Progressive Ideology

[PizzaSnake]

Democrats govern. Republicans want to destroy the government.

..

Democrats govern alright. They want government over everything even parents. The Title IX expansion to gender identity pushes in loco parentis like nothing I've seen before.

But that's the major difference in mentality of the left and right. The right doesnt want government raising their children. Meanwhile the left cant raise their children without the government.

Let me tell you who educates and raises my children. Their parents. We review their textbooks and other materials. If we think there are issues, we discuss with them.

Rest assured they do not take part in compulsory prayer or pledges. Save that shite for the dim-witted who are incapable of critical thought.

[kramerica.inc]

Good for you. You are a small fraction of America.

[MDlaxfan76]

Good for you. You are a small fraction of America.

What is the size of the fraction that wants to tell teachers what to teach?

[jhu72]

USA Today tells some truth about public education.

[kramerica.inc]

USA Today tells some truth about public education.

Exactly.
Don't like it?
Run for school board, vote, or put your kids in private school.
That said, here's to vouchers, or at least tax deductions, for those who have dependent children that leave and unburden the public system.

[MDlaxfan76]

USA Today tells some truth about public education.

Exactly.
Don't like it?
Run for school board, vote, or put your kids in private school.
That said, here's to vouchers, or at least tax deductions, for those who have dependent children that leave and unburden the public system.

Interesting last point...not so sure I agree with that, though.

Lots and lots of people without children contribute their taxes to cover costs, and get no deduction because they don't send kids to public school. So, not so sure middle class and up should get a tax deduction for opting out of free public education.

We do it because of the societal stake we have in children not our own.

I do think that vouchers for kids in poverty situations might make sense in extreme situations, but I'd rather see the necessary investments made to dramatically improve the public schools.

[PizzaSnake]

USA Today tells some truth about public education.

Exactly.
Don't like it?
Run for school board, vote, or put your kids in private school.
That said, here's to vouchers, or at least tax deductions, for those who have dependent children that leave and unburden the public system.

Familiar with Horace Mann?

“No one did more than he to establish in the minds of the American people the conception that education should be universal, non-sectarian, free, and that its aims should be social efficiency, civic virtue, and character, rather than mere learning or the advancement of sectarian ends.[1]”

https://hmleague.org/horace-mann-3/

[kramerica.inc]

USA Today tells some truth about public education.

Exactly.
Don't like it?
Run for school board, vote, or put your kids in private school.
That said, here's to vouchers, or at least tax deductions, for those who have dependent children that leave and unburden the public system.

Interesting last point...not so sure I agree with that, though.

Lots and lots of people without children contribute their taxes to cover costs, and get no deduction because they don't send kids to public school. So, not so sure middle class and up should get a tax deduction for opting out of free public education.

We do it because of the societal stake we have in children not our own.

I do think that vouchers for kids in poverty situations might make sense in extreme situations, but I'd rather see the necessary investments made to dramatically improve the public schools.

I'm not suggesting tax deductions for people who don't have children. Just for those who have children of school age, and don't burden the public school system with them.

I see private school as a way of improving schooling for the citizenry overall. I look at private school tax deductions similar to the way the gov't views childcare. Childcare tax deductions are unique to people who are parents. And capped at 10K per year. And they are given because the working parent is generating income tax to the benefit of society. Parents who send their kids to private school are providing a major benefit to society.

The parents choosing private school are reducing class size, lessening the wear and tear on a schools, and those kids are not in need of meals, bus services, extracurriculars, after school programs, etc. School systems have a cost per student. That number is always analyzed. If you ensure the tax break is half of the cost per student and it's statistically significant and viable.

Having covered schools for years, those issues- school improvements/school enrollment/overcrowding are absolutely massive burdens on a school system both from a capital standpoint and HQ brain power/attention. I think you would see a major benefit to society if parents were encouraged to use private schools. But I highly doubt the teachers unions or their lobbies would ever allow it. It's too bad, because I think the major issues that many school systems face would be severely lessened.

[PizzaSnake]

USA Today tells some truth about public education.

Exactly.
Don't like it?
Run for school board, vote, or put your kids in private school.
That said, here's to vouchers, or at least tax deductions, for those who have dependent children that leave and unburden the public system.

Interesting last point...not so sure I agree with that, though.

Lots and lots of people without children contribute their taxes to cover costs, and get no deduction because they don't send kids to public school. So, not so sure middle class and up should get a tax deduction for opting out of free public education.

