StL County Cops Shoot Teen

[Headinjun]

Oh look, another thread of Republicans vs Democrats. About time we had one

Again, the shooting and it's aftermath should not be a political issue. Democrats are trying to make it one. That's just a fact, and I was just pointing it out.

Yes, always the Democrats (or Republicans) fault.

I was expecting better excuses than just a vague "well, the Republicans do it, too." So far, the best spin I've heard is "just another voter registration effort" and even that's pretty weak. You guys are really mailing it in at this point, or maybe there's just no excusing the inexcusable.

Democrats: Hey black people! Are you angry that Michael Brown got shot 'cause racism? Then you should totally go to the polls and vote this November for us - the Democrats!

Republicans: Wait, aren't the Democrats responsible for a lot of things irreparably harming poor and minority Americans, like mass importation/employment of unskilled labor, stifling school choice, the largest genocide by abortion in history, and destruction of the family unit by expansion of welfare?

Democrats: Don't listen to that pack of racists! We're the party of Barack Obama!

Republicans: We're the party of Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Ben Carson, Alan West, and many other black political figures.

Democrats: Buncha Uncle Toms! You're our voters!

Republicans: That sounds kind of like slavery...

Democrats: Raaaaacists!

Me thinks KSU believes African Americans can't think on their own and must be led around by the neck on how to vote and how to live.   

I think it's pretty sorry for him to possibly think such things. 

Could it be that voter purging, gerrymandering, and tougher voter registration requirements implemented by Republicans to gain a stronghold on power has anything to do with African Americans predominately voting democrat?

Do the Lee Atwater/ Karl Rove dog whistle tactics of the 80s have anything to do with the African American left lean at the polls? 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Republicans have offered many solutions to improving education. In addition to giving kids an opportunity to get out of shitty schools with vouchers, Republicans have also advocated for getting rid of shitty teachers by breaking up unions and their "RIF lists", making it easier to fire them, etc. Scott Walker was a big proponent of this, and the Democrats staged a recall election in response.

I'll ask about these, too. Mods, maybe start a republican solution to poor education thread.

Vouchers: what happens to the kids who don't get out of shitty schools? eff 'em? There isn't a solution for every student, but let's at least help the ones we can. Again, throwing money at the problem isn't the answer. Maybe a slightly better teacher:student ration will help at least a bit?

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones? There doesn't seem to be any shortage of young, hopefully more motivated teachers being churned out every year by our universities. Maybe shift some of the existing funds away from assistant deputy secretaries and other adminsitration and actually spend it on merit-based teacher salaries?

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Me thinks KSU believes African Americans can't think on their own and must be led around by the neck on how to vote and how to live.   

I think it's pretty sorry for him to possibly think such things. 

Could it be that voter purging, gerrymandering, and tougher voter registration requirements implemented by Republicans to gain a stronghold on power has anything to do with African Americans predominately voting democrat?

Do the Lee Atwater/ Karl Rove dog whistle tactics of the 80s have anything to do with the African American left lean at the polls?

What a goldmine of libtard cliches. Good work. Voter purging? I'm pretty sure that means taking dead people off the books. Gerrymandering? Both parties do that, and it sucks. Tougher voter registration requirements? If a country like India can have a national voter ID requirement, so can we. Dog whistles? Not sure where that even came from, but .

And I'm not accusing blacks of not being able to think for themselves - it's just odd that the black demographic is such a monolithic voting block in favor of a political party whose policies do so much harm to the poor and minorities.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Second, poor eduction is mostly the result of the breakdown of the family. If kids don't have role models and a home environment conducive to learning, they're at a massive disadvantage.

Has there been some sort of scientific study that supports this statement?

Also,

Come on man, when you ask for a "scientific study" to prove something that's just so common sense, you just sound silly. I guess google it if you really need to - I'm sure something will pop up. In the meantime, I'll go off common sense, my own experience as both a student and a parent, and the experience of my gradeschool teacher friend who tells me "funny, the kids with parents who actually bother to show up to the parent-teacher nights do better at school."

But if home environment does not play a role in learning, then boy those teachers have really been wasting our time with that "homework" thing.

I think everything plays a role in learning. You said: "poor eduction is mostly the result of the breakdown of the family". Family structure is definitely part of that but so is income, neighborhood, nutrition, peer group, teachers, after school and summer activities, etc., etc., etc. I think family structure breakdown is closely associated with many of these problems.

