Re: Do you support educational vouchers in schools?

[Herman Rubin]

For the purpose of teaching people to read the Bible.

But public education was present in many societies before this; as far as can be told, universal literacy for boys became almost mandatory in Judaism 2500 years ago. The education was by groups of parents hiring teachers, with the community paying the bill for those too poor.

While the Talmud has many restrictions on competition, it specifically allows a teacher to open his school right next to that of another; this would be prohibited for a grocer. So the idea that competition was a good idea in education was present.k

[Banty]

Are you "John Gatto"? Yes or no.

Banty

[toto]

You are not Gatto.

-- Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[Bob LeChevalier]

The quotes provided show that the purpose was much broader than that, and in fact that the state had an interest in education independent of any that they church might have had.

How about for girls?

Since I've been doing lots of census research lately, I will now grab a random page in the lower south East of NYC from 1900, where immigrant Jews predominated, and look at the literacy. I'm being selective only to choose a page that is mostly Jewish, and mostly not native-born, rather than Irish or some other ethnicity, so as to get a meaningful sample. I am excluding those under age 10 and those listed as being in school. I will then continue until I get 100 data points

Manhattan 1900 Census District 288 page 1-3 and part of 4.

yes Male 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111 40 Female 111111111111111111111111 24

64 No male 1111111111 10 female 11111111111111111111111111 26 36

Conveniently (I didn't plan it that way) the population split equally by gender. I see 80% literacy in men, 48% literacy in women. Neither an especially bragworthy figure among a population for which "universal literacy" has been mandatory for 2500 years.

Indeed, while I did not collect numbers, an age breakdown would have given significantly lower literacy numbers among those over 40 or those over 50 - those in their teens and twenties were almost universally literate, perhaps because most of them had some schooling after they arrived here, and NYC had compulsory education to some level (I'm not sure what) in those days.

And that is just basic literacy, not competency in what you consider fundamental math concepts. I believe you have already noted your parents' lack of sufficient to even point you in the right direction in your own education.

lojbab

[Bob LeChevalier]

Your name is not John Gatto.

I have previously posted numerous refutations of Gatto's shoddy, false, and undocumented assertions about the schools.

But you've been given a chance to freely and relevantly promote your wife's books and website, and are failing to do so. This leads people to believe you are a fraud.

lojbab

[Herman Rubin]

Did Martin Luther include the girls? Possibly.

Teaching girls was not prohibited, but was not common in Judaism at that time. One reason was that the teachers were men, and the Jewish modesty rules made it quite difficult. It was even a problem for mothers to drop off their sons at school. However, some rabbis taught their daughters, and they in turn taught other girls.

[Herman Rubin]

.................

But public education was present in many societies before this; as far as can be told, universal literacy for boys became almost mandatory in Judaism 2500 years ago.

Literacy in what? Did they count literacy in Yiddish or Hebrew?

[Bob LeChevalier]

I believe that the question asked was "can you read?" or "can you write?" Separate questions asked what their primary language was and whether they could speak English. I'd have to go back to check the specific people, but I'm pretty sure that there were people who did not speak English who were listed as able to read and write.

lojbab

[dragonlady]

Bully for you. But irrelevant.

I'm referring to the game you are playing on this thread.

[Hillary Israeli]

** *>*>Huh? First of all, I don't believe bussing killed public schools or *>*>private schools or anything at all (i'm not sure what you're trying to say *>*>bussing did, actually). * *The initial busing, to allow those restricted to go to *schools which they could manage, was good. When it came *to "racial balance", it was bad.

I still don't really understand by what means you think bussing "killed" any particular schools.

*>*We have to watch out for the hyperegalitarians trying to * *>What is a "hyperegalitarian?" * *Someone who believes that people cannot be unequal *in any manner.

No it's not. There is no such word.

*>*The educationists and hyperegalitarians cannot admit that *>*there is a large range of mental abilities, and even if *>*they changed now, the public schools could not do what is *>*needed in a generation, alas. * *>OK, well - I think there is a huge range of ability, I think our public *>schools are failing, and I think vouchers would probably make them *>worse... but I have no idea what you're talking about. * *Nothing can make our schools better in the short run.

Well, actually, a massive rapid infusion of cash and influx of highly capable and dedicated teachers would certainly improve them quickly!

*What vouchers can do is to enable academics to be used *to set up better educational programs than the present *schools could, even if they wanted to.

I disagree.

[George]

Cash would be consumed by the tenured - but newly enriched - union members.

Capability of teachers? You mean we'd check the quality of their output - students - instead of their certificate? Yeah, that's about likely. Once you're in, even the area of certification is meaningless.

Dedication? When you motivate by money, you attract those motivated by money. Try staying after school to help some kids and see how fast your steward comes down on you.

Conventional non-thinking.

[Charlie Self]

quickly!

I agree. Cash isn't the cure, but I also know that locally anyway, and over a fairly wide local area, teachers routinely stay after school, and come in early, to assist students who need it (or who wish to improve on already good work). No "stewards" have anything to say about it.

Dedication and capability, though, are highly variable, even in the same teacher over time. And blaming the mess totally on teachers and teachers unions is an absolutely horrendous mistake. Certainly, piss poor teachers don't do a good job. But, then again, neither do piss poor students, many of whom are trained, if that's the word, to disregard anything that doesn't meet specific inanities. Parents must take a role, and the greater the force and direction of the parental role, the more likely the student is to be successful, even in the face of mediocre, or worse, teaching.