We do it because of the societal stake we have in children not our own.

I do think that vouchers for kids in poverty situations might make sense in extreme situations, but I'd rather see the necessary investments made to dramatically improve the public schools.

I'm not suggesting tax deductions for people who don't have children. Just for those who have children of school age, and don't burden the public school system with them.

I see private school as a way of improving schooling for the citizenry overall. I look at private school tax deductions similar to the way the gov't views childcare. Childcare tax deductions are unique to people who are parents. And capped at 10K per year. And they are given because the working parent is generating income tax to the benefit of society. Parents who send their kids to private school are providing a major benefit to society.

The parents choosing private school are reducing class size, lessening the wear and tear on a schools, and those kids are not in need of meals, bus services, extracurriculars, after school programs, etc. School systems have a cost per student. That number is always analyzed. If you ensure the tax break is half of the cost per student and it's statistically significant and viable.

Having covered schools for years, those issues- school improvements/school enrollment/overcrowding are absolutely massive burdens on a school system both from a capital standpoint and HQ brain power/attention. I think you would see a major benefit to society if parents were encouraged to use private schools. But I highly doubt the teachers unions or their lobbies would ever allow it. It's too bad, because I think the major issues that many school systems face would be severely lessened.

“Parents who send their kids to private school are providing a major benefit to society.”

Are you familiar with the resistance to integration in public education? You sound like a cheerleader.

[kramerica.inc]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

[DMac]

kram, friend of mine has a gson, royal pain in the asz, needs to go live with a father like mine for a couple of weeks.
Been in trouble at school, parents decided to send him to the Living Word school this year, was going to public school.
Kid rides the same bus his brother does who still goes to that public school. Gets dropped off and picked up at that school,
I guess. How can that be??
Didn't take him long (brother too) to get kicked off that bus and banned from riding it after the video of him brutalizing
one of the slow learner/easy target types. Got reinstated after letters of apology (words only) and some groveling, Riding
the bus again probably temporarily. Guess what his parents do? Yup, both teachers.

[PizzaSnake]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

White parents removing their children from public schools rather than have their children educated with black children.

You missed some things in your canvass.

https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi ... ntext=uclf

Or are graduate level publications out-of-bounds? I know the University of Chicago is such a hotbed of left-wing apostasy…

[MDlaxfan76]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

I don't think this applies to you at all, but I suspect you understand how this logic was used to justify segregation.

I think you may have misunderstood my point.

I understand that you're just talking about parents who send their kids to private school getting a deduction.

But that's all such parents...eg my family, with exception of my wife, all private in my parents' and my generation.

I never saw sending my son to Gilman as benefiting society because I wasn't burdening the public school system...sure, I'd hope/expect that he'll end up a very productive member of society and a benefit that way, but I never expected the public tax payers to give me an extra break because we chose that path for him. I did it because we thought it was optimal for him and we prioritized that investment over other choices. I continue to donate to the school so that they can provide scholarships for poor kids to have that opportunity as well.

Moreover, I'm not so sure it wasn't a cost to the public school in our region for him to not be there, rather than the other way around...I have no doubt that he'd have contributed significantly to any classroom and to any other activity in the life of the school...we'd have been equally as involved as parents in ensuring the quality of the environment, the support for teaching excellence, etc as we were at Gilman...on net, a positive even.

But public school education costs, per student, are a small fraction of the costs that Gilman expends per student. Dramatically different facilities, technology, teacher pay, etc, etc. The tuition itself, which is much larger than the per student cost of public schools, covers only a portion of the overall annual budget...close to half that cost comes through alumni annual donations and endowment draw.

And that's with a school that is able to self-select students that generally conform within a set of expected capabilities that enable more efficient delivery of education. Little remedial education needed, little behavioral issues tolerated. More efficient...but still way more cost expended.

so, if we provide $ incentives to remove from public schools those who are best positioned to conform to private school selection, we increase the density of the most costly student situations...and removed the positive contributions such students make to the classrooms, school life, critical mass, etc.

Just as we made the choice for our own family, as a taxpayer citizen I'm for prioritizing education as a community, as a state, as a country, over all sorts of other potential investments we can make.

IMO, that's our problem, we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently.

[PizzaSnake]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

I don't think this applies to you at all, but I suspect you understand how this logic was used to justify segregation.

I think you may have misunderstood my point.

I understand that you're just talking about parents who send their kids to private school getting a deduction.

But that's all such parents...eg my family, with exception of my wife, all private in my parents' and my generation.

