One of the big things one must learn when commentating on any issue is that situations are rarely static. Instead, they are fluid and evolve over time. If you get locked into one view, you will invariably find yourself looking at the wrong things.
It has been nearly a week since Bob Dunning’s piece ran on the school district’s letter regarding senior exemptions. In terms of my view of the situation, it has remained fairly static.
But there is also this: it really does not matter what I personally think. It matters what members of the community think.
So I talked to a lot of people, people who generally support the district, probably will vote yes on the parcel tax, and they all told me roughly the same thing, that the district mishandled this.
What I was told was that the district has been viewed as much more functional than the city. The school board has been less contentious and more professional. For the most part,people support the district and believe they have done a good job in tough times.
Most of the people, not all, but most, that you see attacking the school district publicly over this are in fact not of that ilk. Many were questioning the parcel tax from the start, and tend to be more conservative elements in the district. We need to remember that some of these people voiced dissent over Measure W, which passed by a 3-1 margin.
The district should be more concerned, though, that a core of the people who support them generally are concerned. And that concern actually began before this. It started with the way the district handled the firing of the coach.
From what I have been told, no one knows whether or not the district should have fired the coach. But to a person, no one was comfortable with the way it was handled in public.
This was the first time in awhile where the district has really mishandled something in a public way. There are certainly people who disagree with the closing of Valley Oak, disagree that the District should have considered closing Emerson, or think the District should not have prioritized the high school stadium over repairs at Emerson.
But those are opinions. People may have strong opinions on those matters but they are opinions over policy.
The coach firing appears to be a question about the competence of the board and the handling of a fiasco by a largely unknown and untested Superintendent.
And this latest controversy only adds to that concern. The feeling was the timing was bad. It looked like a campaign piece, given its timing.
The consensus is that Board President Richard Harris’ apology was not as sincere as some would have liked it. They felt like timing was not the only problem, but the content of the letter should have been more neutral.
I do not agree with a lot of this. But again, my opinion by and large does not matter here. The perception is that the district either made a mistake or tried to pull a fast one.
The question is, how much damage was done? To a person, no one really knows, although I have not talked to anyone who has changed their mind as to how to vote (or at least so claims), based on this.
They have, however, told me the district needs to re-focus on why we need the parcel tax. The argument here is very strong. As the result of budget cutbacks, the district will face a $6 million shortfall in the money coming from the state.
Davis has been able to weather the storm, based on the generosity of this community and its commitment to education.
The increase to the parcel tax will only cover two years and after that we will reevaluate the fiscal picture.
The parcel tax will only cover half of the deficit, but will reduce the number of needed layoffs, reduce needed increases to class sizes, preserve programs, etc.
The people who would be hurt by the failure to pass Measure A are not the school board or the Superintendent. Rather it would be the students and the teachers.
That is what I am hearing from people in the community. To me, there was a need to send out that letter and the letter followed the letter of the law. But to many people, the content of the letter looked like a campaign piece.
I have always remembered back to my days in San Luis Obispo, when that school district hid behind lawyers on legal technicalities. I often criticized them for failing to understand the politics of a situation. That is the problem that is faced right now.
However, in my view the stakes are high and so even if you think you are right, enough people believe that you are not that I think you have to, in the end, respect that view and work to restore trust and remind people what is really at stake here.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I have voted no on Measure A. Not because of any issues related to a coach or a letter. I admit that I am not living on a fixed income. My income has contracted along with the economy. This tax further erodes what little discretionary income I have, and I see that as being detrimental to the many other things that keep me here in Davis, and keep Davis uniquely Davis. I value the arts, and this tax is a further knock against my support for an already strained art community. I value the farmers market. I contribute to a number of charities. But I’m not so wealthy as to not feel this tax. I’ve had to evaluate where I place this school district relative to all the other things and people that make this community rich in character. The district has my support already through previous assessments. Ultimately, that is good enough.
Frankly, this article sounds like Harris’ nonapology. It is very dismissive of those opinions (as somehow illegitimate) that do not agree w those of the author. It does more harm than good IMO, to wit:
“I think Mr. Dunning did the community and the students in the district a disservice by failing to talk to district officials before running his column. I think there was considerable gray that would have colored at least the perception of intent in the situation. And at the core, I think it was an overreaction.”
” There are certainly people who disagree with the closing of Valley Oak, disagree that the District should have considered closing Emerson, or should have prioritized the High School Stadium over repairs at Emerson.
But those are opinions. People may have strong opinions on those matters but they are opinions over policy.”
“Most of the people, not all, but most, that you see attacking the school district over this publicly are in fact not of that ilk. Many were questioning the parcel tax from the start and tend to be more conservative elements in the district. We need to remember that some of these people voice dissent over Measure W which passed by a 3-1 margin.”
“To me, there was a need to send out that letter and the letter followed the letter of the law.”
And by the way, I have still not received my ballot…
Davis Enophile
I want to thank you for your thoughtful post.
I have voted yes on Measure A. I also made my decision based on a process of weighing what is most important to me in the community.
Perhaps partially because I have recently had two children in the public schools, I feel a responsibility to support this aspect of our community as fully as I can. I also feel that supporting our schools indirectly supports all of the other groups you have mentioned as these students are the artists, farmers … of our future. I fully understand and appreciate your decision even though it differs from my own. What I have difficulty understanding is the tendency I have seen to take one or two questionable decisions made by the supervisor and/or board and use them a the justification for a no vote that will have serious adverse consequences, not for them, but for the students.
I have volunteered for get out the vote operations in my neighborhood, which means I often get a good sense for what my neighbors’ political inclinations are. I also regularly attend block/neighborhood parties, and know many of my neighbors socially. Last night there was a neighborhood party in our neighborhood in west Davis, and I was thinking about this.
Based on what I see here, I think this is an issue that tends to be based on how connected one feels to neighbors and how strongly one values those neighborhood connections. Basically, the neighborhood joiners are likelier to vote yes. The ones that I rarely see, or who appear to have their social connections elsewhere are likelier to vote no.
As for me, I have seen my salary reduced in the past couple of years, but I still see a definite value in my yes vote for this. I can watch my neighbors’ kids and pretty readily can figure out ways in which not passing this will affect them. It comes from watching those kids in the neighborhood and chatting with their parents. In the past decade I have seen the quality of this neighborhood improve, and I think the schools have something to do with that.
[quote]“…For the most people support the district and believe they have done a good job in tough times.
Most of the people, not all, but most, that you see attacking the school district over this publicly are in fact not of that ilk. Many were questioning the parcel tax from the start and tend to be more conservative elements in the district. We need to remember that some of these people voice dissent over Measure W which passed by a 3-1 margin.”[/quote]I don’t see enough people “attacking the school district over this publicly” to make any assessment of a few folks as a group, let alone characterize “most” of their ilk by their identical Measure A intentions, Measure W history and level of conservativeness.