Money is a useful adjunct when you're trying to attract good teachers, but it is only a true motivator, IMO, for those in the early stges of their careers. Somehow, 35K in Alexandria, VA sounds like a lot more than 29K 200 miles southwest. At this point, those doing personnel searches in the SW of VA haven't learned to point up the differences in things like rent ($750 and up in the Alex area, $450 in the SW area, same square footage, condition, etc.), while gas in the SW area is 15% cheaper, food the same, etc. And, biggest blessing of all, you're not dealing with the slop over from big city traffic (largest city in the area is 95,000).

[Banty]

Would that we decide that we need people who are highly motivated to make businesses suceed, and not those motivated by mere money, to run our corporations. So clearly we've gone the wrong route by paying CEO's so much.

Your non-conventional thinking is wonderful!

Banty (hey, sports too! - think we could convince Steinbrenner??)

[dragonlady]

Right. Most of the teachers *I* know got into teaching for the Big Bucks.

And I know MANY teachers who stay after school to help kids -- and even spend evening or weekend hours available to help -- and none have gotten in trouble with their unions. Heck, even when unions have issued a "work to rule" order, some teachers ignore it and continue to put in hours over and above what is required by contract.

[George]

Well, dragons notwithstanding, wages are great, job guarantees are better, and time off for those who want it (why some got into it anyway) is abundant.

As to salaries - I thought 45 in the boondocks was a _lot_ more than 75 in the inner city. My sister-in-law, having gone back to elementary, resists all effort to put her back in middle school where many are larger than she. Smart woman.

[Banty]

I'll try not to grow my kid too big, sorry 'bout that.

[Herman Rubin]

It caused them to lower their standards. This did more than reduce the amount children learned; it greatly hampered, in many cases permanently, their ability to think.

Words are coined daily. This one should be easy.

We have lots of dedicated teachers. But we have a curriculum set up by those who do not understand subject matter, especially at the administrative level. The "new math" debacle of 45 years ago showed that the teachers could not learn concepts, but could only proceed by plug and chug methods. A large proportion of those taught to read by the whole word method were unable to learn to make good use of the alphabet later. Grammar is almost out, and structure likewise.

Capable teachers would have to be those who understand concepts and are willing to teach them, and we need to allow them to be taught, which means throwing out almost the entire curriculum. These teachers would mainly have to be those not taking education courses, and hence not being able to be credentialed. This CAN be done.

What cannot be done quickly is to produce the revised curriculum. It took years to produce and test the "new math" curriculum before it was introduced in the public schools. With a "grade" system, it is hard to see how a concept-oriented curriculum can work, as one cannot provide a schedule for learning a concept.

There were highly unsuccessful attempts to teach concepts to the teachers, the same concepts which could be taught to the children. This has, if anything, gotten considerably worse.

[toto]

LOL. It is certainly true that words are coined daily. Interestingly, the children in the fourth grade class I substituted in today were reading Frindle about just such a possibility.

is no sound, no cry in all the world that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[Herman Rubin]

the one who brought it into use. One which is a little harder, and also refers to the PC, is

hyperinfracaniphilia.

We have too much of this as well.

[Hillary Israeli]

* *> *Nothing can make our schools better in the short run. *> *> Well, actually, a massive rapid infusion of cash and influx of highly *> capable and dedicated teachers would certainly improve them quickly! *> * *Another fantasy.

Obviously I do not believe a massive rapid infusion of cash and influx of highly capable and dedicated teachers is forthcoming. I stand by my statement that this would in fact improve schools quickly.

*Cash would be consumed by the tenured - but newly enriched - union members.

Not if it was budgeted for other uses. Teachers do not usually have a contractual clause stating all new district income must be equally distributed among tenured faculty or anything!

*Capability of teachers?

Is English not your first language? Capability: (noun)power or ability, the extent of someone's abilities. Does that help?

*You mean we'd check the quality of their output - students - instead of *their certificate?

No, I don't mean that. I did not speak as to the method of determining the capability of teachers as that is not my area of expertise. Since you ask, I will comment that the method you propose seems foolish - seems to promote things like "teaching to the test," for one, and seems as if it would be harmful to those teachers who take on groups of less-capable students! What seems fairer to me would be a combination of looking at the educational background of teachers, letters of recommendation, and percent increase in grade level or test scores in students. But as I said, that's not my area of expertise, and I'm just saying that having increased numbers of very capable teachers could only help the situation.

*Yeah, that's about likely.

None of this is LIKELY. But a statement was made that NOTHING could help. I countered this with a description of things I think actually WOULD help.

*Dedication? When you motivate by money, you attract those motivated by *money.

I don't get your point. Who said anything about motivating by money? I believe part of the definition of "capable and dedicated" is "motivated by a desire to do a good job," for one thing. The kind of teacher I'm talking about would be available to help students who were having problems, via telephone if necessary, or some other arrangement, for example.

• Try staying after school to help some kids and see how fast your steward

• comes down on you.

Hmmm. I went to a public school; I stayed after school to do extra work with teachers pretty regularly. I have friends who are teachers; they help kids during their breaks or after hours pretty regularly. I don't know what you are talking about.

*Conventional non-thinking.

Now, now. Which is it? Fantasy, or conventional?