I personally think a rich kid in a single-parent household is far more likely to succeed in education and life than a poor kid with married parents in a shitty neighborhood with shitty teachers and friends, but maybe that's just me.
Ok - I think you're wrong, but we'll just disagree on that. I knew several wealthy kids from mumped-up families who were absolutely terrible students. Give me a poor minority student from a peaceful, two-parent household versus a spoiled rich kid from a fatherless (or might as well be) household, put them in the same school, and I'll put my money on the poor kid every time.

Edit - I just saw the "and life" part. That's a different discussion. We're talking education (in a thread about the Michael Brown shooting - heh)

[Cartierfor3]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

[michigancat]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

Yes, but struggling districts already have a huge problem retaining teachers without "firing" the bad ones. I guess you could pay more.

[Cartierfor3]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

Yes, but struggling districts have a huge problem retaining teachers without "firing" the bad ones. I guess you could pay more.

only the good ones tho

[michigancat]

Vouchers: what happens to the kids who don't get out of shitty schools? eff 'em? There isn't a solution for every student, but let's at least help the ones we can. Again, throwing money at the problem isn't the answer. Maybe a slightly better teacher:student ration will help at least a bit?

We CAN raise our minimum standard of education for ALL children. If we choose to. "School choice" just shifts money to different places without raising the bar overall. Yes, some students will always fall through the cracks, but it is possible to raise the bar for everyone.

And how do you improve the teacher:student ratio without money?

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones? There doesn't seem to be any shortage of young, hopefully more motivated teachers being churned out every year by our universities. Maybe shift some of the existing funds away from assistant deputy secretaries and other adminsitration and actually spend it on merit-based teacher salaries?

Like I said before, there is a problem attracting quality teachers to struggling districts. And I agree throwing more money at teachers is a good possible solution.

[Kat Kid]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

And right now, more or less, the way we evaluate teacher performance is standardized student test scores.  Is that the method we are using to evaluate in your system?

[Cartierfor3]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

And right now, more or less, the way we evaluate teacher performance is standardized student test scores.  Is that the method we are using to evaluate in your system?

oh hell no

[michigancat]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

Yes, but struggling districts have a huge problem retaining teachers without "firing" the bad ones. I guess you could pay more.

only the good ones tho

I thought we were firing the bad ones? Raise the pay for all, improve the applicant pool.

[Cartierfor3]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

Yes, but struggling districts have a huge problem retaining teachers without "firing" the bad ones. I guess you could pay more.

only the good ones tho

I thought we were firing the bad ones? Raise the pay for all, improve the applicant pool.

oh yeah, but to raise the pay scale, districts would have to reinvent themselves. I can go into more depth but its just going to be a voucher system in the end.*

*spoiler

[Rage Against the McKee]

Republicans have offered many solutions to improving education. In addition to giving kids an opportunity to get out of shitty schools with vouchers, Republicans have also advocated for getting rid of shitty teachers by breaking up unions and their "RIF lists", making it easier to fire them, etc. Scott Walker was a big proponent of this, and the Democrats staged a recall election in response.

I'll ask about these, too. Mods, maybe start a republican solution to poor education thread.

Vouchers: what happens to the kids who don't get out of shitty schools? eff 'em? There isn't a solution for every student, but let's at least help the ones we can. Again, throwing money at the problem isn't the answer. Maybe a slightly better teacher:student ration will help at least a bit?

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones? There doesn't seem to be any shortage of young, hopefully more motivated teachers being churned out every year by our universities. Maybe shift some of the existing funds away from assistant deputy secretaries and other adminsitration and actually spend it on merit-based teacher salaries?

I have not come across a proposed solution that matches "throwing money at the problem" better than vouchers do.

[Kat Kid]

Getting rid of shitty teachers: How do you propose attracting non-shitty teachers to replace the shitty ones?

Same way any organization or place of employment would. Pay the good ones, fire the bad ones.

And right now, more or less, the way we evaluate teacher performance is standardized student test scores.  Is that the method we are using to evaluate in your system?

oh hell no

good man.

[michigancat]

KK, what's the best way to separate good teachers from the bad? I know test scores are a terrible way, but is there a good way?