I’d say it’s a long stretch to make the claim that most people who have “publicly attacked” the district–or, more accurately, “criticized sending The Letter”–do not “support the district.”
[quote]“And by the way, I have still not received my ballot…”[/quote]Elaine, we have an extra we can give to you. Election materials for our daughter have been arriving at our home for a decade, although she’d only used our’s as a temporary “permanent address” while she was off at school. No amount of communication seems to halt our extra ballots, including three visits over the years to Freddie’s office.
Of course, we’ve already marked “YES on Measure A” on our daughter’s ballot, so you’re stuck with that opinion should you decide to accept her paperwork,
wdf1: “I have volunteered for get out the vote operations in my neighborhood, which means I often get a good sense for what my neighbors’ political inclinations are. I also regularly attend block/neighborhood parties, and know many of my neighbors socially. Last night there was a neighborhood party in our neighborhood in west Davis, and I was thinking about this.”
Now this is an interesting observation. I live in West Davis as well. I put on a potluck for Davis’ Neighbors Night Out that the city encourages. Only one person from our street came, but I met a lot of nice neighbors from the next street over. Interestingly, the ones that came to the party had NO kids. Now the parents that do have kids on our street regularly and illegally block our street off w orange traffic cones, so their little darlings can use the street w impunity – which causes those of us at the end of the cul-de-sac problems in trying to drive home.
Secondly, my kids did not have very good experiences in Davis schools. Some of the teachers were excellent, some were mediocre, and some were terrible. In general the administration was abominable in the schools, but not in all cases. But the fact of the matter is my one daughter was sexually assaulted at school and my son was beaten multiple times and had his bike and calculator destroyed while the administration did nothing.
I do not agree that the Measure A letter sent out was legal or harmless. But I actually do think the school handled the firing of the coach properly, except perhaps for the dismissive way public comment was handled at a school board meeting.
However, none of these side issues will determine how I am going to vote on Measure A, if I ever receive my ballot. I will base my decision on whether I think the school district really needs this money, and what the consequences will be if they do not get Measure A passed.
But I call them as I see them… and I don’t think citizens should be faulted for criticizing Davis Schools. Our schools are not sacrosanct, and need vast improvement. If citizens don’t speak out, nothing will change for the better…
[i]” and I don’t think citizens should be faulted for criticizing Davis Schools. Our schools are not sacrosanct, and need vast improvement. If citizens don’t speak out, nothing will change for the better”[/i]
Well said Elaine. I have always been perplexed at the sound of small violins playing when the subject turns toward teachers and public schools. The unions seem to be very effective protecting their interests: deflecting criticism by exploiting emotives and by using “the kids” as a human shield.
I support giving more money to teachers, based on how effective the teachers are in the classroom. If Measure A would require this, I would not only vote yes, I would walk door-to-door with WDF1 and encourage others to vote yes.
I am disappointed by the fact that our district pays the worst teachers the same as the best, as long as each one’s seat has been warmed the same number of years. I am disgusted by the fact that our district FIRES young teachers and retains old teachers, regardless of classroom performance. (I still recall my two worst teachers at Davis High: one was senile and the other was an alcoholic. They were old. They had tenure. They could not be fired. They made more than my best teachers.)
It is indefensible to suggest we cannot determine who are the good teachers, who are the bad, and who are the in between. Generally, the teachers and the principals know by observation and student progress the ordination of pedagogy. Moreover, in courses like English and math, it is simple to conduct a value added analysis and firgure out which teachers are doing the best job in aiding their students’ progress. It’s a crime to put a struggling elementary student year after year in the classroom of a poor teacher. Yet that’s what our policy of non-discrimination does.
There is a big myth that the Davis schools are the gold standard, due to the relatively high API test scores in our district. I suspect if you control for parental education, parental income and race/ethnicity (due to cultural factors which affect student performace), you would find that Davis schools are essentially the same in the core subjects* as Dixon schools, Woodland schools or Winters schools.
If you think otherwise, tell me what it is that the Davis schools and teachers are doing which makes them so much better, ceteris paribus, than the other districts and teachers.
*Where Davis schools have an advantage over the others is with non-core, enrichment programs (like music, theater, etc.) which are funded outside of the ADA and categoricals money. Odd that Davis, a bastion of liberals, has no problem with the fact that it is our wealthier residents giving our kids this advantage, essentially saying to the poorer districts and to the Serano decision of equal funding, “screw you.”
With the two rental houses I own in Davis, I pay property taxes on three homes. Typically my rentals are occupied by folks who do not have children in the schools. My rents are down. My city fees are skyrocketing. My income is definitely shrinking. Living in Davis is getting to be a squeeze.
But I voted yes on A because educating our youth is the future. Now, if we could just get back some of the funds that are wasted incarcerating people, we might not need to hold special elections just to keep our schools functioning on a marginal level!
E. Roberts Musser,
“””Now the parents that do have kids on our street regularly and illegally block our street off w orange traffic cones, so their little darlings can use the street w impunity – which causes those of us at the end of the cul-de-sac problems in trying to drive home. “”””
Please , that makes your life difficult , a little extra safety , probably from you the way you sound angry when you type about it !
ORANGE CONES ……………….WOW
Rich:[i] “I still recall my two worst teachers at Davis High: one was senile and the other was an alcoholic. They were old. They had tenure.”
[/i]
I don’t know that you are qualified to assess alcohol dependence or senility. And correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think tenure applies in the public school system. Does it?
My kids got great educations in the Davis schools. I had to actively monitor to make sure the placement was correct, and participated considerably with each one as they were in independent study. Now I have no children in the schools, so I have no vested interest. I can’t vote here, but I will pay this tax if it passes. So somebody please vote Yes on my behalf.
I can think of lots of reforms I’d love to see implemented. But nothing has persuaded me that the Davis schools, or any others, would benefit from having [b]less[/b] funding.
[quote]“Odd that Davis, a bastion of liberals, has no problem with the fact that it is our wealthier residents giving our kids this advantage, essentially saying to the poorer districts and to the Serano decision of equal funding, ‘screw you’.”[/quote]I’m pretty sure you’re just joking here, but on rereading…. Do you really see Serrano support falling along liberal-conservative lines? It seems difficult to me that ANY group still would support the decision, the Prop. 13 fiasco it helped foster and the resulting failure of California education in rich and poor districts alike.
As long as Davis schools are seen as helping maintain our healthy house prices, I’m sure liberals and conservatives here will be happy to pay a few extra bucks to help. As long as funding levels don’t get too disparate again, we probably won’t have a problem putting in parcel payments so we can keep pumping out polymaths. Is that a liberal or conservative view in your opinion?
