• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing NC GOP debacle thread

Right. We are talking about policy in this thread. LK seems to be saying once you have kids, you don't favor policies to provide better educational opportunities to poor kids.
 
PhDeac said:
Right. We are talking about policy in this thread. LK seems to be saying once you have kids, you don't favor policies to provide better educational opportunities to poor kids.
Click to expand...

Favoring policies for your own kids, and wanting better educational opportunities for the poor are not mutually exclusive. It's not an all or nothing. 2&2 wanting the funding to follow his kids to their charter school shouldn't be distilled down to a "fuck the poor" black or white distinction.

I wish all schools were exceptional. Then I wouldn't have had to move across town into a house that cost 2-3 times what my old one did just so my kids would have the best education opportunities possible. My point is that advocating for a better situation for your own kids does not equal "fuck the poor."
 
PhDeac said:
Right. We are talking about policy in this thread. LK seems to be saying once you have kids, you don't favor policies to provide better educational opportunities to poor kids.
Click to expand...

Take that a step forward and you could argue that people who have no kids don't want any resources devoted to public education since childless means no direct benefit. That is obviously not the case. Ones own personal situation doesn't necessarily color their opinions on broad policy decisions. Or at least it shouldn't.
 
Liquid Karma said:
Favoring policies for your own kids, and wanting better educational opportunities for the poor are not mutually exclusive. It's not an all or nothing. 2&2 wanting the funding to follow his kids to their charter school shouldn't be distilled down to a "fuck the poor" black or white distinction.

I wish all schools were exceptional. Then I wouldn't have had to move across town into a house that cost 2-3 times what my old one did just so my kids would have the best education opportunities possible. My point is that advocating for a better situation for your own kids does not equal "fuck the poor."
Click to expand...

Then why are you using having kids as a justification for policies that "fuck the poor?"
 
Liquid Karma said:
Favoring policies for your own kids, and wanting better educational opportunities for the poor are not mutually exclusive. It's not an all or nothing...My point is that advocating for a better situation for your own kids does not equal "fuck the poor."
Click to expand...

On the contrary, they are very often mutually exclusive. Funding is not unlimited.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
On the contrary, they are very often mutually exclusive. Funding is not unlimited.
Click to expand...

Especially when "favoring policies for your own kids" often means making sure poor kids can't come to your school.
 
I feel like the more interesting part of LK's post is that there's already a market in education (tied to the real estate market) and it blows.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
I feel like the more interesting part of LK's post is that there's already a market in education (tied to the real estate market) and it blows.
Click to expand...

Yep. Perception of schools is tied to location and school demographics.
 
PhDeac said:
Yep. Perception of schools is tied to location and school demographics.
Click to expand...

One way to deal with that is busing. But I think busing inevitably fails politically because 1 it's inconvenient to have long bus routes and 2 it concedes that segregation is ok by ignoring residential segregation.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
One way to deal with that is busing. But I think busing inevitably fails politically because 1 it's inconvenient to have long bus routes and 2 it concedes that segregation is ok by ignoring residential segregation.
Click to expand...

That and it doesn't really work. The poor kids fail just as badly in the more affluent schools because when they take their hour long bus ride home they get there and they're still poor. We still have to fix the communities around the poor schools to see any real change.

*cue JHMD riding in on a white horse shouting about two person households like some conservative Paul Revere*
 
Deadbolt said:
That and it doesn't really work. The poor kids fail just as badly in the more affluent schools because when they take their hour long bus ride home they get there and they're still poor. We still have to fix the communities around the poor schools to see any real change.

*cue JHMD riding in on a white horse shouting about two person households like some conservative Paul Revere*
Click to expand...


No. This is not true and it's really important to understand it. A large body of research shows a very strong correlation between improved individual performance of poor kids when placed into mixed socioeconomic schools. That is one very important reason why policies which actively resegregate schools economically (and therefore, racially) are directly harmful to individual kids. There are some studies that show this factor is more important than any other factor in predicting individual performance.

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may13/vol70/num08/Boosting-Achievement-by-Pursuing-Diversity.aspx

http://articles.courant.com/2010-10-22/news/hc-green-education1022-20101021_1_middle-class-schools-affluent-schools-low-income

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/05/20/is-segregation-back-in-us-public-schools/integrating-rich-and-poor-matters-most
 
Deacon923 said:
No. This is not true and it's really important to understand it. A large body of research shows a very strong correlation between improved individual performance of poor kids when placed into mixed socioeconomic schools. That is one very important reason why policies which actively resegregate schools economically (and therefore, racially) are directly harmful to individual kids. There are some studies that show this factor is more important than any other factor in predicting individual performance.

http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/may13/vol70/num08/Boosting-Achievement-by-Pursuing-Diversity.aspx

http://articles.courant.com/2010-10-22/news/hc-green-education1022-20101021_1_middle-class-schools-affluent-schools-low-income

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/05/20/is-segregation-back-in-us-public-schools/integrating-rich-and-poor-matters-most
Click to expand...

I've read some studies that conflict with what those. That's been a couple years ago though, so finding them now will be difficult, but they used smaller sample sizes and individual school systems. Those data sets indicated mixed results at best (some kids performed the same, others worse, few better).

But studies are not always perfect, so maybe I'm wrong.
 
N&O is doing a big 4-part expose on Cheri Berry, basically accusing her of not doing her job.
 
I feel bad for whenever would have to replace all those inspection certificates, should she leave.
 
Liquid Karma said:
You mean she didn't personally inspect every elevator in the state?

Bitch.
Click to expand...

More like, if your employer stops paying you the NC Department of Labor isn't going to help you out, and she hates regulations but has a job enforcing regulations.
 
Hold up. The person whose name is in every elevator in NC is named "Cheri Berry." NC has really gone downhill.
 
Jesus, even the NC elevator inspector is a fucking asshole conservative. Is there anything in this state that hasn't been tainted by these mouthbreathing backwoods regressives?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top