Former U.S. Education Secretary: 'We're top 10 in nothing'

"In the Indianapolis area, the formula considered Carmel schools as least needy, awarding it $5,411 per student, while it judged Indianapolis Public Schools most needy, paying $7,630 per student. The difference between Carmel and IPS was $2,219. Carmel’s per student aid was eighth lowest in the state while IPS was fourth highest."

I was a little off on the richer schools.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/in/...-school-funding-difficulty-defining-fairness/
 
"In the Indianapolis area, the formula considered Carmel schools as least needy, awarding it $5,411 per student, while it judged Indianapolis Public Schools most needy, paying $7,630 per student. The difference between Carmel and IPS was $2,219. Carmel’s per student aid was eighth lowest in the state while IPS was fourth highest."

I was a little off on the richer schools.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/in/...-school-funding-difficulty-defining-fairness/

Thanks for the link, reading now.

I was skeptical because most states rely on local property taxes which tends to lead to poor districts being underfunded but it looks like Indiana had moved to more General Assembly funding (kind of surprising tbh).

And their ranking compared to other states isn't bad.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/education/prek-12
 
top in GDP. which is the most important thing in the world.
 
We have too many people and are too diverse in the US to be Top 10 in metrics that use averages, but our top students are still some of the best in the world. We probably have more high school drop out than other countries that top the lists have students. That said I think it's funny the guy who ran this shit for Obama NOW says we suck at education. We didn't just drop off a cliff in the last 3 year buddy.

yea.

our bottom schools are some of the least funded/staffed in the developed world. so....its not surprising that the students in these locations perform predictably.

most other developed nations do not have a bottom as low as ours with regard to funding. and funding isnt everything. there are cultural issues. policy needs to meet people halfway though. you cannot demand that people value education in poor communities BEFORE you agree to fund their schools.

general public: "you should work harder and value education more."

poor students/families: "Ok. well why does rain literally fall into my child's classroom, and theyre buying 15 year old textbooks from the school across town where every student gets a laptop? why does a 2nd grade class have 40 students in it?"
 
There's nothing to argue with. Our early education set up is borderline non-existent. We refuse to properly fund our schools. We refuse to properly pay our teachers. We refuse to update our approach to curriculum. We don't fund gifted programs for our brightest kids.

There's a ton of things we can do to improve our school and how we educate our children. But this conversation never goes anywhere because the moment some people start talking about updating failing schools in the inner cities, some other people will throw up a roadblock to updating any schools because they don't think inner city communities should get a benefit.

And this is what is allowing our school system to lose more and more effectiveness despite the thousands of easy fixes that are out there.

I have no proof of this but I think it's what drives some of the support for charter schools. It's a way to address obvious school failings without helping the entire communities reliant on those schools. Fund a charter that helps a few hundred kids while ignoring the neighborhood schools that affect thousands of kids.
 
yea.

our bottom schools are some of the least funded/staffed in the developed world. so....its not surprising that the students in these locations perform predictably.

most other developed nations do not have a bottom as low as ours with regard to funding. and funding isnt everything. there are cultural issues. policy needs to meet people halfway though. you cannot demand that people value education in poor communities BEFORE you agree to fund their schools.

general public: "you should work harder and value education more."

poor students/families: "Ok. well why does rain literally fall into my child's classroom, and theyre buying 15 year old textbooks from the school across town where every student gets a laptop? why does a 2nd grade class have 40 students in it?"

I was reading the book "Genius Denied", it's a book written by these 2 philanthropists who started a school for profoundly gifted kids, the brightest of the bright. They said exactly what you said - you cannot expect kids to act as if education matters when the adults are sending them to crumbling schools without textbooks. These are people who created their own free private school who can see the problem with how we approach schools for the poor. They gave up working within the system because brilliant poor kids are getting the educational shaft, just because they're poor.

Kids might be poor but they're not blind. They know that the quality of their school is a proxy for how much their education matters to the people who cut the checks.
 
I'm sure the Dept of Education wastes plenty of money that could be redirected to teacher pay.

Not really, teacher pay is set by the local school districts. The Dept. of Education doesn't have a lot to say on that subject.
 
In the past Finland's schools had students that performed similar to American students.

Now Finland is ranked number 1 in student achievement. Thought this a decent video on what changes Finland made to reach number 1. The answer is surprising, as they stopped giving out homework, had let students have more free time, and be less stressed.