[quote]“Odd that Davis, a bastion of liberals, has no problem with the fact that it is our wealthier residents giving our kids this advantage, essentially saying to the poorer districts and to the Serano decision of equal funding, ‘screw you’.”[/quote]I’m pretty sure you’re just joking here, but on rereading…. Do you really see Serrano support falling along liberal-conservative lines? It seems difficult to me that ANY group still would support the decision, the Prop. 13 fiasco it helped foster and the resulting failure of California education in rich and poor districts alike.
As long as Davis schools are seen as helping maintain our healthy house prices, I’m sure liberals and conservatives here will be happy to pay a few extra bucks to help. As long as funding levels don’t get too disparate again, we probably won’t have a problem putting in parcel payments so we can keep pumping out polymaths. Is that a liberal or conservative view in your opinion?
[i]”I don’t know that you are qualified to assess alcohol dependence or senility.”[/i]
Don, when you can clearly smell alcohol on your teacher’s breath every day, it does not take an advanced degree in distillationology to know the man was an alcoholic.
One day maybe 10 years ago — which was something like 20 years after I had this particular teacher — I mentioned to an older woman I knew from a Davis dog park that “I had a chemistry teacher back in 1981 at DHS who was regularly drunk” at Davis High. (I still hold it against him that I learned nothing in his class.) Harriet was a college professor at Stanlislaus State — yeah, long commute — but her husband was a Davis High English teacher, so she knew the faculty. Without a second of thought she said, “Fr*** *****n! The lush! They never could fire him.”
As to the senility of my American history teacher: again, it was obvious. He had been a boxer as a young man. He had a very messed up nose from getting punched in the head over and over. He was ‘punch drunk.’ He had serious memory problems as an older teacher. (He was also an a**hole. At least the drunk chem teacher was a nice guy.)
[i]”And correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think tenure applies in the public school system. Does it?”[/i]
You are wrong ([url]http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/research/quickhelp/elections/2005special/htTeacherTenure.html[/url]). [quote]Current state law mandates that teachers gain tenure in California after completing a two-year probationary period during which time they can be dismissed for poor performance by their school district. (see Education Code, Sec. 4929.20-44929.29). Once tenured, teachers gain a degree of security in their positions and [b]can be dismissed only for just cause*[/b]. State law dictates conditions under which a tenured teacher can be dismissed including unsatisfactory performance or misconduct.[/quote] *When Prop 74 was on the ballot–it would have changed the tenure system, but it was defeated by the voters after the CTA poured tens of millions of dollars into the ‘no’ campaign–I recall someone noting that in the previous 25 years there had been 12 teachers statewide with tenure who had ever been fired for ‘just cause.’ Of those, 11 had been convicted of serious felonies and the 12th was caught having sex with a student in the school parking lot. Sometimes bad teachers can be pressured to resign–that actually happened to my truly horrible 4th grade teacher at West Davis Intermediate School–but it is almost impossible to fire a bad teacher for ‘just cause’ in most cases.
Why? First, the standard for proving ineptitude is extremely high. And second, it is a very expensive legal process. Districts simply are not willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to get rid of their worst teachers for ‘just cause,’ when that money could instead be spent just hiring new, better teachers. I don’t think the DJUSD has ever fired a single bad teacher who had tenure.
[i]”Is that a liberal or conservative view in your opinion?”[/i]
I presumed that the liberal view was that all public school students in California should have equal funding.
I also presume that the conservative view is that property taxes paid within a district ought to be kept in that district and it should not matter if that means a wealthy district has much more money to fund its schools than a poorer district. (I think a further view of many conservatives would be that the money collected for K-12 education should be given to the parents in the form of a voucher, which the parents could use to fund a public school education or a private school education.)
Rifkin
And I would further postulate that the liberal view would probably be in agreement with the use of vouchers if it could be guaranteed that no student was turned away from a quality school based on their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, etc. and if these vouchers could not be used to support religious institutions. I would strongly object to having my tax dollars used for vouchers which could be used at the religious based school of the parents choice.
[i]”… the liberal view would probably be in agreement with the use of vouchers if it could be guaranteed that no student was turned away from a quality school based on their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, etc. …”[/i]
Polling data says you are not right on your postulation. In fact, vouchers are generally not widely supported among the center-right, the center-center or the center-left. Where you find support for vouchers is the libertarian-right and the conservatives who are currently sending their kids to religious schools. I recall seeing some polls among black parents living in low-income urban areas favoring vouchers. However, I could not just now find any current polls showing that. I would guess that many of those poor parents who favor vouchers would like to send their kids to parochial schools, if that were an option.
I did not postulate that liberals currently support vouchers, only that they would be likely to do so given the guarantees I stated. Since those guarantees are not in existence, I think it would be very unlikely that most liberals would support vouchers.
My guess is that you are correct that many poor parents would like to send their children to parochial schools. Having had a daughter who chose to attend a parochial school, I do not favor using taxes to support religious indoctrination which was the norm there although the school claimed it was not. I also suspect that many conservatives and libertarians might balk at taxes being used to send children to mosques, synagogue or ashram based schools. I continue to believe that the best solution is to improve the public schools, not to divert tax money away from them.
“I presumed that the liberal view was that all public school students in California should have equal funding.”
I think the liberal view is that we spend more money on education everywhere and cut it from prisons.
A couple of points:
1. the district mishandled this by their own admission, so we need not argue that point anymore.
2. There are two issues, the tax, and the districts’ behavior. We talked the districts behavior to death, so onto the tax:
a. I do not see passage of the tax as necessarily supporting the students. The two are not necessarily one in the same. The question is, do we truly believe the district will spend money on the students behalf, and if that money is spent on their behalf, will we have a measurable way of showing that the money did any good? I find it amazing that so many davisites gave their support to the schools, and yet they closed valley oak anyway, and gave the community the middle finger, and they damn near succeeded in closing emerson. In short, the district is not owed a pat on the back for a job well done.
b. There are economic repercussions whether the tax passes or not. more than one person has wrote in, suggesting they may have to leave davis. And if that happens, there goes that person’s support for the davis schools. And we haven’t even hit with the water and sewer fee increases yet, and that doesn’t factor in the rising cost of gas. pricing your tax base out of town is going to mean less revenue for the schools.
So let me ask, where would you cut $6 million from the district’s budget?
Rifkin: [i]It is indefensible to suggest we cannot determine who are the good teachers, who are the bad, and who are the in between.[/i]
In recent years I have seen that DJUSD has been hiring most of its newer teachers with experience in other districts. This means that they have a track record beyond their initial probation in their first district. I haven’t seen evidence of truly bad teachers as you describe. I have seen a teacher or two that weren’t the greatest fit for my kids, but I have heard praises of them from other parents.
I grew up with coaches teaching my high school health and history classes, clearly when they weren’t qualified or interested in the subject. An older cousin of mine has mentioned teachers smoking in the classroom in her day; all I remember was smoke drifting out of the teachers’ lounge. I haven’t seen any of that (and no cases of drunkenness, unacceptable substance use) in Davis. I don’t think parents would let the district get away with that.
