Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WickhamAkimbo t1_j9ibssn wrote

> Just because you’re poor, doesn’t mean your son or daughter needs to be surrounded by disrupting and violent student. They have a right to learn too.

Progressive people have a tendency to view shitty people like criminals and violent students as victims (of police, bad teachers, society, etc) instead of perpetrators and react by failing to protect innocent people from them.

They believe that keeping these bad people in an otherwise good population will magically reform them and fix their deep lack of discipline, responsibility, empathy, etc. It's magical thinking, and it doesn't work. Antisocial students need to be removed to intensive programs that actually address their major behavioral problems.

71

misterferguson t1_j9k6lbm wrote

>shitty people like criminals and violent students as victims (of police, bad teachers, society, etc) instead of perpetrators and react by failing to protect innocent people from them.

Further to this, they fail to account for the fact that most people who grow up in those same communities with those same headwinds don't become criminals. I.e. the notion that criminality is predetermined given one's circumstances is clearly proven false by those who suffer the same BS and rise above it.

22

Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9kuipo wrote

[citation needed]

Please show us the proportions of kids who thrive in that environment and those who fall into the cycle.

This smacks of “I have a friend who grew up in the hood and he’s alright. Why can’t the rest of them be like that?”

−4

Awkward-Painter-2024 t1_j9jbcgs wrote

It's not magical thinking. It's about access. We don't know why all those kids act up. We try to give children a chance. Is it easy, no. Does it seem pointless, yes, sure. But it's not. You can't separate every "trouble-maker" child and put them in prison. These are kids. We need to address social conditions somehow. Private charter schools only move money out of education and into the hands of corporations, CEOs, etc.

15

WickhamAkimbo t1_j9jqtmb wrote

> We don't know why all those kids act up.

Yes we do. They have terrible lives at home, often with parents that don't love them, neglect them, and even abuse them. They aren't disciplined and don't receive healthy boundaries. That describes the vast majority of cases.

> You can't separate every "trouble-maker" child

Yes, you can, and it saves the education of all the remaining children.

> ...and put them in prison. These are kids. We need to address social conditions somehow

You don't put them in prison, but you don't leave them in an environment free to ruin everyone else's life (which is how important education is). Put them in specialized schools that can address the massive behavioral problems that they have. Remove them from abusive households. They absolutely deserve help and a future; leaving them in a normal school population and pretending that will solve their problems does nothing. You might as well send them to jail yourself. Magical thinking.

37

Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9kuzoz wrote

> Yes we do. They have terrible lives at home, often with parents that don't love them, neglect them, and even abuse them

And diverting money away from the public school system is going to help them… how?

> Yes, you can, and it saves the education of all the remaining children.

And you call progressives out of touch with reality. Lmao

> You don't put them in prison, but you don't leave them in an environment free to ruin everyone else's life (which is how important education is).

1.) literally nobody is advocating for that.

2.) that’s what extra investment in school systems will help with, though. It allows schools to fund extracurricular activities and clubs, provide after school care, give kids tutoring programs to help them along.

Christ, how are you people this shortsighted?

2

WickhamAkimbo t1_j9l5urq wrote

> And diverting money away from the public school system is going to help them… how?

I support charter schools only to the extent that they allow parents to pressure and force public education officials to acknowledge this problem and actually address it by removing violent and disruptive students from the population of students that are already motivated to learn. Public schools should be well-funded, and in New York they are. They have the highest funding in the nation per-pupil.

> And you call progressives out of touch with reality. Lmao

Yes, you are considerably out of touch with reality on nearly every topic you give your opinion for in this sub.

> 1.) literally nobody is advocating for that.

Yes, they are.

> 2.) that’s what extra investment in school systems will help with, though. It allows schools to fund extracurricular activities and clubs, provide after school care, give kids tutoring programs to help them along.

Throwing money at kids disruptive, antisocial, or violent kids in the middle of the general population of students doesn't magically fix behavioral problems. They need much more direct interventions with much smaller class sizes and, likely, remedial instruction. Fixing those behavioral problems takes time and cannot be done in a normal classroom without being massively disruptive.

Good luck with your hand-wavy ideas.

7

Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9laa2n wrote

> I support charter schools only to the extent that they allow parents to pressure and force public education officials to acknowledge this problem and actually address it by removing violent and disruptive students from the population of students that are already motivated to learn.

But if they charters don’t take them, where are they going to go? Federal law requires minors to go to school.

This seems like a problem that would fix itself if we, y’know, invested in public schools.

> Yes, you are considerably out of touch with reality on nearly every topic you give your opinion for in this sub.

Lmao nice ad hominem. Really shows you people are scraping the bottom of the barrel argumentatively.

> Yes, they are

[citation needed]

> Throwing money at kids disruptive, antisocial, or violent kids in the middle of the general population of students doesn't magically fix behavioral problems. They need much more direct interventions with much smaller class sizes and, likely, remedial instruction. Fixing those behavioral problems takes time and cannot be done in a normal classroom without being massively disruptive.

