Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
The posts you like are my original ones, and then when people start getting nasty I respond in kind.
|
At the risk of speaking (inaccurately) for SAM, they really aren't. You often do begin the discussion by declaring your position to be obvious and unassailable (as you did this one).
And here, when some of us suggested that your positions were less than obvious and unassailable, you really haven't done much beyond repeat your assertions (without sharing why you think the critiques are inapt) and trumpetted that you sit on a board. For example, G3 has shared a number of thoughtful posts, and I don't think you have responded to any of them (although, admittedly, I have not checked).
As SAM mentioned, this is frustrating because at times you really do seem open to discussion. Other times (this discussion, and the "torture is good" argument, as examples) you have merely become repetive or defensive when challenged.
As for suggesting that you know nothing about this topic, well, I was simply drawing conclusions based on your absolutist statements. Clearly I was in error. It isn't that you know nothing about the topic, it is that you wish to stick to your opinion without letting facts get in the way. My apologies. The positions that you advocate do happen to be republican dogma. They have been touted repeatedly by republican on the national stage (W, in particular) and in a number of jurisdictions (Minnesota and Virginia to my personal knowledge). But if you have reached your conclusions completely independently of that fact, again, my apologies.
But let me give you an yet another example that I think shows that your conclusion that the core issues that trouble public education are tenure, social promotion, and lack of testing. Let me begin with the caveat that my exposure to these schools is rather old, but my depictions were accurate as recently as five years ago.
For our case study, let's look at the Minneapolis public schools. In particular, Minneapolis North and Minneapolis South. The former is in the roughest, and poorest part of Minneapolis. It struggles to do a fair job educating its students. Minneapolis South, on the other hand, is has a strong reputation for producing top-notch students, and is well respected in the community. It also happens to be in one of the wealthier parts of the city (drawing its local students from the lakes area south of downtown).
Both schools are part of the same school district. Teachers at both are part of the same collective bargaining unit, and subject to the same job protections. The schools have the same testing (and did before the recent rounds of additional state-mandated testing), and presumably have the same policies on social promotion (I have to assume as I don't specifically know).
Yes, I know that Minneapolis isn't in California. And maybe there is something extra special unique about the LA labor situation (which I doubt, as I have said and you have not responded to), but it is safe to say that Minneapolis's liberal-dominated city government is just as beholden to the political power of the teachers unions as anywhere.
So, Spanky, what do you think explains their different results?