[i]There is a big myth that the Davis schools are the gold standard, due to the relatively high API test scores in our district, etc.[/i]
In reference to what I said earlier, I think on the whole there are all round more experienced and competent teachers in Davis. I suspect that other districts are likelier to have more newer teachers with less experience. I think that explains something. In Davis I suspect that parents are more willing to be responsive to teacher suggestions and comments, and probably doing what parents everywhere ought to be doing (reading to their kids, following what they’re doing with their homework), but it’s mostly teachers running the show, day-to-day at school.
I’m interested to see what other districts (LAUSD) do with the value-added measurements, but LA is a district that is a little more desperate to get things moving in the right direction. What I’m leary of is having schools jump on the bandwagon of every education fad, only to discover the shortcomings later.
By the way, I see that Dunning softened slightly in his column today.
[quote]“I presumed that the liberal view was that all public school students in California should have equal funding.”
“I think the liberal view is that we spend more money on education everywhere and cut it from prisons.”[/quote]Excellent retort, agree.
[i]”Excellent retort, agree.”[/i]
It’s actually a non-sequitur.
Check that. It’s not a non-sequitur. It simply does not address the question of whether liberals do or do not prefer equal funding. In other words, it’s a non-denial denial.
Medwoman: on your point about not supporting vouchers because they can support schools connected to certain religions… What about our current public schools supporting the religion of Liberalism?
Jeff B.: I’m not entirely sure what you mean by religion of Liberalism. But I don’t want my tax dollars going to people who say that I and my loved ones are going to hell. I grudgingly respect their right to believe it, but if we’re going to exist in this country as we have up until now, we need a default position of religious tolerance (provided those religions don’t openly advocate or act on harming others). That means not giving the government the appearance supporting an intolerant religious belief.
JB
I don’t believe that there is such a thing as “the religion of liberalism”. When you can define this as a group which has a well defined constituent group with an agreed upon set of beliefs ( as in commonly held theology ) and tax exempt status, I will believe you. Until then, I would have to consider this question a non issue that you put forward based on no more than your personal belief system.
To Avatar: A traffic cone in the dead center of the street stops all traffic, and makes the little darlings believe they can play there w impunity/no repercussions. It makes the kids LESS SAFE, not more safe. As a result, these same kids now tend to dart out from between parked cars, don’t watch out for cars, etc. It’s a recipe for a tragedy…
JB: ” What about our current public schools supporting the religion of Liberalism?”
All 3 of my children ran into problems w their teachers spouting liberal political views. In fact my children were actually denigrated in front of other students for holding more conservative views than that of their teachers. One biology teacher said to my daughter “I can’t believe you would think that”, when my daughter expressed a whit of skeptism about some liberal view the teacher had espoused. My children learned to keep their mouths shut and not argue w the teacher when s/he would state some extreme liberal view. It got even worse when my kids attended college… Anyone who thinks schools represent the “free forum of ideas” that they are supposed to is sadly mistaken. Students are not permitted to think critically, or question liberalism in the public schools and colleges in this state. It is very disheartening and undemocratic… but I see some of that same dismissive attitude on this blog if one doesn’t believe lock step liberal think…
Trust me when I tell you CA is out of sink w most of the rest of the nation on a whole host of issues… they are in their own little liberal bubble…
By the way, I finally received my Measure A ballot…
Correction: “out of sync”
EMR
I agree with you that no student should have their ideas denigrated by a teacher. However,unlike you I do not feel that either end of the political spectrum has a monopoly on this kind of inappropriate activity. Probably because their mother has very strongly held beliefs, and not always ones associated with “liberals” my kids tended to get it from both sides. This led me to the conclusion that people who hold very strong opinions tend to state those as though they were truth. While this is entirely appropriate on a blog, it is less so for a teacher whether in a public or private school. One example of unwarranted criticism from the right was attempted interference with my children’s lack of acceptance of the almost universally accepted “God” as father figure especially associated with the more conservative members of our society.
And on another note, I’m glad your ballot has arrived ! ; – )
Interesting: I had some very conservative teachers when I was in high school who treated me the same way. But I learned a lot from them regardless. With most of my teachers, and those of my kids, I had no idea as to their ideological viewpoints. I can certainly imagine a biology teacher dismissing creationist viewpoints, although discussion is always better than denigration.
“So let me ask, where would you cut $6 million from the district’s budget?”
lol, where is the 6 million going to come from when people are priced out of davis?
Musser
“when people are priced out of Davis”
While I don’want to equate your ideas with those of Jeff Boone, it does seem to be a fairly common conservative/ libertarian theme that if people cannot afford their lifestyle, they either need to tighten their belts and or improve their skills so as to improve their incomes.
When I have objected to that as a rather heartless point of view, I have either been informed that I am naive about the virtues of a market economy or a bleeding heart liberal. I see a certain irony in this concern for the wellbeing of the community. And I still can’t imagine where those six million will come from.
Medwoman: “they either need to tighten their belts and or improve their skills so as to improve their incomes.”
“I see a certain irony in this concern for the wellbeing of the community.”
so do I. for example, these parcel taxes disproportionately hit the poor since they pay the same dollar amount, and you don’t appear to give a crap.
There is no other legal way to structure a schools tax that I am aware of. Please let me know if there is a different legal method of taxation that you would support. Otherwise, it is a choice between this tax measure, and no tax measure; the latter means significant spending cuts for Davis schools. Do you support cutting DJUSD budget by $6 million dollars?
Just curious: does anybody know who, other than Thomas Randall, is funding the opposition to this measure?
Musser
Well, I guess that just shows how deceptive appearances can be. I am very much in favor of the” rich” picking up proportionately more of the tax burden even though that would definitely affect me. Unfortunately, that is not an option here. if it were, I guarantee it would have my vote.
I am completely unapologetic about my view that the wealthiest among us should be willing to economically support the system that has helped me to achieve my comfortable lifestyle and that would include being taxed at a significantly higher rate than my less affluent neighbors.
To JBoone’s earlier comment… the religion the public schools espouse & ‘teach’ is not liberalism… it is agnosticism &/or atheism..
[i]Just curious: does anybody know who, other than Thomas Randall, is funding the opposition to this measure?[/i]
I understand that Jose Granda is probably coordinating with Randall.
[i]these parcel taxes disproportionately hit the poor since they pay the same dollar amount, and you don’t appear to give a crap.[/i]
There was a serious attempt to have a statewide vote to extend certain state taxes. A good portion of those were income taxes, which are more progressive than property taxes. I am personally disappointed that not one Republican would come out and support a workable compromise to have that vote. The lack of that tax revenue accounts for a little more than $3 million in DJUSD’s deficit for next year. And it’s hitting all school districts across the state, not just DJUSD. And of course the poor will be disproportionately affected. It makes me feel like the legislative Republicans don’t appear to give a crap.
