Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (22618)	1/2/2004 4:11:32 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793690

I am surely no expert. All I know about school systems is what I read. Little Joe listed several things that I believe are known problems. They are all things that can be changed. I'd be the last person to federalize schools. But the feds can remove much of the non-productive burden, the burden that requires such an enormous administrative bureaucracy and the burden of disruptive kids and non-constructive parents. States can change the way they fund schools. They can establish appropriate standards. They can improve teacher education and attract better teachers. Localities can hire good teachers, give them tools and control of their classrooms, and then get out of the way.

To: michael97123 who wrote (22618)	1/2/2004 6:06:04 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793690

I dont know where to begin and i dont really know anyone who does. In California, you would need a conservative majority in the Legislature. Not about to happen. It will have to happen first in a "right to work," state that gets the leadership to do it. My comment all along is that things have to get worse. As long as the suburban schools keep the parents happy, they won't vote for state wide reform. And I had it proved to me in California that you can't pass school reform without these people. So we lose another two generations in the inner cities. Condemned to welfare and prison by a lousy school system.

To: michael97123 who wrote (22618)	1/2/2004 7:10:18 PM
From: frankw1900	Respond to of 793690

A successful school depends from the principal. She must have the power to select and dismiss teachers. She must also have the power to dismiss or suspend students. That a principal has these powers doesn't mean she will run a successful school. She must have leadership qualities. Successful schools are an odd mixture of autocracy and collegiality. You can find successful schools in very disadvantaged areas and you can find unsuccessful schools in very upscale areas. In BC, where I live, where the teachers' union is far too powerful, you can find neighbouring school districts in the area near Vancouver which are demographically similar, in which one district has successful schools and the other much less successful ones. In the successful case the school district understands the role of principals. Provincial or federal government involvement (or as in the US state and federal) doesn't mean poop as far as the success or failure of local schools is concerned. Having reasonable financing and reasonable expectations of outcomes from provincial and federal governments is helpful, but success is won or lost at the school district level. I don't know what the successful school district did, exactly, but it does have good principals who are allowed to do their jobs. I'm sure studies have been done (and buried) of successful North American schools and school districts which draw out their common elements. I wrote that and then I thought what's the internet for? This gets interesting about p12: prrac.org ed.gov www2.edtrust.org Etc: Google for "successful schools" google.com Google for "successful school districts" google.com