 
Not really, teacher pay is set by the local school districts. The Dept. of Education doesn't have a lot to say on that subject.
They give money to states for education. The money the save should by cutting waste should go to the states with them saying it's for teacher pay
 
They give money to states for education. The money the save should by cutting waste should go to the states with them saying it's for teacher pay

They don't have the authority to dictate it that way. They can give money for really specific things or for general goals. So they might be able to say "We'll give money to teachers who complete this certification/training" or to fund this type of programming but they can't tell the school districts how to structure general compensation.

This is one area where federalism makes things more complicated.
 
There's nothing to argue with. Our early education set up is borderline non-existent. We refuse to properly fund our schools. We refuse to properly pay our teachers. We refuse to update our approach to curriculum. We don't fund gifted programs for our brightest kids.

There's a ton of things we can do to improve our school and how we educate our children. But this conversation never goes anywhere because the moment some people start talking about updating failing schools in the inner cities, some other people will throw up a roadblock to updating any schools because they don't think inner city communities should get a benefit.

And this is what is allowing our school system to lose more and more effectiveness despite the thousands of easy fixes that are out there.

I have no proof of this but I think it's what drives some of the support for charter schools. It's a way to address obvious school failings without helping the entire communities reliant on those schools. Fund a charter that helps a few hundred kids while ignoring the neighborhood schools that affect thousands of kids.

The main issue with failing inner city schools isn’t funding. It’s dangerous criminal students that come from broken homes. Teachers in NY are paid very well. Most of my friends with tenure are either over or close to 100k. My friend who I’m seeing later works in an inner city school in East New York...total Ghetto. He is a Gym teacher and History teacher. He spends more time breaking up fights and stopping kids from using weapons and drugs than teaching. He feels bad for the kids that actually want to learn, but the liberals in charge will not get rid of the criminals that do not deserve to be in a regular school. There was a fight at the end of the year involving 80 kids.
 
They don't have the authority to dictate it that way. They can give money for really specific things or for general goals. So they might be able to say "We'll give money to teachers who complete this certification/training" or to fund this type of programming but they can't tell the school districts how to structure general compensation.

This is one area where federalism makes things more complicated.
I know they can't specifically ear mark funds, but they can announce all of these funds are given to you for teacher pay. If states don't use it for that it will be highly visible
 
The main issue with failing inner city schools isn’t funding. It’s dangerous criminal students that come from broken homes. Teachers in NY are paid very well. Most of my friends with tenure are either over or close to 100k. My friend who I’m seeing later works in an inner city school in East New York...total Ghetto. He is a Gym teacher and History teacher. He spends more time breaking up fights and stopping kids from using weapons and drugs than teaching. He feels bad for the kids that actually want to learn, but the liberals in charge will not get rid of the criminals that do not deserve to be in a regular school. There was a fight at the end of the year involving 80 kids.

Notice that you're critiquing inner city schools when my post was about the general failings of our overall education system.

My only mention regarding inner city schools is that people refuse to improve the overall school system because they have some unjustified grievance against inner city schools.

Do you want to address my first paragraph about the overall school system or just keep complaining about an individual school where you don't send your kids and where your friend, not you, works?
 
I know they can't specifically ear mark funds, but they can announce all of these funds are given to you for teacher pay. If states don't use it for that it will be highly visible

That's earmarking funds. And they're going to force the school districts to rewrite their compensation plans? Force a renegotiation with the unions? For money that the fed isn't guaranteeing will be there in 5 years time but the budget will still have to account for somehow? Or what teachers should negotiate for a pay bump with no idea if the fed will keep funding it?

More money for teacher pay is a good thing but it's not as easy as simply handing over more money to the state and telling them to give it to the teachers.
 
This is a bit of repost from elsewhere and again more to do with upper level education, but contemporary China lacks the culture and environment for genuine innovation, their young talent isn't nurtured to think in the abstract - it's all rote - and they have a social/political system in place that actively works to inhibit it. Chasing that homogeneous Han 'dream' doesn't help. They will NOT surpass the United States scientifically nor technologically, sorry y'all.

SCMP: A Century On, China Still Lacks The Drive For Scientific Truth, Says Outspoken Editor

@HomerThompson
That sounds oddly like "American exceptionalism." Or, as the god most of my fellow Americans worship said: "Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall." Or, as the forebears of western civilization and the inventors of democracy would have said: "Hubris describes a personality quality of extreme or foolish pride or dangerous overconfidence, often in combination with (or synonymous with) arrogance. In its ancient Greek context, it typically describes behavior that defies the norms of behavior or challenges the gods, and which in turn brings about the downfall, or nemesis, of the perpetrator of hubris."

So basically the Saga of Luke Rockhold and Michael Bisping.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top