at least anything that wasn't public.

Magnet schools ARE public schools, just with special programs and open to more than just a specific school base.

Because of the DeVos selection our very successful magnet program may lose funding.

Teacher's actual choices, when faced with toxic policy changes from on high, are: to walk away from the students and communities that need good educators (because the most capable have other options than being in classrooms), or to do the best they can within those 'guidelines' without being fired for insubordination.

Blaming teachers for the state of education makes just about as much sense as blaming doctors for failing to fix the medical system's runaway costs and inequities. Both groups of professionals largely hate what the modern pressures of their workplaces have done to the profession, by the way.

With all due respect, Edward, why "anything that wasn't public?"

Why not "life in a place where the public schools were higher quality?"

Why not "I wish my parents had made better life choices?" Let me be clear-- I'm not suggesting that your parents had a lot of better choices in front of them, but this would have been a problem anyway.

Why was it that you weren't attending a magnet school? Such institutions have existed since the 1960's and 1970's.

Why is it about how awful the public schools were?

I was also publicly educated. I am EG. I could not have received a better education given where I lived, at the time I was being educated, with my parents' somewhat limited options-- not at any other school option, save perhaps homeschooling (which my parents did consider). Even with nearly unlimited financial resources, my educational options would have been only marginally better-- and the reason is that I attended very good public schools. Which my parents chose when they made decisions about where to live.



What isn't clear to me is why playing a zero sum game that allows some children to 'win' while others simultaneously lose is a good idea. Why isn't it a higher priority to figure out how to fix this for all children without taking anything away from some of them at the same time? Look at Finland again. The top PISA and TIMMS performers are-- surprise, surprise, mostly from collectivist cultures, and those which have decided to get serious about addressing child poverty.

Linda McSpadden McNeill's op-ed about the absurdity of privatization(LMM is a professor at Rice U):

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/c...s-educational-marketplace-concept-absurd


She's right about that part of her message. While I understand when individual parents make a choice to avoid a local public school (we did it too), you are then at the mercy of those market forces, which is basically the equal of having made a bargain with the devil.

Again-- parents ALREADY have the choice. ANY parent can homeschool-- from a legal standpoint, I mean. From a functional one, not so much, I know. But that is the same thing as saying that school vouchers and "choice" can work as an option for everyone. No. They can't.

Maybe I am just not a fan of the notion that you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet, or that the best way to fix a problematic system is to drive it to failure and destroy it before rebuilding it along better lines. In the case of children, commoditizing human beings is just immoral, in my opinion-- the children thus harmed by this exercise will suffer literally irreparable harm in the process.



We've tried holding schools "accountable" for student performance-- and the only thing that has really emerged form all that data is what educators were saying in 1965, and have never really stopped saying-- that student performance is a great proxy mostly for SES.

My experience with government subsidies in NZ is that when the subsidy goes up so do the fees. Those schools where the voucher will meet the costs are keeping their fees down with difficulty. When the parents have a voucher to offset the costs the fees will go up. If the parents are lucky they will go up less than the voucher but people who couldn't afford it before vouchers still won't be able to. The more expensive schools will also increase their fees by the voucher amount but they will use the money to provide extras that make rich parents even more willing to enrol. The poor kids will still be at poor public schools because that is all the voucher will cover.

This may be cynical but it is what I have seen time and again.

If there is a cap put on fees people will find ways round it - donations where children a shamed if their parents can't pay, compulsory school meals at $5000 a year have been used in NZ but I am sure there are other ways.

My apologies, I should have been more factual. Technically they are, but in performance to me they come across as a whole other world.

What about Devos would cause a loss of funding? I am against if that is the case.

To this I do not disagree, I concur.



But doctors are only as strong as their education. Look at it like this: How many US teachers are specifically trained to identify gifted or high potential students?


You make a good point again. At the time all I saw anything outside of public as being a better option, but I guess what I really wanted all along was a better public school.


And what life choices would make the outcome better for students? My parents did the best with what they had, and their control over the public school was limited. You can't fix a whole system, no matter how good you are as a parent.



Good question. I simply did not meet any of the criteria. The openings in my area were limited and I did not win the lottery like admission process. That and the fact my school did not see me a gifted- my grades were poor.




Well said. While my area has a very broad range of private schools to choose from, in some communities the options for private are not that much better than public. Either because the public is really good, or the private is lack luster. But I do feel I am painting with a broad brush. What is good for one student is poor for another and visa-versa.



The lottery system says so much about being so wrong. It openly admits we do not have the resources at the moment for all students.



I do not flat out dispute her, but look at it like this: what gives better consumer results? A monopoly or capitalism? In theory vouchers for various private schools create a competition between schools forcing each school to strive to out do the other.

However, I am not closed off to the down falls others are aware of.



But what if there are plenty of good schools for everyone willing to take those vouchers?

Home school vs public. I know home-school has worked out great for some kids, but does it work for all kids? For some kids home school is no better than public. Yes in home schooling a child can learn at their pace, but social isolation becomes a problem for some. As much as I did not like public, and many times actually wanted solitude in middle and early high school, 2 years before I graduated I actually went (motivation wise) just for social contact. I made a few friends, and it was the small group, but that group probably gave me the most fulfillment out of all the years I attended. It was much needed for my psychological well being- as well as social skills.

Of course please do not assume I am knocking on home schooling- I am not. Rather that for some (like myself) the social contact in public is desired regardless of the educational aspect.




Considering that public schools also do irreparable harm for some, a radical fix is needed.



What is SES? (sorry lol)

As for accountability, that will never work. And everyone knows it. When I was in high school I got into a lengthy conversation with my school psychologist about it. He simply laughed and said it would never work out because every kid 'has a varying IQ' and 'It simply is not possible to bring every child up to the same academic level.' I myself would further add to the above: some kids simply do not want to be students. I've been in rooms during mandated testing where kids were goofing off and launching crumpled paper with rubber bands despite the emphasis being put on taking such tests seriously. Simply put their are students who cognitively can't score high and another group who could care more about what the teacher is making for dinner.

Socio-Economic Status. (LOL, this has been asked and answered up thread, a few weeks ago.) Possibly this thread is attracting posts from some who are not frequent posters on the forum; It is encouraging to see increased active participation among the gifted community. Here is a thread on common abbreviations and acronyms. Wikipedia has a page on socioeconomic status.

That said, this thread is veering off topic from the subject of DeVos' confirmation to a rant on past experiences with the US public education system, developed under other administrations. Possibly a new thread could be created to discuss past public education experiences and/or beliefs about public education in general?

Angie, could you explain this further? For example, is this based on DeVos backing vouchers... is your concern that parents may choose other schools for their children, those families would receive vouchers (the money would follow the children), thereby leaving a smaller budget for the magnet school to work with?

It seems unlikely that the magnet would lose students (therefore dollars) if it is "very successful"...?

Thank you for the clarification on that acronyms and the links to the other thread as well I am an infrequent poster, and a bit aloof, hence the midway miss.

LOL, no need to apologize... it's nice to have more members reading and posting... I've personally enjoyed several of your posts, including this one... well said!

Time will tell what changes DeVos makes in the Department of Education, and the ways in which the Department of Education may change DeVos.