The system is screwed and the state has underfunded education because of the Republican stranglehold on the budget. So the argument that because most districts are underfunded we should underfund in sympathy in the hopes that people who don’t believe in the public schools or taxes will see the light is foolish and dumb. Its not a liberal or conservative issue it cuts across all the lines. Its parents wanting what is best for their kids. That is why I’m supporting measure A to support the education of my kids and the kids of this community. Its shocking that after all these years you still go off about your own experience years ago with a couple of teachers that didn’t meet your expectations. Try some therapy and then grow up. Maybe you have deficiencies as a result of your experience with these people. That would explain a lot but in the greater scheme of things has it really hurt you? Also, out of how many teachers did you have these few “Bad ones?” So you want to punish the kids because you had some bad teachers or you don’t like the system or you have issues with some grammar or whatever and then after bashing the district until the end your going to claim you voted for the increase like you did the last time. Well on behalf of all the people who have children in school facing larger class sizes thanks for your support. Its good to know that you want to make the children suffer just because the system isn’t perfect. Its good to know that because of the actions of those who are long gone you are forever static in your thinking and want to punish and deprive innocent children of opportunity. Its so easy to be so high and mighty when you don’t have a kid in the system, when you don’t worry that the class of 25 is already too large for your child and that 30 seems to guarantee that the kid will be lost in the mass.
Dunning had it right today when he said he was voting yes despite all his concerns. The kids deserve better.
[quote]“With most of my teachers, and those of my kids, I had no idea as to their ideological viewpoints. I can certainly imagine a biology teacher dismissing creationist viewpoints, although discussion is always better than denigration.”[/quote] I’d also be at a loss to label my own K-12 teachers in this way (as well as the DHS teachers who did exceptional jobs providing our children with educations they needed to successfully head three different directions and an appreciation for learning that still enhances their lives).
I classified my own instructors in one of two simple categories (“tough” or “nice”) until at least 10th grade. Either they had little interest in pushing their political or religious views on us or we couldn’t have cared less because our curiosities were elsewhere, probably both.
Of course, that all changed at college where instructors were happy to include their opinions with the facts. But that seemed fine since they encouraged us to challenge them. But, that may have been accentuated by the times (“Question Authority!”).
I’d also hope a frustrated biology teacher could be patient even with a student showing up convinced that life on earth began 10,000 years ago, say, and insisting on the truth of it. Kids who come to public school indoctrinated with liberal or conservative dogma start at serious disadvantage with teachers and fellow students alike.
Hello,
There are many reasons to be opposed to Measure A like I am and I offer commentary in that regard on the following website and its also connected to a Facebook webpage as well (see below):
[url]http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-a[/url]
And the “No on A” campaign has also been doing phone calling as well.
“lol, where is the 6 million going to come from when people are priced out of davis?”
lots of people are already priced out of Davis. Why do you think 2/3 of Davis are renters. Why do you think there are so many interdistrict transfers of UCD employees children. Its not that this tax will push them over although it might push a few on the margin. Its the restrictions on supply that have driven prices up to the point where young families can’t afford to live here that has been a much greater detriment than this $200 will impose.
[i]And the “No on A” campaign has also been doing phone calling as well.[/i]
And what kinds of conversations do you have and receptions do you get when you call folks?
If you like your pro/con ballot arguments side by side, then here’s something for you: [url]http://davismedia.org/content/measure-statements[/url]
I’ll take these in reverse order:
WDF1: you responded to my criticism of the school tax with democrat party talking points. if that is the best you can do, it is quite pathetic. try again. at least Don and Medwoman actually respond to the issue.
Don: There is no other legal way to structure a schools tax that I am aware of. Please let me know if there is a different legal method of taxation that you would support.
assuming that is correct, it does not make the tax fair for the following reasons whether it is the only option or not:
1. the tax disproportionately hits low income
2. the tax has an age discrimination clause which makes only younger people liable for the tax.
Don: Otherwise, it is a choice between this tax measure, and no tax measure; the latter means significant spending cuts for Davis schools.
so does the former. I thought I explained that, but I’ll say it again: pricing your residents out of town means those residents cannot pay taxes to the schools.
” Do you support cutting DJUSD budget by $6 million dollars?”
lol, given the gravity of the economic situation, that is going to happen one way or the other.
Medwoman:
“I am completely unapologetic about my view that the wealthiest among us should be willing to economically support the system that has helped me to achieve my comfortable lifestyle and that would include being taxed at a significantly higher rate than my less affluent neighbors.”
well, that is quite interesting viewpoint because that is precisely the opposite of what the school tax does.
Musser
“the opposite of what the school tax does”
True, and from my point of view, regrettable, but this was the only measure on the ballot. I cannot see penalizing today’s children because there is not enough political will to establish a more fair system of taxation.
See today’s article, I explain the law and why it has to be a parcel tax.
[i]2. the tax has an age discrimination clause which makes only younger people liable for the tax.[/i]
Well, this is interesting, given that you use the argument that the tax is unfair to the poor. Seniors are likelier to be retired and on fixed income. About a thousand seniors use the exemptions, and almost 300 are residents of the Rancho Yolo mobile home park, many of whom appear to be lower income, based on recent blog discussions.
Agree with you David about much of this being traceable to Prop 13. Having direct interaction with the California public schools both before and after Prop 13 I can vouch for it’s deleterious effects. It was actually at the state and federal level that I was referring to a lack of political will. I realize that our locals pretty much have their hands tied as far as fundraising is concerned. All the more reason to offer our ongoing support.
JustSaying: “I’d also hope a frustrated biology teacher could be patient even with a student showing up convinced that life on earth began 10,000 years ago, say, and insisting on the truth of it. Kids who come to public school indoctrinated with liberal or conservative dogma start at serious disadvantage with teachers and fellow students alike.”
I find it amusing that everyone assumes the criticism leveled at my daughter from her biology teacher was about religion – it wasn’t. It had to do w global warming, if I remember rightly, and what my daughter said was pretty innocuous – it was merely an innocent question. My daughter was shocked at the visceral reaction she got from her biology teacher, and learned to keep her mouth shut in this liberal bastion of PC. Same thing happened to my son when he entered college, only more so. There, he had a critical thinking teacher who literally “attacked” those who didn’t agree w the teacher’s extreme leftist world view, while the liberals got a “pass”. So it became a real dilemma when papers were due. Does a student speak his/her mind, or give the teacher what the teacher wants to ensure a good grade on the essay? My daughter is going through the same thing right now in pre-med in her Public Health class… Surprisingly, I find CA people to be some of the most intolerant of views that differ from their own leftist ideas of what is the correct way of doing things…
[i]hpierce: …the religion the public schools espouse & ‘teach’ is not liberalism… it is agnosticism &/or atheism”[/i]
[quote]Religion:
1. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion; [the religion of Liberalism].
