• 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

2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Holy. fucking. shit. Where does it say funding is being cut? Please, point to where. I've provided the link for you again.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article30508572.html

It actually looks like the funding would be going up, given the quote: "If the bill passes and money is included in this year’s budget"
Click to expand...

It's much easier to argue against the mythology than the facts. I will buy a North Carolina draft beer for the first poster who can prove that aggregate funding to education has been cut since the GOP takeover in North Carolina. Lot of fine brews out there, gents. Pick your favorite and I'll be Millhouse-style unzipped-and-waiting.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Eh, you are automatically correlating funding with results. If the results suck under the current model, why is funding a barometer of results? If you can pay $100 for shit or pay $5 for the same shit, why would you pay the $100? If you can successfully switch to a better system, the funding of that system may or may not have any correlation to current funding.
These things go hand in hand. I think everyone on here agrees that one of the biggest problems, if not the biggest problem, with education is the administrative bloat (which is the perfect PC excuse because it allows blame without blaming the teachers, students, or parents, but I again digress). So the charter schools are mostly designed to avoid that administrative bloat. So, presumably, the cost of the education itself should come down. But then when the funding drops that is a major cause for concern. But isn't the point to get better results, regardless of the funding? The point isn't to simply throw money at something as a replacement for results and try to use that funding as a measure of results.
Click to expand...

What the general assembly has done for the past five years is to cut funding without taking any action whatsoever to "switch to a better system". The proposal that started this discussion is a pilot program for 5 schools - it barely nibbles at the edge. I agree, and the research clearly shows, that there is little to no correlation between per-pupil spending and results. At the same time, I recognize that the professional educators in every county in the state are clamoring for more money to (a) do what they think is the right thing for students, and (b) do all the stuff they're required by law to do, whether it's the best thing for students or not. A large portion of the administrative bloat and other money-wasters are in (b) and could be directly impacted by the general assembly if they chose to do so. Instead of taking any policy action to try and improve the way schools operate, the general assembly has enacted unfunded mandates and arbitrary school grading policies, while simultaneously cutting funding that would enable the schools to fulfill their mission. Schools are required by law to do a long list of things that they aren't allowed to cut when funding goes down, so they end up having to cut support staff and get by with ancient textbooks and outdated computers.

In short, in talking about education policy in North Carolina, funding is essentially the only question on the table. Since nobody is doing anything about any other aspect of public education, educators and people who care about public education have to fight the battle that's in front of them.
 
jhmd2000 said:
*sigh* As you point out, that's not a cost saving measure, and while not what anybody I know on the right is arguing, is admittedly downhill skiing to argue against. Straw men e'erywhere this a.m....

If I wanted to return the courtesy, I would ask you why you don't believe in poor parents commitment to their children. I don't though, I'd rather actually debate what you're saying. Which I will do when I get back from my meeting. Peace.
Click to expand...

Feel free to question my belief in som (#notall) poor parents commitment to their children. Are we actually going to debate that there are kids in the school system today who have parent(s) who are not committed to their education? Parent(s) who are content to live on the dole and raise their kids with a complete disregard to the kids completing their education, getting a job, getting married, and then having a kid? Isn't that what you have preached for the past, what, 10 years?
 
Deacon923 said:
What the general assembly has done for the past five years is to cut funding without taking any action whatsoever to "switch to a better system". The proposal that started this discussion is a pilot program for 5 schools - it barely nibbles at the edge. I agree, and the research clearly shows, that there is little to no correlation between per-pupil spending and results. At the same time, I recognize that the professional educators in every county in the state are clamoring for more money to (a) do what they think is the right thing for students, and (b) do all the stuff they're required by law to do, whether it's the best thing for students or not. A large portion of the administrative bloat and other money-wasters are in (b) and could be directly impacted by the general assembly if they chose to do so. Instead of taking any policy action to try and improve the way schools operate, the general assembly has enacted unfunded mandates and arbitrary school grading policies, while simultaneously cutting funding that would enable the schools to fulfill their mission. Schools are required by law to do a long list of things that they aren't allowed to cut when funding goes down, so they end up having to cut support staff and get by with ancient textbooks and outdated computers.

