[les3547]

The Obama also talked about investing more in education.
Why?
Kind of obvious how that's working.

Wrong logic. Spending "more" isn't all there is to it. Finland, for example, spends less with much higher results partly, at least, because they put more resources where it's needed most, they practice experiential learning, and they rely on a host of other quality differences (see below). That's rather unlike the US competitive system where the focus is on passing tests, being popular, and giving rich neighborhoods the best schools. Because the quality of schools is tied to property taxes, because that means poor neighborhoods get the least in the way of education when education is the best way to lift oneself out of poverty . . . that indicates what we need is education reform, and we also need more money to pull off that reform.

What is the Poverty Line, anyway?

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, it's a family of four (two adults, two children) that earns less than $21,834. Still, $35,000 is basic-needs budget for a U.S. family of four (two adults, two children), as calculated in An Atlas of Poverty in America.

In 2008, nearly 43.6 million people Americans lived in poverty (about 13.2% of the population); 12.9 million were under the age of 18.

In the US, poverty is still tied to race: 24.7% of the African American population live below the poverty line while 8.6% of Caucasians do.

School budgets are tied to property taxes. This is why schools in poor neighborhoods get about half as much money per student than schools in affluent neighborhoods.

Three-quarters of the nation's schools (almost 60,000) report needing repairs, renovations or modernization in order to reach good condition.

Not surprisingly, most schools in bad condition are in cities where at least 70% of students are below the poverty line.

Urban students are less likely to graduate than their suburban counterparts. High school graduation rates are 15% lower in the nation’s urban schools when compared with those located in the suburbs.

Graduation rates are also lower among certain groups, particularly ethnic minorities and males. In 2008, the graduation rate among African-Americans was 61.5% compared to 81% for whites.

In 2008, 17 of the nation's 50 largest cities had high school graduation rates lower than 50%, with the lowest rates reported in Detroit (24.9%), Indianapolis (30.5%) and Cleveland (34.1%).

Children of poor families are up to six times more likely to drop out than wealthy children.

Now compare that to how Finland handles things, where all schools, no matter how rich or poor the neighborhood, are the same:

26 Amazing Facts About Finland's Unorthodox Education System

Since it implemented huge education reforms 40 years ago, Finland's school system has consistently come at the top for the international rankings for education systems. So how do they do it? It's simple — by going against the evaluation-driven, centralized model that much of the Western world uses.

• Finnish children don't start school until they are 7.

• They rarely take exams or do homework until they are well into their teens.

• The children are not measured at all for the first six years of their education.

• There is only one mandatory standardized test in Finland, taken when children are 16.

• All children, clever or not, are taught in the same classrooms.

• Finland spends around 30 percent less per student than the United States.

• 30 percent of children receive extra help during their first nine years of school.

• 66 percent of students go to college.

• The difference between weakest and strongest students is the smallest in the World.

• Science classes are capped at 16 students so that they may perform practical experiments every class.

• 93 percent of Finns graduate from high school.

• 43 percent of Finnish high-school students go to vocational schools.

• Elementary school students get 75 minutes of recess a day in Finnish versus an average of 27 minutes in the US.

• Teachers only spend 4 hours a day in the classroom, and take 2 hours a week for "professional development".

• Finland has the same amount of teachers as New York City, but far fewer students.

• The school system is 100% state funded.

• All teachers in Finland must have a masters degree, which is fully subsidized.

• The national curriculum is only broad guidelines.

• Teachers are selected from the top 10% of graduates.

• In 2010, 6,600 applicants vied for 660 primary school training slots

• The average starting salary for a Finnish teacher was $29,000 in 2008

• However, high school teachers with 15 years of experience make 102 percent of what other college graduates make.

• There is no merit pay for teachers

• Teachers are given the same status as doctors and lawyers

• In an international standardized measurement in 2001, Finnish children came top or very close to the top for science, reading and mathematics.