I never saw sending my son to Gilman as benefiting society because I wasn't burdening the public school system...sure, I'd hope/expect that he'll end up a very productive member of society and a benefit that way, but I never expected the public tax payers to give me an extra break because we chose that path for him. I did it because we thought it was optimal for him and we prioritized that investment over other choices. I continue to donate to the school so that they can provide scholarships for poor kids to have that opportunity as well.

Moreover, I'm not so sure it wasn't a cost to the public school in our region for him to not be there, rather than the other way around...I have no doubt that he'd have contributed significantly to any classroom and to any other activity in the life of the school...we'd have been equally as involved as parents in ensuring the quality of the environment, the support for teaching excellence, etc as we were at Gilman...on net, a positive even.

But public school education costs, per student, are a small fraction of the costs that Gilman expends per student. Dramatically different facilities, technology, teacher pay, etc, etc. The tuition itself, which is much larger than the per student cost of public schools, covers only a portion of the overall annual budget...close to half that cost comes through alumni annual donations and endowment draw.

And that's with a school that is able to self-select students that generally conform within a set of expected capabilities that enable more efficient delivery of education. Little remedial education needed, little behavioral issues tolerated. More efficient...but still way more cost expended.

so, if we provide $ incentives to remove from public schools those who are best positioned to conform to private school selection, we increase the density of the most costly student situations...and removed the positive contributions such students make to the classrooms, school life, critical mass, etc.

Just as we made the choice for our own family, as a taxpayer citizen I'm for prioritizing education as a community, as a state, as a country, over all sorts of other potential investments we can make.

IMO, that's our problem, we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently.

“we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently.”

And why students from countries that do are “eating our lunch”. But, by all means, we should let the loud, ifnorant minority of parents dictate curriculum.we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently. A saying about inmates comes to mind.

[kramerica.inc]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

White parents removing their children from public schools rather than have their children educated with black children.

You missed some things in your canvass.

https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi ... ntext=uclf

Or are graduate level publications out-of-bounds? I know the University of Chicago is such a hotbed of left-wing apostasy…

Curious which "integration" you meant. A lot of things get integrated in schools.

I didnt work too much with graduate-level publications. More boots on the ground stuff with the BoEs, teachers, parents and school admins in DC and the surround when I covered education for the ultra right-wing WaPo...

[MDlaxfan76]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

I don't think this applies to you at all, but I suspect you understand how this logic was used to justify segregation.

I think you may have misunderstood my point.

I understand that you're just talking about parents who send their kids to private school getting a deduction.

But that's all such parents...eg my family, with exception of my wife, all private in my parents' and my generation.

I never saw sending my son to Gilman as benefiting society because I wasn't burdening the public school system...sure, I'd hope/expect that he'll end up a very productive member of society and a benefit that way, but I never expected the public tax payers to give me an extra break because we chose that path for him. I did it because we thought it was optimal for him and we prioritized that investment over other choices. I continue to donate to the school so that they can provide scholarships for poor kids to have that opportunity as well.

Moreover, I'm not so sure it wasn't a cost to the public school in our region for him to not be there, rather than the other way around...I have no doubt that he'd have contributed significantly to any classroom and to any other activity in the life of the school...we'd have been equally as involved as parents in ensuring the quality of the environment, the support for teaching excellence, etc as we were at Gilman...on net, a positive even.

But public school education costs, per student, are a small fraction of the costs that Gilman expends per student. Dramatically different facilities, technology, teacher pay, etc, etc. The tuition itself, which is much larger than the per student cost of public schools, covers only a portion of the overall annual budget...close to half that cost comes through alumni annual donations and endowment draw.

And that's with a school that is able to self-select students that generally conform within a set of expected capabilities that enable more efficient delivery of education. Little remedial education needed, little behavioral issues tolerated. More efficient...but still way more cost expended.

so, if we provide $ incentives to remove from public schools those who are best positioned to conform to private school selection, we increase the density of the most costly student situations...and removed the positive contributions such students make to the classrooms, school life, critical mass, etc.

Just as we made the choice for our own family, as a taxpayer citizen I'm for prioritizing education as a community, as a state, as a country, over all sorts of other potential investments we can make.

IMO, that's our problem, we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently.

“we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently.”

And why students from countries that do are “eating our lunch”. But, by all means, we should let the loud, ifnorant minority of parents dictate curriculum.we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently. A saying about inmates comes to mind.

I thought the Horace Mann quote was particularly apt.