In short, in talking about education policy in North Carolina, funding is essentially the only question on the table. Since nobody is doing anything about any other aspect of public education, educators and people who care about public education have to fight the battle that's in front of them.
Click to expand...

Except, of course, for most of the charter schools being operated/run, which is somehow decried as a bad thing. And, more relevant to this discussion, the actual particular piece of proposed legislation being discussed.

And who gives a shit if professional educators are clamoring for more money when said professional educators are doing a shitty job with the money they have? Should we have given [name redacted] an increase in the basketball budget had he asked for one?
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Eh, you are automatically correlating funding with results. If the results suck under the current model, why is funding a barometer of results? If you can pay $100 for shit or pay $5 for the same shit, why would you pay the $100? If you can successfully switch to a better system, the funding of that system may or may not have any correlation to current funding.
These things go hand in hand. I think everyone on here agrees that one of the biggest problems, if not the biggest problem, with education is the administrative bloat (which is the perfect PC excuse because it allows blame without blaming the teachers, students, or parents, but I again digress). So the charter schools are mostly designed to avoid that administrative bloat. So, presumably, the cost of the education itself should come down. But then when the funding drops that is a major cause for concern. But isn't the point to get better results, regardless of the funding? The point isn't to simply throw money at something as a replacement for results and try to use that funding as a measure of results.
Click to expand...

Apparently whoever is setting the NC education budget disagrees.

Expenditures on teachers and teacher assistants in 2014 made up 3.4% less of the overall budget than they did in 2009. Expenditures on leadership and support services (a.k.a. administrative bloat) now account for 2.7% more of the overall budget than they did in 2009.
 
Yearly Spending per Pupil from 05-06 to 14-15 in 2014 dollars:

2005-2006: $6,035.70
2006-2007: $6,226.37
2007-2008: $6,375.12
2008-2009: $6,341.32
2009-2010: $5,759.31
2010-2011: $5,565.61
2011-2012: $5,330.85
2012-2013: $5,641.32
2013-2014: $5,256.55
2014-2015: $5,320.34

Looks like spending is being cut to me
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Holy. fucking. shit. Where does it say funding is being cut? Please, point to where. I've provided the link for you again.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article30508572.html

It actually looks like the funding would be going up, given the quote: "If the bill passes and money is included in this year’s budget"
Click to expand...

The specific bill has no impact on funding, other than to shift funds from public schools to charter schools on a per pupil basis.

In general, the NC GOP has been cutting funding for public schools and moving to privatize schools in general (fitting with a general move towards privatization of public services).
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Except, of course, for most of the charter schools being operated/run, which is somehow decried as a bad thing. And, more relevant to this discussion, the actual particular piece of proposed legislation being discussed.

And who gives a shit if professional educators are clamoring for more money when said professional educators are doing a shitty job with the money they have? Should we have given [name redacted] an increase in the basketball budget had he asked for one?
Click to expand...

Well, with respect to the dialog you and I are having, we both agree (with some reservations and caveats) that charter schools and this particular bill can be good things. So I am assuming the first paragraph is not directed at me.

As to the second paragraph, that's just a silly deflection. You are wrong to say that North Carolina educators are doing a "shitty job". The majority of public schools are doing quite well and despite years of funding cuts, North Carolina's schools still perform slightly above the national average in the NAEP tests. http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/stateDetails.jsp?pLEACode=410&pYear=2012-2013&pDataType=1#stNAEP Over 85% of students graduate from high school on time, with many districts reporting much higher graduation rates. Guilford County achieved 88.5% last year. As is normal in public education throughout the US, the schools that have the biggest challenges are the schools serving the poorest, most disadvantaged, most segregated areas in the state. I could go on, but the idea that public educators are "doing a shitty job" is nothing more than right-wing propaganda meant to demonize educators and justify spending cuts.

The absurd basketball comparison does not dignify a response. Let's use a better analogy. Educating poor students is a societal necessity and is enshrined in the North Carolina constitution. It's a mandatory and necessary part of state government. If a mandatory and necessary part of a business was struggling - say a company's sales force - would that company slash funding to the sales force and tell them to do more with less? No, the company would devote resources, not only cash but managerial time and expertise, to figuring out the problem and fixing it. That might well include firing poor performers and hiring better ones, but it probably wouldn't include slashing the budget for sales training (see, e.g. killing the Teaching Fellows program and raising tuition at the state schools that train teachers) or telling the sales team they can't have any new marketing collateral or computers until sales improve (see, e.g., defunding textbooks and building maintenance). You could argue "hey maybe the company would outsource its sales force" (e.g. charter schools) - well, maybe so, but no responsible company would actively handicap the operation for five years, then decide to outsource a tiny percentage of the operation while continuing to handicap the rest.
 