[Winters]

Not sure if luke'd but this is why I hardly use Facebook anymore...http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/09/02/facebook-twitter-ferguson-icebucketchallenge/14818505/

[SdK]

Deleted my fb six months ago. Though I feel Ferguson would have been in my news feed.

[Kat Kid]

KK, what's the best way to separate good teachers from the bad? I know test scores are a terrible way, but is there a good way?

I think an evaluation system that values process significantly more than results is the wright way.

In general (but particularly for education) I think these are the rules to live by for Organizations:

-finding potentially good employees (recruitment/hiring)
-investing in training on best practices
-collaboration/innovation/interpretation of best practices led by identified best employees (peers/specialists/evaluators/supervisors)
-evaluation focused primarily upon process, with extensive documentation (not just data) to assess

I don't think standardization is bad at all, but when the focus is exclusively on results (with lots of motivation for achieving results) and tons of autonomy is given to process, "juking the stats" and outright fraud is what happens. 

You cannot make people fear for their jobs when they don't control any of the inputs and are being graded exclusively on the output.

[CNS]

Schools def could use a HR dept for finding the right ppl and for training.  I personally feel like college set me up very well to understand the macro of my industy, but if I didn't have the formal training at my first employer, after school, I wouldn't know half the stuff I know now about my industry.  Also, I am not a teacher, but the teachers I know all feel like they know who the good and bad teachers in their schools are.  Why can an evaluation process not be established if those in the system all feel like they know who the good teachers are? 

As for at risk schools, those teachers need to be paid more.  A lot more.  I don't know how to fund this, or to decide who gets what, but a teacher in KCK or KCMO should get more than one in Shawnee, for example.  The best employee gets the hardest tasks and should get a higher salary and a better bonus for being the person who takes on such tasks.  Raise the wages and let the individual schools handle the hiring/firing, and it should start getting better in a short amt of time.

Also, the districts need to hold kids and families to a higher standard.  My wife's district doesn't hold kids back.  Like, at all.  If you can't read as a 4th grader this year, then next yr you are a illiterate 5th grader who gets pulled out of regular class to work on reading.  If you can't get multiplication in 3rd grade, then next year you are a 4th grader that gets pulled out of class for math and continues to slip because while you are out, your class moves forward with division, fractions, and decimals.  Creates a product that the teachers can never catch up.  How do you over come that without holding kids back?

I don't know about all districts, but I could type for hours on the seemingly obvious stuff that I would change about my hometown dist.

[Kat Kid]

Schools def could use a HR dept for finding the right ppl and for training.  I personally feel like college set me up very well to understand the macro of my industy, but if I didn't have the formal training at my first employer, after school, I wouldn't know half the stuff I know now about my industry.  Also, I am not a teacher, but the teachers I know all feel like they know who the good and bad teachers in their schools are.  Why can an evaluation process not be established if those in the system all feel like they know who the good teachers are? 

As for at risk schools, those teachers need to be paid more.  A lot more.  I don't know how to fund this, or to decide who gets what, but a teacher in KCK or KCMO should get more than one in Shawnee, for example.  The best employee gets the hardest tasks and should get a higher salary and a better bonus for being the person who takes on such tasks.  Raise the wages and let the individual schools handle the hiring/firing, and it should start getting better in a short amt of time.

Also, the districts need to hold kids and families to a higher standard.  My wife's district doesn't hold kids back.  Like, at all.  If you can't read as a 4th grader this year, then next yr you are a illiterate 5th grader who gets pulled out of regular class to work on reading.  If you can't get multiplication in 3rd grade, then next year you are a 4th grader that gets pulled out of class for math and continues to slip because while you are out, your class moves forward with division, fractions, and decimals.  Creates a product that the teachers can never catch up.  How do you over come that without holding kids back?

I don't know about all districts, but I could type for hours on the seemingly obvious stuff that I would change about my hometown dist.

You realize that this is 99% a political/money reason right?  Add up all the extra years of schooling for those kids.  Also, we have compulsory education with strong penalties for non-compliance, local control is about mitigating some of that state power.  The more invasive and absolute the control the state exercises, even in this area, inevitably the more push back you will find from parents/community.  I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but it would be a bigger problem than you are making it out to be.

[Mr Bread]

What are you not saying couldn't happen? 

