She never really answered the question in my opinion. Russ Roberts:What I’m curious about is why isn’t there more oversight of the charter school funding?ĭiane Ravitch: Charter schools don’t have the same oversight and accountability and transparency as public schools. I am very biased towards school choice and vouchers particularyl, so take it with a grain of salt, but I thought she was very combative, and dodged the questions that were put to her plainly. I, personally, did not find that she helped my understand why school choice was the wrong directions. However, I found this guest to be unhelpful to her cause.
I would like to see that continue whole-heartedly. I really appreciate that Russ gives a platform to someone that he disagrees with, and that he provides an opportunity for them elucidate why what they have to say is important to an understanding of the issue. But it’s not even discussed because there’s bipartisan agreement not to do it.
It’s busing kids from areas with terrible schools to ones with phenomenal suburban public schools like Lexington MA. I actually think we know the answer to this problem. I think that’s a very fair characterization of the real-world results, and it’s something that charter school advocates rarely engage with. I think Diana’s main point is that after 30 years and many billionaires pouring their personal fortunes into the charter school movement, the results are mixed at best. And she did say that some public schools are failing kids.īut I think she was pushing back on common rhetoric from charter school advocates, which is to take the best charter school in the country (while ignoring the many bad charter schools) and compare it to the worst public schools in the country (while ignoring the manny good public schools). It’s a religion in everything but name.ĭiana did say there are some sucessful charter schools. However, she doesn’t seem to have a problem with the dominant religion being taught in public schools today: The progressive religion of social justice. Telling Russ that his saying there are some bad teachers means he’s demonizing teachers.Īttempting to conflate the racist history of the term “school choice” with the current charter movement.įinally, the guest says that she does not want to support religious schools.
Antonym of elucidate how to#
Telling “Billionaires” how to spend their own money (fixing social issues according to this week’s guest’s preferences). This may be true, but the guest didn’t go anywhere past a few examples. Using examples of corruption in a few charter schools to impugn the whole system. Unnecessary and irrelevant name-calling (“Disrupters,” “Billionaires,” “Evangelical,” “Anti-gay,” “Koch brothers,” “Betsy DeVos,” “Right-wing”).
Mono-racial countries have the same issues with low-performing classes. I felt this week’s guest did not an fell back on unproven tropes and bad reasoning: The most important part of having an honest and open discussion is having a partner who feels the same. Let them fail alone and let us save some of the kids who would have gone down with them. The disruptive kids are going to fail anyway. The best we can do is select out the kids who have a chance of succeeding and separate them from the disruptive kids who are stealing their education. The same common factor makes their kids perform poorly in school. It seems that a lot of people in the education field work really hard to consider every theory and possibility for the issues discussed in this episode except for one: A common factor (culture, low IQ, lack of impulse control, poor decision-making skills) make certain people poor.
0 kommentar(er)