Deacon923 said:
Educating poor students is a societal necessity and is enshrined in the North Carolina constitution. It's a mandatory and necessary part of state government. If a mandatory and necessary part of a business was struggling - say a company's sales force - would that company slash funding to the sales force and tell them to do more with less? No, the company would devote resources, not only cash but managerial time and expertise, to figuring out the problem and fixing it. That might well include firing poor performers and hiring better ones, but it probably wouldn't include slashing the budget for sales training (see, e.g. killing the Teaching Fellows program and raising tuition at the state schools that train teachers) or telling the sales team they can't have any new marketing collateral or computers until sales improve (see, e.g., defunding textbooks and building maintenance). You could argue "hey maybe the company would outsource its sales force" (e.g. charter schools) - well, maybe so, but no responsible company would actively handicap the operation for five years, then decide to outsource a tiny percentage of the operation while continuing to handicap the rest.
Click to expand...

/thread
 
Deacon923 said:
As to the second paragraph, that's just a silly deflection. You are wrong to say that North Carolina educators are doing a "shitty job". The majority of public schools are doing quite well and despite years of funding cuts, North Carolina's schools still perform slightly above the national average in the NAEP tests. http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/stateDetails.jsp?pLEACode=410&pYear=2012-2013&pDataType=1#stNAEP Over 85% of students graduate from high school on time, with many districts reporting much higher graduation rates. Guilford County achieved 88.5% last year. As is normal in public education throughout the US, the schools that have the biggest challenges are the schools serving the poorest, most disadvantaged, most segregated areas in the state. I could go on, but the idea that public educators are "doing a shitty job" is nothing more than right-wing propaganda meant to demonize educators and justify spending cuts.

The absurd basketball comparison does not dignify a response. Let's use a better analogy. Educating poor students is a societal necessity and is enshrined in the North Carolina constitution. It's a mandatory and necessary part of state government. If a mandatory and necessary part of a business was struggling - say a company's sales force - would that company slash funding to the sales force and tell them to do more with less? No, the company would devote resources, not only cash but managerial time and expertise, to figuring out the problem and fixing it. That might well include firing poor performers and hiring better ones, but it probably wouldn't include slashing the budget for sales training (see, e.g. killing the Teaching Fellows program and raising tuition at the state schools that train teachers) or telling the sales team they can't have any new marketing collateral or computers until sales improve (see, e.g., defunding textbooks and building maintenance). You could argue "hey maybe the company would outsource its sales force" (e.g. charter schools) - well, maybe so, but no responsible company would actively handicap the operation for five years, then decide to outsource a tiny percentage of the operation while continuing to handicap the rest.
Click to expand...

That's going to leave a mark.
 
Deacon923 said:
Well, with respect to the dialog you and I are having, we both agree (with some reservations and caveats) that charter schools and this particular bill can be good things. So I am assuming the first paragraph is not directed at me.

As to the second paragraph, that's just a silly deflection. You are wrong to say that North Carolina educators are doing a "shitty job". The majority of public schools are doing quite well and despite years of funding cuts, North Carolina's schools still perform slightly above the national average in the NAEP tests. http://www.ncreportcards.org/src/stateDetails.jsp?pLEACode=410&pYear=2012-2013&pDataType=1#stNAEP Over 85% of students graduate from high school on time, with many districts reporting much higher graduation rates. Guilford County achieved 88.5% last year. As is normal in public education throughout the US, the schools that have the biggest challenges are the schools serving the poorest, most disadvantaged, most segregated areas in the state. I could go on, but the idea that public educators are "doing a shitty job" is nothing more than right-wing propaganda meant to demonize educators and justify spending cuts.