[graphicgr8s]

Les, I believe that what we need to do is abolish the federal education department and bring it back mostly to the local governments with some to the state government. Federal can put broad requirements in place but state/local has control. However it's not all the government's fault. Parents need to be active in their child's education. My 3 year old is advanced for his age and understands 2 languages. But his grandparents and the two of us work with him. It's not structured education. When we're on the way to drop mommy off we work on his spanish, or counting, or colors. His grandparent's talk to him in spanish. He is starting to help work on my fish tanks. He is starting to understand what I am doing when working on them. It's informal education but he'll be ahead when he starts school. He's not going into any head start program because they don't work.

We also need to get rid of the teachers unions. It too is proven that the charter/magnet schools that don't use union teacher actual educate better.

[jeffkrol]

We also need to get rid of the teachers unions. It too is proven that the charter/magnet schools that don't use union teacher actual educate better.

Latest statistics in WI show "virtual charter schools" failing.. and our gov. wants them to expand... ????

http://www.htrnews.com/article/20120826/MAN019802/308260106/Virtual-charter-...t-making-grade

Enrollment in Wisconsin’s online schools has doubled in the last five years, but students who have chosen class without a classroom often struggle to complete their degrees and repeat grades four times as often as their brick-and-mortar counterparts, according to a Gannett Wisconsin Media analysis.

Standardized test results also show that virtual school students trail traditional students in every subject but reading and are far less likely than their peers to take the ACT or Advanced Placement tests.

But virtual schools have more than four times the turnover of traditional schools and teach students who often bring a history of academic struggles. So are mediocre results indicative of a flawed system or flawed students?

CHARTER brick and mortar schools (and voucher recipients) get to "cherry pick"..and are tie w/ public schools......


As much as the right wants it about education and "best for the student" it is really only about cost and "making do"...............exactly as a private business would do.. min. expense adequate results (if better.. well that is just dumb luck.)

[les3547]

Les, I believe that what we need to do is abolish the federal education department and bring it back mostly to the local governments with some to the state government. Federal can put broad requirements in place but state/local has control. . . . He's not going into any head start program because they don't work. . . . We also need to get rid of the teachers unions. It too is proven that the charter/magnet schools that don't use union teacher actual educate better.

You say you "believe" we need to do certain things, but why do you believe them? Is it because you are aware of what works and what doesn't? We have all of history and the entire world to study in search of what "works, what has worked, and what has or does partially work. If we don't study every bit of that, then we end up reinventing the wheel which includes repeating all the mistakes made during the centuries of experimentation.

Today there are calls from the far right to decentralize government to the point it would be virtually powerless. Do you think most people wanting that are aware of the consequences of a weak central government? Have they looked at how powerful our "united" feature has made the US compared to other countries of the world? People also say central government can't handle big administrative jobs, but that isn't true. While any small situation is going to be easier to manage than a larger one, there are advantages bigness has that smallness doesn't in terms of power and accumulated wealth which, if used for the benefit of the people, can do what no local situation could ever pull off.

So what's your suggestion? That we bring education back to local governments. Do you know how many local governments there are in the US? Almost 90,000. Are each of them going to be experimenting with "what works" all over again? And who gets to go to what schools? Are the rich going to get the best, and the poor (who need education the most) going to get all the leftovers, maybe even nothing at all if a locality is too poor? Since we've had a couple of hundred years in the US and still are struggling to produce educated students, what are private schools going to do that public schools didn't that is proven to work? (According to the Program for International Student Assessment report, which ranked the knowledge of 15-year-olds in 70 countries, the U.S. ranked 14th in reading, 17th in science, and 25th in mathematics.)

Fragmentation is a way to be exclusive rather than inclusive. The result of fragmentation will be everybody to set up their own little kingdom, and you can bet it will get at the very least bizarre, and at the worst, kingdoms that have warlord equivalents. Without the central government's protections, people will be at the mercy of whomever gets in power locally. Why do you think the Koch bros are so enthusiastic for a weak central government? To make it better for you and the rest of us???