I could be mistaken, but I think there are legitimate concerns that some parents have about public schools not doing an excellent job of educating children on the fundamental skills necessary to be a good learner, to be productive in a competitive world....and these legit concerns get manipulated by others seeking specific sectarian or ideological goals as if the issue is an over prioritization on particular societal issues, taking away time, presumably, from more effective education on the core the lit concerned folks are most interested in.

Nope, the issue is not enough total investment, rather than this zero sum logic all too often employed when talking about budgets and taxes...spend less and we don't have to be taxed as much...very limited perspective on what is much better considered to be an investment rather than a line item on the budget.

[kramerica.inc]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

I don't think this applies to you at all, but I suspect you understand how this logic was used to justify segregation.

I think you may have misunderstood my point.

I understand that you're just talking about parents who send their kids to private school getting a deduction.

But that's all such parents...eg my family, with exception of my wife, all private in my parents' and my generation.

I never saw sending my son to Gilman as benefiting society because I wasn't burdening the public school system...sure, I'd hope/expect that he'll end up a very productive member of society and a benefit that way, but I never expected the public tax payers to give me an extra break because we chose that path for him. I did it because we thought it was optimal for him and we prioritized that investment over other choices. I continue to donate to the school so that they can provide scholarships for poor kids to have that opportunity as well.

Moreover, I'm not so sure it wasn't a cost to the public school in our region for him to not be there, rather than the other way around...I have no doubt that he'd have contributed significantly to any classroom and to any other activity in the life of the school...we'd have been equally as involved as parents in ensuring the quality of the environment, the support for teaching excellence, etc as we were at Gilman...on net, a positive even.

But public school education costs, per student, are a small fraction of the costs that Gilman expends per student. Dramatically different facilities, technology, teacher pay, etc, etc. The tuition itself, which is much larger than the per student cost of public schools, covers only a portion of the overall annual budget...close to half that cost comes through alumni annual donations and endowment draw.

And that's with a school that is able to self-select students that generally conform within a set of expected capabilities that enable more efficient delivery of education. Little remedial education needed, little behavioral issues tolerated. More efficient...but still way more cost expended.

so, if we provide $ incentives to remove from public schools those who are best positioned to conform to private school selection, we increase the density of the most costly student situations...and removed the positive contributions such students make to the classrooms, school life, critical mass, etc.

Just as we made the choice for our own family, as a taxpayer citizen I'm for prioritizing education as a community, as a state, as a country, over all sorts of other potential investments we can make.

IMO, that's our problem, we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently.

I'd beg to clarify on a few points.

Your point re: density of costly students. The ratio of "costly" students changes for the school system, but the number of those students doesn't increase and negatively impact your budget or staffing/facility plans. Those are the same students that were there before. The group of less-costly students then have smaller group sizes to deal with. Arguably a benefit to those kids. Unfortunately, the effects of costly vs uncostly student ratio is only a hypothesis.

You are not lowering the amount you are spending on schools or education by giving a tax break. The quality of EVERY school system is measured in per pupil spend, student/teacher ratio and schools on capacity. ALL of those things are PROVEN to have a positive, measurable benefit on student success. Documented. In this case, you are actually increasing the per-student spending with a tax cut that is less than the per pupil spend. That excess money goes back to the school system and IMPROVES the MEASURABLE population categories I mentioned above.

The issue most certainly is simple supply, demand and budget. That's why student success is again measured in per pupil spend, student/teacher ratio and schools on capacity. Yearly, the biggest concerns of EVERY district in MD and VA has been growing enrollment, over capacity schools, outdated/crumbling facilities, increasing student to teacher ratios, and inefficient use of facilities. Most school districts in the NE region cant keep up with infrastructure, and school improvement/building as it currently sits. That's been exacerbated with the materials shortage. Lessening the number of students that need to be served only helps the public school system. Incentivising people to take the leap to private schools would significantly benefit local school systems and budgets.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

I don't think this applies to you at all, but I suspect you understand how this logic was used to justify segregation.

I think you may have misunderstood my point.

I understand that you're just talking about parents who send their kids to private school getting a deduction.

But that's all such parents...eg my family, with exception of my wife, all private in my parents' and my generation.

I never saw sending my son to Gilman as benefiting society because I wasn't burdening the public school system...sure, I'd hope/expect that he'll end up a very productive member of society and a benefit that way, but I never expected the public tax payers to give me an extra break because we chose that path for him. I did it because we thought it was optimal for him and we prioritized that investment over other choices. I continue to donate to the school so that they can provide scholarships for poor kids to have that opportunity as well.