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.[/quote]
Frankly, I see less diversity in the beliefs and practices of US liberals than I do in US Christians.
Instead of having or developing faith in a higher power and creator, Liberals tend to rely on science for their answers to the big questions. However, this does not fully satiate their spiritual needs, and hence the reason they have adopted the label “progressive” as they persistently, and sometimes futilely, tweak the rules in an attempt to fill this need.
Liberals tend to reject the binding moral basis delivered from the traditional religions, and instead build a different “church of government” that will net out a morality deemed more acceptable to them.
It is admirable what liberals attempt to achieve; and I think very few tenants of liberalism are malicious in intent. However, it is the lack of Liberal’s acceptance and transparency that they, as a group, are pushing their set of beliefs and practices on others… and this simple problem makes them dangerous to a society.
The vast majority of public educators are liberals. As a parent and prior student, there is absolutely no question that the process of education included copious amounts of brainwashing toward a liberal viewpoint. I could made to be more accepting of this if educators and liberals would just admit it. It is their denial that the problem exists that sends off my alarm bells. This and the crappy outcomes are enough to justify my opinion that the entire system should be scrapped and replaced with vouchers and private providers. At least then, as a parent, I could combat this tendency for the public education system to indoctrinate my kids into the religion of liberalism.
Wow, so many generalizations about liberals. And so disparaging. One might conclude that you believe conservatives are morally superior to liberals. But I’m sure that isn’t what you intended to say.
“Liberalism” is a political philosophy. If it is a religion, then so is conservatism.
[i]“Liberals “build a different “church of government” that will net out a morality deemed more acceptable to them.”[/i]
Lots of people do this. I happen to believe that social conservatives have a much stronger tendency to want the government to tell people what they can and cannot do – at least in the bedroom, or which substances they consume. But this meddlesome characteristic certainly exists across political philosophies. Are you a libertarian?
Pew Research polls show that only a tiny percentage of Americans declare themselves to be atheist or agnostic (about 1 to 2%). A much larger percentage of Americans are secular (12%); i.e., not religious in any way, but not necessarily atheist or agnostic. Secularists range across the belief spectrum; secularism is not a religion, nor is it something that educators “teach.”
From Pew: “Currently, 5% of Republicans say they are atheist, agnostic, or decline to state a religious preference, which is the same percentage that did so in 1987. But the number of Democrats in this category is now 11%, up from 7% in 1987; currently 17% of independents are classified as secular, an increase from 9% in 1987.”
[i]“This and the crappy outcomes are enough to justify my opinion that the entire system should be scrapped…”
[/i]My children had excellent outcomes from DJUSD. Did your kids attend Davis schools? I also got an excellent education in public schools.
Don: The percent of liberal democrats that are teachers far exceeds the numbers of the general population. My sons did not have excellent outcomes from Davis high school. However, friends of ours having their less-gifted kids attended Jesuit had much better education outcomes. Davis schools teach to a narrow template. Kids outside that template are marginalized and have their opinion of education corrupted. It has taken my oldest son two difficult years of college to recover from the damage done by the Davis schools. He is an extremely intellegent, hard-working, curious and creative kid that developed such a distaste for education. He was made to feel that he didn’t fit in and his opinions did not really matter. He was surrounded by too many teachers seeking the path of least difficulty… meaning they played favorites to the kids that conformed to a template that promissed them, the teacher, the least amount of effort. The smart non-conforming kids see this and mimick the teacher… seeking the path that takes the least amount of effort.
I moved to CA in the ninth grade after having most of my schooling in the Mid West. I was two grades ahead of my fellow CA students.
[quote]“I find it amusing that everyone assumes the criticism leveled at my daughter from her biology teacher was about religion – it wasn’t.”[/quote]I was responding to Don’s observations, not yours.
With respect to your comments, I’d wonder whether you’re painting with too broad a brush. I’m not questioning your children’s unpleasant experiences, just your conclusions.
Lots of us must have run into several jerks during our school years. A few teachers just don’t deal well with challenges from students, regardless of the reasons for the questioning.
Arguing that this is a liberal failing probably doesn’t work beyond the extent that fewer conservatives go into teaching. And the idea that intolerance is a leftist characteristic easily can be tested with this statement:[quote]“I find CA people to be some of the most intolerant of views that differ from their own conservative, rightest ideas of what is the correct way of doing things….” [/quote]Nine out of 10 people I checked with this morning totally agreed. Try it out in your own neighborhood.
@Jeff: I don’t think I’ve ever been so thoroughly mischaracterized in your generalizations. Did you have a bad weekend?
It makes me think that maybe I’m not really liberal, nor is most of Davis.
Jeff: [i]”Davis schools teach to a narrow template. Kids outside that template are marginalized and have their opinion of education corrupted.”[/i]
That can be true anywhere if the parent doesn’t recognize the problem and act on it. My son’s placement was inappropriate, so we got him moved into DSIS and he did 8th – 12th grades there. He was in GATE and Special Ed, and I think very highly of those programs and resources, but independent study proved the best placement. We did have to press a bit to get that done. It was a good choice for my daughter at one point as well. But if you just count on the school system to know what is best for your child, and fail to see the problems as they are developing, you aren’t likely to have good outcomes anywhere.
What I will say about DJUSD is that it has more such options than other school districts. The independent study program here was miles ahead of what was available in Dixon schools.
[quote]“Jeff: ‘Davis schools teach to a narrow template. Kids outside that template are marginalized and have their opinion of education corrupted.’
“That can be true anywhere if the parent doesn’t recognize the problem and act on it. My son’s placement was inappropriate, so we got him moved into DSIS and he did 8th – 12th grades there….”[/quote] Didn’t I read somewhere that about half of Davis’ high school age kids are schooled in various special programs. If true, that’s hardly a “narrow template.” I can’t testify to more than two other school districts, but they didn’t come close to DJUSD in providing accommodation to varied needs.
Parents can’s be blamed for being unaware of opportunities if a school district doesn’t communicate adequately with them. However, the word’s certainly out there with Davis parents.
It’s discouraging that everyone didn’t have as excellent an experience with Davis schools as we did. But, I think they do a fine job of providing education on a mass basis, with lots of options available.
Don: my kids were mostly A students until they hit eigth grade. They loved school before Jr high. By the time we realized that their “problem” with their decline to a B average was the fact they hated school, it was too late to pull them out.
My wife and I regret falling into the “Davis schools are great” trap. We held on too long hiring tutors and expecting the kids to hit their stride again. Now that they are out of high school and able to explain the situation to us without our “Davis Schools Are Great” bias, we now get it. Davis schools are not great at inspiring kids that do not fit a narrow template.
[i]”it was too late to pull them out.[/i]”
I don’t understand this at all. 7th to 8th grade is when we saw the problem, and we moved quickly to change the placement. It’s never too late.