I cited for you the Finish experiment in education, a wholly inclusive system, a 100% federally controlled system, and it is the best in the world. How could that be if central government is incapable of excellence on a local scale? Because their students have been among the top (or THE top) performers since they revamped their education system thirty years ago, it should be required study for anyone who wants to set up an education program. When I look at successes like this, I think we should be understanding everything we possibly can about how to repeat it, but do you think this kind of quality can be repeated when the nation is split into 90,000 different localities, each developing and paying for their own education program?

A view from inside Finland:

You Tube

You Tube

An American take on Finland education:

You Tube

You Tube

Education in Finland is an egalitarian system, with no tuition fees and with free meals served to full-time students. The present Finnish education system consists of well-funded and carefully thought out daycare programs (for babies and toddlers) and a one-year "pre-school" (or kindergarten for six-year olds); a nine-year compulsory basic comprehensive school (starting at age seven and ending at the age of fifteen); post-compulsory secondary general academic and vocational education; higher education (University and Polytechnical); and adult (lifelong, continuing) education. The Nordic strategy for achieving equality and excellence in education has been based on constructing a publicly funded comprehensive school system without selecting, tracking, or streaming students during their common basic education. Part of the strategy has been to spread the school network so that pupils have a school near their homes whenever possible or, if this is not feasible, e.g. in rural areas, to provide free transportation to more widely dispersed schools. Inclusive special education within the classroom and instructional efforts to minimize low achievement are also typical of Nordic educational systems.

After their nine-year basic education in a comprehensive school, students at the age of 16 may choose to continue their secondary education in either an academic track (lukio) or a vocational track (ammattikoulu), both of which usually take three years. Tertiary education is divided into university and polytechnic (ammattikorkeakoulu, often translated into English as "university of applied sciences") systems. Only universities award licentiate- and doctoral-level degrees. Formerly, only university graduates could obtain higher (postgraduate) degrees, however, since the implementation of the Bologna process, polytechnic degree holders can now qualify for further academic study by doing additional courses. There are 20 universities and 30 polytechnics in the country.

[jeffkrol]

. It too is proven that the charter/magnet schools that don't use union teacher actual educate better.

Yes my Catholic college prep school educated people better.. good thing they could easily get rid of the riff raff that would bring down this statistic..........
sorry it is smoke and mirrors w/ the ONLY objective (that counts) is eliminating gov.

See:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/political-religious-discussion/198166-rep...mic-model.html

[ihasa]

If there was less centralised control, like graphicgr8s says, would it not be more feasible for states (or regions) to try approaches like Finland's. After all, the Scandinavian countries don't have a unified education system. Maybe states are a bit small to be autonomous, but wouldn't a lot of problems be easier to deal with if the USA was broken into smaller units of friendly states.

[jeffkrol]

If there was less centralized control, like graphicgr8s says, would it not be more feasible for states (or regions) to try approaches like Finland's. After all, the Scandinavian countries don't have a unified education system. Maybe states are a bit small to be autonomous, but wouldn't a lot of problems be easier to deal with if the USA was broken into smaller units of friendly states.

how could states give tax incentives to steal businesses from other states........ ????

"Centralized control" is more illusion than reality...and states are revenue constrained whereas Finland and the US are not..

Education in the United States is mainly provided by the public sector, with control and funding coming from three levels: federal, state, and local.

Most "control" comes from states NEEDING Fed money... one way or another... and some basic Fed mandates..
AND it was Republicans who wanted "qualifications" to aid:

Under the No Child Left Behind Act, all American states must test students in public schools statewide to ensure that they are achieving the desired level of minimum education,

AND are as equally responsible for Fed. "education" than the Dems.. if not in fact MORE...

[Nesster]

...and states are revenue constrained whereas Finland and the US are not..

Though Finland does have the Euro...

[jeffkrol]

Though Finland does have the Euro...

OPP's then they are revenue constrained.. my mistake....