[CNS]

Schools def could use a HR dept for finding the right ppl and for training.  I personally feel like college set me up very well to understand the macro of my industy, but if I didn't have the formal training at my first employer, after school, I wouldn't know half the stuff I know now about my industry.  Also, I am not a teacher, but the teachers I know all feel like they know who the good and bad teachers in their schools are.  Why can an evaluation process not be established if those in the system all feel like they know who the good teachers are? 

As for at risk schools, those teachers need to be paid more.  A lot more.  I don't know how to fund this, or to decide who gets what, but a teacher in KCK or KCMO should get more than one in Shawnee, for example.  The best employee gets the hardest tasks and should get a higher salary and a better bonus for being the person who takes on such tasks.  Raise the wages and let the individual schools handle the hiring/firing, and it should start getting better in a short amt of time.

Also, the districts need to hold kids and families to a higher standard.  My wife's district doesn't hold kids back.  Like, at all.  If you can't read as a 4th grader this year, then next yr you are a illiterate 5th grader who gets pulled out of regular class to work on reading.  If you can't get multiplication in 3rd grade, then next year you are a 4th grader that gets pulled out of class for math and continues to slip because while you are out, your class moves forward with division, fractions, and decimals.  Creates a product that the teachers can never catch up.  How do you over come that without holding kids back?

I don't know about all districts, but I could type for hours on the seemingly obvious stuff that I would change about my hometown dist.

You realize that this is 99% a political/money reason right?  Add up all the extra years of schooling for those kids.  Also, we have compulsory education with strong penalties for non-compliance, local control is about mitigating some of that state power.  The more invasive and absolute the control the state exercises, even in this area, inevitably the more push back you will find from parents/community.  I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but it would be a bigger problem than you are making it out to be.

I am not trying to minimize any of the problems.  There are many of them and many are big.  Changing something that has been allowed to happen for a long time is hard as is changing something that is tied to public money and cast in a shitty light for the last decade or more.  Doesn't mean it doesn't need to be changed. 

As for the political/money issue, you won't find me opposing a much better funding plan for education, ever, and this is exactly the type of political sitch where the governing body needs to stand up to those being served by the system.  Everyone likes to say that if parents don't like the quality of existing ed, then go find a private school.  The state should stand up and use the same reasoning for those who don't like having to meet the standards of a more rigid system. 

[SdK]

Mods. Clean this crap up.

[MakeItRain]

Oh look, another thread of Republicans vs Democrats. About time we had one

Again, the shooting and it's aftermath should not be a political issue. Democrats are trying to make it one. That's just a fact, and I was just pointing it out.

Yes, always the Democrats (or Republicans) fault.

I was expecting better excuses than just a vague "well, the Republicans do it, too." So far, the best spin I've heard is "just another voter registration effort" and even that's pretty weak. You guys are really mailing it in at this point, or maybe there's just no excusing the inexcusable.

Democrats: Hey black people! Are you angry that Michael Brown got shot 'cause racism? Then you should totally go to the polls and vote this November for us - the Democrats!

Republicans: Wait, aren't the Democrats responsible for a lot of things irreparably harming poor and minority Americans, like mass importation/employment of unskilled labor, stifling school choice, the largest genocide by abortion in history, and destruction of the family unit by expansion of welfare?

Democrats: Don't listen to that pack of racists! We're the party of Barack Obama!

Republicans: We're the party of Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Ben Carson, Alan West, and many other black political figures.

Democrats: Buncha Uncle Toms! You're our voters!

Republicans: That sounds kind of like slavery...

Democrats: Raaaaacists!

It seems like you think republicans have a pretty good appeal to black voters. Have republicans ever made an effort to get this message to blacks? Why hasn't it been successful?

1. Yes, of course they have.
2. Don't know, but I would speculate that it is because Democrats have done such an effective job pushing the victimhood/entitlement drug over the decades. There are obvious individual exceptions (e.g., the folks I named above and many, many more), but unfortunately, the black population as a whole, as a voting demographic, appears to have long since gone over the tipping point due to poor education, fatherless family structure, and dependency on welfare. Americans as a whole may be headed down the same road, which is obviously very troubling.

You are a true piece of crap

[Kat Kid]

What are you not saying couldn't happen?

Fair enough, it won't happen.