Don: my point was/is, that Davis schools, grades 8-12, are no better in general, and are potentially worse for at least 50% of the kids. For every parent that says their kid’s jr. high and high school education experience was great, I can find another that says the opposite.
Of course there is no data to back up my theory; but I think if you somehow migrated all Woodland students to Davis and all Davis Students to Woodland, the Davis students as a whole would do marginally better, and the Woodland students as a whole would do marginally worse.
From my perspective as a parent of two boys that attended Davis schools K-12 and a wife that also attended K-12 30 year prior; Davis teachers do not give back enough from the gift of so many gifted students. Frankly, they have an easier job and should direct their reserve energy at inspiring and engaging more of the non-template learners. Instead, they get a bit lazy and let these non-template learners flounder… or worse, make them feel incapable and unfitting. I don’t have a problem with individuals competing for achievement… but only after they are educated.
Every child that does not come away from his/her public school experience motivated to learn more is a tragedy caused by the education system and is an indication that the school is not performing to expectation.
JB
While I would agree that the excellence of my two kids educations stopped at the elementary school level, I had teachers and counselors who paid very close attention to my son who was getting into serious emotional trouble in high school. This resulted in them working very closely with me to find the right placement for my son which happened to be DaVinci. I believe that the existence of this program was certainly what got my son through high school and quite possibly saved his life. While I would agree that the main high school caters to a narrow template of kids such as my daughter who would probably excel anywhere, there are other programs available for those who need a more specialized and personal program. One of my concerns about further cutbacks is that with larger class sizes and fewer counselors we may be putting some of our more vulnerable students at greater risk.
medwoman: DaVinci was just getting off the ground when my oldest son was in high school. I think it might have helped him. However, our problem was that he tested as being a bit beyond the kids he knew to be signing up for this alternative. His emotional intelligence was much higher than most kids his age (this was based on our observation of the behavior of other kids his age… even the brainy ones). His SAT ended up in the low 1800s… this and other evidence seemed to validate our impression that it wasn’t his capability as much as his motivation. He ended up with a 3.2 GPA… below what was required for him to be accepted into some of the schools he desired. He is doing fine now and we expect him to be fine, however, he is not complementary of his Davis education and tells us the hype is overblown. We believe him. Many other parents we talk to seem to agree that the quality of Davis schools is overblown… API scores being more a factor of having a higher percentage of kids fitting the template than being evidence of higher quality teaching.
My thinking is that because all kids are captives of the public school system, and because it lacks the natural incentive to cater to individual needs of students, it will always fail too many kids. Yes, it will certainly save some like your son; but I see greater potential in a system that responds to the individual needs of customers (students and their parents) free to choose what best fits the need of their sons and daughters.
JB
Would you clarify your use of “natural incentive”as used to refer to a system ?
So far , from the postings that I have seen, the Davis school system seems to be operating pretty much as would be expected. Great for some, not so great for others, and probably just fine for the majority. Private schools are no panacea as we found when my daughter decided to attend St. Francis. The instruction was great in some, but not all subjects. All teachers knew all students, an advantage over Davis high, but not over DaVinci. There was definitely religious indoctrination and this was daily, not just at special events. But more importantly, all of the girl’s problems were viewed through the narrow prism of the Catholic faith regardless of her background or belief system. Strengths were also judged within that system. I recall my daughters keen disappointment when many,many of her service hours were not counted because they were not with Catholic groups. My point ? All education systems have their strengths and weaknesses. And, all kids are not “captive” to the
public schools. There are many options available in our area,both within and outside the public system right down to home schooling for those who cannot find an option they like.
One of the main points that I can see in favor of supporting the public schools is to enable them to continue to develop more supportive options such as DaVinci for those students who do not fit the “narrow template” and for whatever reason have chosen to keep their children in the public schools.
medwoman, I think we have only one choice: to drastically improve the system of K-12 education. The process is outdated, unsophisticated, bloated and bureaucratic. It needs to be a technologically-enabled, state-of-the-art, performance-managed, customer-service-oriented system. There have been successful test examples of this type of approach all over the country; however, they have been kept small and beat back by the power of the teachers’ unions intent to maintain the status quo. There is plenty of proof that doubling the amount spent per child will not improve outcomes. The primary reason is that there are too many employees of the system that are not motivated to change their performance behavior. A for-profit model would change this as market forces would adjust pay for teacher talent and performance… not just seniority.
I admit to being conflicted about the potential loss of community that would result from privatizing public education. I envision a system that looks somewhat like some of the home school programs that exist today – where there is a central campus for group and team activities, but where the “home” part is some smaller private school serving students with like needs.
My original point here was simply that I did not see Davis schools (primarily grades 8-12) as being better and rejected this as a reason to vote yes on Measure A.
Jeff: [i] I envision a system that looks somewhat like some of the home school programs that exist today – where there is a central campus for group and team activities, but where the “home” part is some smaller private school serving students with like needs. [/i]
Davis School for Independent Study is very close to this model. It works very well for some students, especially if their parents are actively involved in the process. It doesn’t work well for all students, as they tell the student and parent at the very first meeting. DSIS also provides support services for home-schooling parents in the community. DaVinci is a tech-oriented magnet school.
Basically, options similar to what you want exist. You just want them privatized. I’m not convinced that will improve outcomes.
Don: The reason the current Independent Study model only works well for some students is that it also serves a narrow template of student.
Thinking about this concept of the “actively involved parent”… isn’t another way to explain this as parents working to prevent the damage that would otherwise be done by the crappy school? If parental involvement is so required to ensure the kids get a quality education, then why not just make the format more like Independent Study for all kids?
Very little comes from the school to assist parents with the job of educating their kids unless you proactively and aggressively go after it. As a parent you have to have the time, energy and sophistication to play an active role. I don’t know about your family, but my wife and I work. Also, my parents did not play anything close to this suggested level of an active role, and I received a quality education. What has changed?
In the current average public school educator mindset, the kids and their parents are a nuisance preventing what would otherwise be an easy job toward a nice retirement. I know bad customer service when I see it, and I know it is usually a symptom of a broken system of incentives. It is more often what happens in the public sector, since the private sector filters out all the bad operators and low-value, or low-quality service providers. Provider competition and customer choice are the mechanisms that continually drive up value (higher quality at lower cost). I don’t think you can do this at all in the public sector unless you find a way to allow competition and choice. Vouchers are one way.
I want to work hard to earn money to pay into a system that continually strives to exceed my expectations as a customer. I don’t want to keep giving a larger percentage of my hard-earned income to a system that strives for a baseline of mediocrity and protects the status quo.