The absurd basketball comparison does not dignify a response. Let's use a better analogy. Educating poor students is a societal necessity and is enshrined in the North Carolina constitution. It's a mandatory and necessary part of state government. If a mandatory and necessary part of a business was struggling - say a company's sales force - would that company slash funding to the sales force and tell them to do more with less? No, the company would devote resources, not only cash but managerial time and expertise, to figuring out the problem and fixing it. That might well include firing poor performers and hiring better ones, but it probably wouldn't include slashing the budget for sales training (see, e.g. killing the Teaching Fellows program and raising tuition at the state schools that train teachers) or telling the sales team they can't have any new marketing collateral or computers until sales improve (see, e.g., defunding textbooks and building maintenance). You could argue "hey maybe the company would outsource its sales force" (e.g. charter schools) - well, maybe so, but no responsible company would actively handicap the operation for five years, then decide to outsource a tiny percentage of the operation while continuing to handicap the rest.
Click to expand...

(A) You can't say that standardized tests are an improper measuring tool but then trot out stats that we are doing well because of scoring on standardized tests and graduation rates that are presumably also based materially on standardized testing. You need to pick one side to be consistent - either standardized tests are faulty, in which case the resulting stats are meaningless and education is in the crapper based on the smell test; or our results are good so everything is generally acceptable and the education sky isn't falling like the left proclaims, so don't worry about it.

(B) I think everyone would agree that schools in poorer areas will have the most challenges. Which goes again to the thought that we shouldn't treat all schools the same. If this idea that charter strategies may work in lower performing schools is catching on, why not at least try it? Related to the LCD issue, there is nothing wrong with acknowledging differences in parental involvement and achievement, and trying to capitalize on the advantages on both ends of the spectrum. Except, of course, that it is not PC to do so. Encourage involved parents to do what they feel is best for their kids, and the system can try to implement some of those successful strategies in places where the parents are not as involved; but recognize that the system is not a replacement for parents and is not going to move as quickly; but to deny the involved parents the ability to do what they feel is best because other parents are not similarly motivated is just idiotic.

(C) I strongly disagree with the concept in your analogy that they would sink more resources into the floundering department. The first thing would do would be a budget-neutral analysis to try to fix the underlying problem - which is what I have been advocating and which is what the charter school and school choice movement generally does. Then if that didn't work they would likely analyze the economics to try to cut funding to get that division internally profitable. If that didn't work, then they would probably fire most of the people there. They are not going to just start pumping material amounts of money into it especially if their first step indicates, as it does here per Townie's article and most common sense, that simply throwing money at it isn't going to solve much given the decades of evidence in hand.
 
Last edited:
when you criticize the right does that mean you speak for the right?
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
(A) You can't say that standardized tests are an improper measuring tool but then trot out stats that we are doing well because of scoring on standardized tests and graduation rates that are presumably also based materially on standardized testing. You need to pick one side to be consistent - either standardized tests are faulty, in which case the resulting stats are meaningless and education is in the crapper based on the smell test; or our results are good so everything is generally acceptable and the education sky isn't falling like the left proclaims, so don't worry about it.

(B) I think everyone would agree that schools in poorer areas will have the most challenges. Which goes again to the thought that we shouldn't treat all schools the same. If this idea that charter strategies may work in lower performing schools is catching on, why not at least try it? Related to the LCD issue, there is nothing wrong with acknowledging differences in parental involvement and achievement, and trying to capitalize on the advantages on both ends of the spectrum. Except, of course, that it is not PC to do so. Encourage involved parents to do what they feel is best for their kids, and the system can try to implement some of those successful strategies in places where the parents are not as involved; but recognize that the system is not a replacement for parents and is not going to move as quickly; but to deny the involved parents the ability to do what they feel is best because other parents are not similarly motivated is just idiotic.

(C) I strongly disagree with the concept in your analogy that they would sink more resources into the floundering department. The first thing would do would be a budget-neutral analysis to try to fix the underlying problem - which is what I have been advocating and which is what the charter school and school choice movement generally does. Then if that didn't work they would likely analyze the economics to try to cut funding to get that division internally profitable. If that didn't work, then they would probably fire most of the people there. They are not going to just start pumping material amounts of money into it especially if their first step indicates, as it does here per Townie's article and most common sense, that simply throwing money at it isn't going to solve much given the decades of evidence in hand.
Click to expand...