Moreover, I'm not so sure it wasn't a cost to the public school in our region for him to not be there, rather than the other way around...I have no doubt that he'd have contributed significantly to any classroom and to any other activity in the life of the school...we'd have been equally as involved as parents in ensuring the quality of the environment, the support for teaching excellence, etc as we were at Gilman...on net, a positive even.

But public school education costs, per student, are a small fraction of the costs that Gilman expends per student. Dramatically different facilities, technology, teacher pay, etc, etc. The tuition itself, which is much larger than the per student cost of public schools, covers only a portion of the overall annual budget...close to half that cost comes through alumni annual donations and endowment draw.

And that's with a school that is able to self-select students that generally conform within a set of expected capabilities that enable more efficient delivery of education. Little remedial education needed, little behavioral issues tolerated. More efficient...but still way more cost expended.

so, if we provide $ incentives to remove from public schools those who are best positioned to conform to private school selection, we increase the density of the most costly student situations...and removed the positive contributions such students make to the classrooms, school life, critical mass, etc.

Just as we made the choice for our own family, as a taxpayer citizen I'm for prioritizing education as a community, as a state, as a country, over all sorts of other potential investments we can make.

IMO, that's our problem, we don't prioritize this investment sufficiently.

I'd beg to clarify on a few points.

Your point re: density of costly students. The ratio of "costly" students changes for the school system, but the number of those students doesn't increase and negatively impact your budget or staffing/facility plans. Those are the same students that were there before. The group of less-costly students then have smaller group sizes to deal with. Arguably a benefit to those kids. Unfortunately, the effects of costly vs uncostly student ratio is only a hypothesis.

You are not lowering the amount you are spending on schools or education by giving a tax break. The quality of EVERY school system is measured in per pupil spend, student/teacher ratio and schools on capacity. ALL of those things are PROVEN to have a positive, measurable benefit on student success. Documented. In this case, you are actually increasing the per-student spending with a tax cut that is less than the per pupil spend. That excess money goes back to the school system and IMPROVES the MEASURABLE population categories I mentioned above.

The issue most certainly is simple supply, demand and budget. That's why student success is again measured in per pupil spend, student/teacher ratio and schools on capacity. Yearly, the biggest concerns of EVERY district in MD and VA has been growing enrollment, over capacity schools, outdated/crumbling facilities, increasing student to teacher ratios, and inefficient use of facilities. Most school districts in the NE region cant keep up with infrastructure, and school improvement/building as it currently sits. That's been exacerbated with the materials shortage. Lessening the number of students that need to be served only helps the public school system. Incentivising people to take the leap to private schools would significantly benefit local school systems and budgets.

hmmm, I see your logic, but the proportion of challenges to the overall student body does matter. It's not as simple as just the straight body count. That's more so the issues around behavior, but often that's driven by frustrations around learning issues, issues that are often not diagnosed or addressed.

Sure, spending more per student is a great proxy for likely success or "quality". But just a proxy.

And if the more spending is because overhead costs are now being applied to fewer students then that's obviously of no real benefit to student learning


But we agree on far more than we disagree.

[jhu72]

Sorry, will never get behind giving tax deductions for not sending kids to public schools. You want a private education, pay for it yourself. If you think there are problems inside the system (real problems, not made up problems) then help be the solution. Gay and transgender kids in school aren't the or even a problem. Kids learning the real history of the US is not a problem. The biggest problem is tax payers have been trying to kill public schools since the 1970s. The vast majority of tax payers stop supporting public schools as soon as their kids graduate. Bigots, racists, etc., stopped supporting public education since Brown v Board of Education.

The real problem with public schools is the tax payers total lack of understanding of their responsibilities to American society.

[PizzaSnake]

I'm pretty well-read on education issues.
Resistance to integration in public schools?
In what way?

White parents removing their children from public schools rather than have their children educated with black children.

You missed some things in your canvass.

https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi ... ntext=uclf

Or are graduate level publications out-of-bounds? I know the University of Chicago is such a hotbed of left-wing apostasy…

Curious which "integration" you meant. A lot of things get integrated in schools.

I didnt work too much with graduate-level publications. More boots on the ground stuff with the BoEs, teachers, parents and school admins in DC and the surround when I covered education for the ultra right-wing WaPo...

Read the UChicago article and my point will be obvious. Hell, just read the title.