Jeff B: [i]Very little comes from the school to assist parents with the job of educating their kids unless you proactively and aggressively go after it. As a parent you have to have the time, energy and sophistication to play an active role. I don’t know about your family, but my wife and I work. Also, my parents did not play anything close to this suggested level of an active role, and I received a quality education. What has changed?[/i]
Many of the charter schools and a few private schools I have explored make frequent mention of parent involvement and a key component of their program:
[url]http://www.aspirepublicschools.org/?q=involvement[/url]
I my oldest kid had a rough go of it in school; he had a learning disability. It required substantial parent involvement to get him to his diploma. We made use of a number of different programs throughout the district at various levels. Frankly, I am grateful we made it with him. I appreciated that the district staff was helpful and sympathetic most of the time. We had to go after a lot of things in the district, but I thought we were given helpful suggestions along the way.
Jeff:[i] “As a parent you have to have the time, energy and sophistication to play an active role. I don’t know about your family, but my wife and I work.”[/i]
I almost don’t know what to say in response to this. But I guess you kind of asked for this.
I have run a small business that is open 362 days a year for 30 years. I work six days a week. My wife worked full time at the business or at another job all through our kids’ school years.
When one child had trouble in elementary school, I rearranged my schedule and paid staff so I could volunteer in the classroom two afternoons a week. Special Ed meetings are always daytime. I attended them all. I was on the DSIS site council for three years. I served on a curriculum committee for the district, because somebody has to do it; they meet in evenings. There are a lot of parents who are much more actively involved than I was, and that includes all of the school board members prior to their election (and since). And of course, I helped to some degree with the various extra-curricular activities such as debate club. Again, that meant paying staff to cover while I went off to judge debate competitions.
DSIS means that you, the parent, function as the day-to-day ‘teacher’ and the child meets with a DSIS instructor one hour per week (plus math separately). I chose to attend those weekly meetings. Each child had space set up at the nursery to work on schoolwork. We monitored the weekly assignments, had guided discussions at home about the topics, and actively participated in the learning process. Really, that is the basic support that every child should have at home. DSIS just takes it to a higher level.
Jeff, you chose to let the school system take responsibility for your kids’ education. Then you weren’t satisfied with the results. You, by your own admission, didn’t get involved. No school, private or public, could possibly meet your exacting requirements if they couldn’t self-select for their student population. Public schools take every child that comes to them, no matter how difficult. They set up alternative programs such as DSIS, DaVinci, and King for students of particular needs. They provide special ed and GATE for mainstream students who can be accommodated with that assistance.
You have these extremely theoretical, totally impractical ideas about how schools ‘should’ be run, and use your own unsatisfactory experience to conclude that local schools are a failure. Thus, you apparently oppose stopgap funding that would retain existing programs, because you want to scrap the whole thing in favor of some privatized tech campus concept.
So if you and other tax opponents prevail, parents who are actively involved in their kids’ education, working to make the best use of DJUSD resources, will have even less to work with. And those whose parents sit back and let the system try to educate 8000 or so kids, without even trying to help, will get even worse outcomes.
[i]”In the current average public school educator mindset, the kids and their parents are a nuisance preventing what would otherwise be an easy job toward a nice retirement.”[/i]
I can’t think of a single teacher my kids had to whom I would apply that statement. And frankly, if you weren’t that involved in your kids’ education, how could you possibly rate the attitudes of their teachers?
Yeah, it’s frustrating discussing education with conservatives.
JB
From your comments, I can only assume that you have had no experience with private schools or you might have a slightly different view from your stated ” since the private sector filters out all the bad operators and low value or low quality service providers.”
My daughter completed elementary and junior high in the Davis schools where she received a wonderful education which prepared her to enter,with highest honors, the private school of her choice, St. Francis. The only real difference we could see between the educational opportunities of Davis high and St. Francis was that the latter was smaller and all girl and my daughter wanted that experience. St.Francis, like Loretto and Jesuit require extensive parental involvement and state so up front. As a single parent working full time, this proved challenging
But I did what I felt was needed to support my daughter in her choice. Three years later, I made the same choice to be very involved in my son’s education at DaVinci where my involvement was welcomed, but not required. So, St. Francis is much,much more expensive than the public schools and requires parental involvement ( or a substantial additional monetary fee if you apply to opt out of participation).
As for the private sector always weeding out the low performers, this is just a myth. While most of the instructors at St.Francis were competent in their subjects and inspirational to the girls, this was by no means universal. I can think of at least two very apathetic, barely competent teachers who had been there for a very long time and were being protected probably because of their religious affiliation. There were several others who would accept absolutely no questioning of their religious, philosophic or political ideas. Somehow the private sector was no better than the public in weeding out the poor performers. Overall, I would say that the quality of the education that my son received at DaVinci probably equalled that of my daughter at St. Francis given the size difference and newness of the DaVinci program which meant that some kids had to go to the main high school for some classes and programs.
In some cases, the private sector does just what you claim in terms of customer service. Nordstroms and the Apple stores are two cases that come to mind. but I think your generalization that all private enterprise is superior and all public endeavors are necessarily inferior because of a mind set that you have defined and arbitrarily applied to all is just plain wrong. For instance, I would consider Target part of the private sector. Do you really feel that you get excellent service every time you walk the door? I don’t ( either get excellent service…or walk in the door any more). Your notion that all the poor teachers will just “fade away” is erroneous as demonstrated by the current private schools which are certainly not without their share of long term mediocrity.
If we go to a voucher system and undermine the public schools, what makes you think that many of these school’s won’t behave more like the
Target than Nordstrom model in order to maximize their profits? And what will keep the best schools from ” cherry picking” only the best and the brightest , or those that fit some other preordained standard, the way the privates do now, leaving many parents with choices no better than what you perceive as the worst of the public system now only with no opportunity to vote for board members or supervisors.
[i]Provider competition and customer choice are the mechanisms that continually drive up value (higher quality at lower cost). I don’t think you can do this at all in the public sector unless you find a way to allow competition and choice.[/i]
There are many choices within the public school system, particularly at DJUSD. Intradistrict transfers are available for parents who aren’t happy with the school of residence. Spanish Immersion is an option for elementary students. DaVinci acts as a magnet school at the secondary level. DSIS is an option at all grade levels. Home schooling can be done with DSIS resources. Split-site is an option where independent study doesn’t provide the best class choices (sometimes necessary to get the UC A – G requirements).
In extreme situations, interdistrict transfer out of the district is available. It is notable that DJUSD has a lot more students transferring in than out. Evidently local ‘consumers’ consider it a good choice.
There’s plenty of competition within the public realm. But most parents don’t avail themselves of the many choices, preferring for one reason or another to let the district assign their student and passively watching the process unfold.
Don & Medwoman: Good posts. Good thoughts.
Don: I’m sorry, but I think you don’t get what I am posting.
Ten to fifteen years from now public schools will look a lot different than they do today. I am just a bit more progressive in my thinking on this than you are. There are people way smarter than me working on this education transformation.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2Qg80MVvYs[/url]
I see this as the next “bubble” of American ingenuity leading the rest of the world.