(A) I never made the argument you are attributing to me. Standardized testing is a useful benchmarking tool. If that's all it was used for (i.e., the way it was when I was in school 20 years ago) it would be fine. High stakes "accountability" testing which causes schools to focus all their efforts on teaching to the test and focus financial resources on testing, retesting, and buying testing materials from private companies... different kettle of fish altogether. My post used a nationally known benchmarking test.

(B) I don't disagree with the concept of magnet and charter schools that allow motivated parents to get better education for our children, again as long as meals and transportation are provided so they are accessible to all income levels. You and I have never disagreed on that. What I have a problem with is sucking resources out of the very schools that need them the most, because they have the worst parents, and diverting them to schools that don't need the help or into an unaccountable black hole of religious private schools. Moreover, I have a problem with the ongoing overall defunding of the entire public education system which makes it harder and harder for the most needy students to get the help they need, and is creating a serious shortage of skilled teachers that is going to pull down the schools for years to come.

(C) I'm not going to banter analogies. We already have some indication of how you run your businesses, suffice it to say that the successful ones I have been involved in do things differently than you.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Remember, I'm the one in favor of the actual proposal on the table to attempt to better their education. You are apparently okay with keeping the current system while waxing poetic about theoretical alternatives.
Click to expand...

straw-man.jpg
 
DeacHawk said:
The above were combined into a single ballot question, which would read as follows:

Constitutional amendments adding the Taxpayer Protection Act to the North Carolina Constitution that would limit the growth of State spending to inflation plus population growth, establish and require yearly deposits in an Emergency Savings Reserve Fund in the State Treasury, and reduce the maximum allowable income tax rate in North Carolina from ten percent (10%) to five percent (5%).

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015/Bills/Senate/PDF/S607v3.pdf

3/5 majority needed to get on the ballot should be a breeze in the Senate, no idea where the House stands on this.
Click to expand...

By further lowering the tax rate, the lost revenue would have to come from further increasing and expanding taxes on consumption and services. They have no problem cutting taxes for the rich and raising them for the poor.

Furthermore, by limiting the growth of spending to inflation plus population growth, state employees (including teachers) will never see meaningful pay increases again. The state will also be unable to meet unforeseen needs in the future or institute new initiatives.

Colorado experimented with similar restrictions to state taxation and spending beginning in 1992. Voters loosened the measure in 2005 after it became obvious that such restrictions are detrimental to the health and well being of the state. The Tax Payers Bill of Rights (TABOR) acts in such a way that spending for the current fiscal year was based of the lower of the actual revenues received the previous year or the amount of revenues allowed under TABOR. During an economic downturn, revenues naturally declined, and a new baseline was set for all future state spending regardless of the state's economic health. TABOR's formula also bases growth on inflation of consumer goods, ignoring the reality that inflation in many sectors is much greater than in consumer goods. TABOR does not take into account that certain segments of the population require more services than others. If there is growth in a segment that requires more services, the state is restricted by TABOR from providing these services.

After witnessing the Colorado debacle, TABOR initiatives have been defeated in Maine twice, Nebraska, Oregon, and Washington. They never made it to the ballot for various reasons in Montana, Michigan, Oklahoma, Nevada, and Rhode Island.

This is a horrible idea that was bull-rushed through without discussion like many other bills. A constitutional amendment that is not worth discussing. Absurd.
 
Just so we're clear, all of these "failing schools" have been labeled as "failing" based on the results of high stakes standardized testing. These standardized test scores highly correlate with SES. We are using these scores as reasoning to fire teachers and shutter poor public schools. Jhmd and conservatives like him believe that these failing scores are reason enough to cut major funding to all of public education, a decision that effects poor children much more that others. Round and round we go. Pretty soon our government will be awarding lowest bidder contracts to corporately owned private prisons, who will in turn be forcing their poor inmates to teach poor school children at corporate private "schools" for maximum efficiency.

Hey! What's in this Soilent Green? It's delicious!
 
Last edited:
Yeah. High stakes testing is another way socioeconomic advantages are justified through our educational system.
 
The Fed spends billions developing military boondoggles that never see battle, but public education is first on the chopping block for red state budgets. That state lottery poor tax really seems to help too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top