Did you.. not read what I put down? I literally said we could do that in the public school system. You might wanna get your eyes checked, buddy.

> Good luck with your hand-wavy ideas.

You literally suggested the same thing, so speak for yourself, Mr accidental progressive policy.

2

WickhamAkimbo t1_j9loah7 wrote

>Did you.. not read what I put down? I literally said we could do that in the public school system. You might wanna get your eyes checked, buddy.

No, you said we could throw a lot of funding at public schools without giving any further details and don't seem to support removing disruptive students from regular classes on the theory that the money will just *waves hands* solve things.

You've also made claims elsewhere that per-pupil spending in NYC is expected to be high because... the city is big. You don't seem to understand that spending efficiency isn't supposed to plummet as you scale the system up. I question if you have basic economic literacy.

3

Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9m96nk wrote

> No, you said we could throw a lot of funding at public schools without giving any further details

I literally gave further details right after that. So you really are that blind.

> You've also made claims elsewhere that per-pupil spending in NYC is expected to be high because... the city is big. You don't seem to understand that spending efficiency isn't supposed to plummet as you scale the system up.

That’s exactly how it happens, though, especially in a student body as big as it is.

1

KaiDaiz t1_j9mddz3 wrote

> That’s exactly how it happens, though, especially in a student body as big as it is.

Nope. Look at the other large school systems in USA. LA also a HCOL area has 2/3 # of students we have but their school budget is 1/2 ours. If all things being equal and accounting for size, you expect LA school budget be 2/3 of our budget but it isn't. In fact its cheaper. Chicago 1/3 our student # but 1/4 of our school budget.

That's raw numbers. If we look at % of the education line item cost in their budgets, our 40% figures exceeds them if we really want to extrapolate for size.

2

Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9mdoa0 wrote

Except yup. Both of those cities have a massive amount of suburban sprawl, so the situations aren’t comparable.

1

EzNotReal t1_j9nhued wrote

You accused him of having no argument for using an ad-hominem… when he used the exact same ad hominem you did in your previous comment? And then littering the rest of your comment with even more ad hominems? How are you a real person?

3

IsayNigel t1_j9lpnc0 wrote

Wait, if you’ve already acknowledged that the problem is these kids’ home lives, then how does diverting funds away from public schools put pressure on the parents. This doesn’t even make sense based on your own internal logic.

2

WickhamAkimbo t1_j9oo45r wrote

The problem is both their home lives and mixing them with the general population of students. Diverting funds from public schools that refuse to remove violent or anti-social students to intensive programs that can correct their behavior puts pressure on them to do just that. You address a bad home situation by giving them a safe space during the day at a specialized school that can focus on behavioral problems, and in extreme cases, by removing them from abusive or neglectful homes.

Let me know if you need additional explanation. I advocated for this combination elsewhere in this thread multiple times already. It's not really that confusing. It's pretty simple.

3

IsayNigel t1_j9ptgb8 wrote

What do you mean “general population” of kids? These are the general population of kids, do you think there’s something defective about them?

Where are you putting these schools? How are you staffing them? Who’s paying for that? How are you training these people?

0

YouandWhoseArmy t1_j9jlcsc wrote

Schools are not the best route to address social conditions.

29

IsayNigel t1_j9lpqn1 wrote

So then why take funds away from public schools to divert to charters?

5

YouandWhoseArmy t1_j9m6u81 wrote

My impression is that public schools have their hands tied with bad kids for whatever reason.

Charters get rid of them. Rightly so.

As far as I can tell they’re the same shit otherwise and charters are making public schools worse and worse. Self fulfilling prophecy.

2

supermechace t1_ja43rc9 wrote

Not OP but I think charter schools in NYC are a makeshift bandaid and political bandaid to address the inability to meet the needs and wants by parents of schools due to bureaucracy, infighting withing government, competing politics and educational goals, and power of teacher unions. Basically similar to outsourcing govt services to outside companies (which has advantages of not being tied up in bureaucracy and plausible deniability if contractor messes up) but in this case the government maintains control of a competing service(public school vs outsourced charter school). The existence of charter schools is due to government and political dysfunction (which seems to be worsening in NYC) so unless those disappear charter schools aren't likely either. Also keep in mind there's a lot of tax payer money out there so everyone wants it to be used the way they want it to be used.

2

KaiDaiz t1_j9lrk4w wrote

charters are public schools as well. they both share the same pool of students and funds. if regular public school student enrollment numbers are decreasing while demand for charter are increasing and its enrollment # increasing...only makes sense to give them more of the public school money. fact is, public school are hemorrhaging students due to continued failed policies which creates the need for charters

1

IsayNigel t1_j9lw22d wrote

They are not public schools in even remotely the same way real public schools are. You actually show up in these threads a lot which makes it seem like you have an agenda to be sure.

