WickhamAkimbo t1_j9l5urq wrote
Reply to comment by Evening_Presence_927 in Parents fume over Governor Hochul’s charter school expansion proposal | amNewYork by barweis
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments