Beshear may call a special session

[MoreheadEagle]

Nothing that I have not read many times before but none of these facts and assertions explain how private schools retain good teachers when Ohio and Indiana offer much higher salaries. If these teachers believed that they are grossly underpaid, then they would not be employed in Kentucky's private schools.

Because I personally knew nearly all of my children's teachers and administrators and my wife worked in the schools. I think that you are the one of making an erroneous assumption.

 

So, you are certain that Ohio and Indiana schools have no problems filling vacancies for math, science, and special education teachers? Or are you simply making the assumption that this situation is worse in Kentucky than north of the border?

 

(BTW, I support spending the money necessary to hire good math and science teachers and spending less money where their is an over supply of teaching specialties.)

 

I can vouch for Ohio since my dad has taught there for 30 years in a small rural district. They have never had much problem attracting math and science teachers. In fact several teachers at his school live in Mason, Lewis, and Bracken counties and commute to his school. Special Ed has a shortage wherever you go b/c unfortunately a lot of people don't want to do that job.

[All Tell]

Based on the last statement I must assume that there are no bad teachers in the state, or bad administrators or bad schools. We are all doing great and don't need any kind of audit or anything. Hmmmm.

 

What does it matter? Because of tenure you can't easilly get rid of the bad ones.

[AcesFull]

I can vouch for Ohio since my dad has taught there for 30 years in a small rural district. They have never had much problem attracting math and science teachers. In fact several teachers at his school live in Mason, Lewis, and Bracken counties and commute to his school. Special Ed has a shortage wherever you go b/c unfortunately a lot of people don't want to do that job.

Ohio's Teaching Drought: Chronic Shortage of Teaching Recruit

Study finds teacher shortages in some Ohio regions, surpluses in others

[True blue (and gold)]

What does it matter? Because of tenure you can't easilly get rid of the bad ones.

 

Well, it's good, then, that the number of teacher's achieving tenure is declining. Fewer people are becoming teachers and there is a greater percentage of those that become teachers not staying in the profession long enough to achieve tenure.

[acemona]

Nothing that I have not read many times before but none of these facts and assertions explain how private schools retain good teachers when Ohio and Indiana offer much higher salaries. If these teachers believed that they are grossly underpaid, then they would not be employed in Kentucky's private schools.

Because I personally knew nearly all of my children's teachers and administrators and my wife worked in the schools. I think that you are the one of making an erroneous assumption.

 

So, you are certain that Ohio and Indiana schools have no problems filling vacancies for math, science, and special education teachers? Or are you simply making the assumption that this situation is worse in Kentucky than north of the border?

 

(BTW, I support spending the money necessary to hire good math and science teachers and spending less money where their is an over supply of teaching specialties.)

 

I will just address the first point. How do you know they have good teachers? Students succeed for a variety of reasons. I will bet you money that you could take an "adequate" teacher from a public school and put him/her in a class with upper-middle class (mostly white) kids whose parents care about their education and that adequate teacher will do okay or even perform above average.

 

You can then take an adequate teacher from a private school and put them in one of our states urban or rural poor schools and they would fail miserably. They stay at the private school with the lower pay b/c of the working conditions.

[AcesFull]

I will just address the first point. How do you know they have good teachers? Students succeed for a variety of reasons. I will bet you money that you could take an "adequate" teacher from a public school and put him/her in a class with upper-middle class (mostly white) kids whose parents care about their education and that adequate teacher will do okay or even perform above average.

 

You can then take an adequate teacher from a private school and put them in one of our states urban or rural poor schools and they would fail miserably. They stay at the private school with the lower pay b/c of the working conditions.

There have been a number of studies done to demonstrate that underprivileged kids placed in private schools perform better than their counterparts in poor public schools. That is one of the reasons why the NEA has even opposed pilot programs allowing parents school choice through voucher programs. The programs discussed in the study referenced below have targeted some of the poorest school districts in the country.

 

ED498011 - School Choice: 2006 Progress Report. Backgrounder No. 1970

Abstract: Parental choice in education is growing. A dozen states and the District of Columbia provide a variety of private school choice programs. Forty states and the District of Columbia have enacted charter schools laws.

A growing body of evidence suggests that parents of students participating in school choice programs are happier with their children's schools. Students attending private schools using scholarships have shown higher test scores than their peers in public school.

Public schools that face competition from school choice programs have shown improved performance. The success of school choice programs is leading more policymakers to support expanding parental choice in education. In 2006, eight states enacted new initiatives or expanded existing school choice programs. Despite this progress, millions of children who could benefit from the opportunity to attend schools of their parents' choice are enrolled in persistently underperforming public schools. Congress and state lawmakers are urged to implement student-centered reforms to give all families the opportunity to choose safe and effective schools for their children. An Overview of K-12 School Choice Programs across the United States is appended. (Contains 38 footnotes.)