6

KaiDaiz t1_j9lwm4u wrote

They are even by NYS definitions and they definitely share from same pool of resources. no one disputes that. I'm a product of nyc public school all my life and here schooling folks like you how far the system has fallen which led to rise of charters

0

IsayNigel t1_j9lyqjq wrote

I know, you go through this song and dance every time. No they aren’t. And I literally could not care less, that doesn’t make you an expert on educational policy. Millions of kids go through the DOE every year.

5

KaiDaiz t1_j9m1bk9 wrote

I suggest you look at the facts. Start with definition of charter school. They public. Start at looking where their funding comes from. Same pool as traditional public. Look at enrollment numbers over past decade. Which is increasing and which ain't. Even Asians are noticing charters and flocking to them over screened schools due to NYC DOE fuckery

Now go into my history. I have always advocate for reform for public schools to return to its once glory. As of right now, NYC DOE on its continued warpath to ruin the entire system and more and more students will flock to charter at this rate. This not my prediction, just look at the enrollment data and public polling regarding charters.

In addition, I am a volunteer tutor. I tutored plenty of kids over the years and def noticed the quality of students education, their abilities dropping and what counts as passing ever lowered.

Even right now, you and others can't seem to understand what the NYC DOE is doing to public schools is creating the need and increased demands for charters. Its basically writing ads for them

0

IsayNigel t1_j9n5clg wrote

Really, if they’re so public, why don’t they follow the same rules as DOE schools?

2

ctindel t1_j9m3wf9 wrote

> I have always advocate for reform for public schools to return to its once glory.

What were the glory days of NYC public schools and what about them was glorious?

1

KaiDaiz t1_j9m4gea wrote

When we actually taught students, had standards and tracked as many promising students as possible of all background. The passing grade for math regents these days is < 1/3 questions correct. What kind of fuked up math is that.

1

ctindel t1_j9m518e wrote

I thought they had to get a 65 out of 100?

1

KaiDaiz t1_j9m5uoh wrote

65 doesn't mean 65% of questions correct or raw scores

How bad the problem is now

https://medium.com/@newyorkteacher/guessing-c-for-every-answer-is-now-enough-to-pass-the-new-york-state-algebra-exam-93bac55b3e24

Heres the 2015 grading chart and each yr the raw score been getting lower to get passing grade

https://www.nysedregents.org/algebraone/615/algone62015-cc.pdf

1

ctindel t1_j9mapy8 wrote

Oh yeah I remember reading this when it was posted. Haha thanks for the sad reminder of the current state of NY education. I don’t know that there was ever really a golden era of NYC schools where they were generally as good (and producing as good results) as the suburbs though.

People in my parents and grandparents generation just dropped out a lot more instead.

1

IsayNigel t1_j9lytee wrote

What does “folks like me” even mean?

1

KaiDaiz t1_j9m24eq wrote

folks who don't even understand why charters exist...current nyc doe is doing a shiet job

1

akmalhot t1_j9jdjya wrote

So all of the other kids should suffer?

21

againblahisnothere t1_j9jwolg wrote

Actually we do know. They come from homes where a parent will abuse (physical and verbal) and neglect them. This has a direct impact on brain development and the ability to self regulate. When you hit a two year old, you’re putting them in stress mode. Not healthy for a developing brain. This isn’t rocket science. It’s really not their fault but at the same time it’s not fair for them to be disrupting other peoples education. In reality those parents need to be educated and those patterns of abuse need to be broken but saying you’re a shit parent has a condescending tone- not sure what program would address this.

12

sad_pizza t1_j9k45qh wrote

Schools aren't equipped to handle every "trouble-maker." Schools are meant to educate our children, not to fix every deficiency they have because they aren't getting what they need from their parents or elsewhere. If your goal is to get schools to be that for children, you are setting yourself up for failure. We have a problem with our society (e.g., poverty and the culture that poverty creates) and it is bleeding into our schools. A school-based solution, absent of anything to treat the root problems, will be superficial and ineffective.

10

Koboldsftw t1_j9jexia wrote

Najee just think the poor kid who should be allowed to have a chance is just as likely the perpetrator as the victim

2

mikevago t1_j9jxtls wrote

&gt; They believe that keeping these bad people in an otherwise good population will magically reform them

People believe this because it very often works and its pretty well documented. You have this reductive view that there are "good people" and "bad people" and those are somehow immutable. This isn't a video game where your job is to punish the bad guys. So much misbehavior in high-poverty schools is the result of poverty, and so much of the rest is atmosphere. If everyone in your school grew up in generational poverty and sees nothing but the behaviors that that engenders, you're going to act the way everyone around you acts. If everyone in your school grew up middle class, with middle class behaviors, you're going to act differently. Are kids in that situation going to immediately become perfect, 100% of the time? Of coures not. But on the whole it's absolutely beneficial.

You just have to have faith in people and a genuine desire to help, not your sneering dismissiveness of people who grew up in poverty as inherently "shitty people".

−9