[acemona]

There have been a number of studies done to demonstrate that underprivileged kids placed in private schools perform better than their counterparts in poor public schools. That is one of the reasons why the NEA has even opposed pilot programs allowing parents school choice through voucher programs. The programs discussed in the study referenced below have targeted some of the poorest school districts in the country.

 

ED498011 - School Choice: 2006 Progress Report. Backgrounder No. 1970

Abstract: Parental choice in education is growing. A dozen states and the District of Columbia provide a variety of private school choice programs. Forty states and the District of Columbia have enacted charter schools laws.

A growing body of evidence suggests that parents of students participating in school choice programs are happier with their children's schools. Students attending private schools using scholarships have shown higher test scores than their peers in public school.

Public schools that face competition from school choice programs have shown improved performance. The success of school choice programs is leading more policymakers to support expanding parental choice in education. In 2006, eight states enacted new initiatives or expanded existing school choice programs. Despite this progress, millions of children who could benefit from the opportunity to attend schools of their parents' choice are enrolled in persistently underperforming public schools. Congress and state lawmakers are urged to implement student-centered reforms to give all families the opportunity to choose safe and effective schools for their children. An Overview of K-12 School Choice Programs across the United States is appended. (Contains 38 footnotes.)

 

 

1. That study is two years old. Recent studies have not shown the same results.

 

2. It says nothing about underprivileged kids, but kids that came there on scholarship.

 

3. If a kid has a learning disability or a behavior problem they do not have to be educated at the private school.

[acemona]

just for fun

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/18/opinion/18wed1.html?ex=1250568000&en=97054e2cba6418ab&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

 

http://educationwonk.blogspot.com/2006/01/private-vs-public-schools-some.html

 

http://www.felixsalmon.com/000492.html

 

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0715-01.htm

[AcesFull]

just for fun

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/18/opinion/18wed1.html?ex=1250568000&en=97054e2cba6418ab&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

Opinion piece published in the New York Slimes on August 18, 2004

http://educationwonk.blogspot.com/2006/01/private-vs-public-schools-some.html

A blog link proves nothing except that somebody's opinion matches your own. (Note the Saturday, January 28, 2006 date.)

 

http://www.felixsalmon.com/000492.html

Another blog. Another opinion. At least this one's author registered his own domain. (Note that it is dated y, April 16, 2006.

 

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0715-01.htm

A reprint of another New York Times bash piece, appearing in a site self-described as "Breaking News and Views for the Progressive Community." (Note the publication date of July 15, 2006.)

 

just for fun:

 

Let us summarize. You criticized the source to which I linked (published 2006-09-18) because you said, and I quote, "it is two years old." Your response was to post links to a much older New York Times editorial, a couple of blogs, and a liberal news aggregator recycling another New York Times piece. Four links, each of them predating the publication of the study to which I linked. :lol:

[AcesFull]

1. That study is two years old. Recent studies have not shown the same results.

See my previous post. All of the links that you posted were older than the study to which I referred.

 

2. It says nothing about underprivileged kids, but kids that came there on scholarship.

The abstract may not mention underprivileged kids because it is an...abstract. If you read a few pages of the study itself, then you will learn that many of the programs specifically targeted the very poor. (Taking this approach makes it more difficult for the demagogic tactics of the NEA puppets to block voucher programs. Success of school choice programs is among the NEA's worst nightmares.)

 

3. If a kid has a learning disability or a behavior problem they do not have to be educated at the private school.

Again, if you read a few pages of the study, you will find that some of the pilot projects did include special needs students.

[acemona]

See my previous post. All of the links that you posted were older than the study to which I referred.

 

The abstract may not mention underprivileged kids because it is an...abstract. If you read a few pages of the study itself, then you will learn that many of the programs specifically targeted the very poor. (Taking this approach makes it more difficult for the demagogic tactics of the NEA puppets to block voucher programs. Success of school choice programs is among the NEA's worst nightmares.)

 

Again, if you read a few pages of the study, you will find that some of the pilot projects did include special needs students.

 

i said "just for fun" because the links were as old as yours.

 

The Lubienski study, however, is pretty authoritative

[ladiesbballcoach]

What does it matter? Because of tenure you can't easilly get rid of the bad ones.

 

Very misleading statement.

 

Tenure takes 5 years to attain.

 

During those first 5 years, no reason has to be given to a teacher for them to not be rehired.

 

At any time during those first 5 years, it is extremely easy to get rid of a bad teacher.

 

And after those first 5 years, it is just like having to get rid of a union employee. Got to have a good reason and not just a political reason.