These people are our future

[IowaSkinsFan]

Public schools are over-funded and the money spent on public schools does not correlate to the educations provided. Here is a graph showing test scores vs spending:

A Picture Is Worth $300 Billion | Cato @ Liberty

Spending is about $26,000 for each student signed up at a DC public school. $28,000 for each student who actually attended.

The cost of the average private school is only $6,620. So they cost a quarter of what public schools do, but still they do better.

And imagine how much better we would be at education if we didnt waste all that money giving to terrible schools.

[boost]

And imagine how much better we would be at education if we didnt waste all that money giving to terrible schools.

I feel like the issue with schools is compounded by unions. Unions have turned into an abomination that rarely are in the interest of the consumer or even the union worker. We should probably move on to another issue unless you can find a reasonable way to separate what problems are caused by unions and what are caused by the school being tax funded.

[IowaSkinsFan]

I feel like the issue with schools is compounded by unions. Unions have turned into an abomination that rarely are in the interest of the consumer or even the union worker. We should probably move on to another issue unless you can find a reasonable way to separate what problems are caused by unions and what are caused by the school being tax funded.

These are two completely different factors. I am not simply using two statistics. I am not saying "public schools are worse than private schools, public schools are funded by taxes, therefore tax funding causes public schools to be bad." That is not a logically true statement.

What I am saying is that if a public school is funded by taxes, it will never fail. This is a true statement. And if a public school can never fail, despite any of its results, a bad public school will continue to exist. Do you disagree that this proves that tax funding is a factor that would help cause a public school to be bad? I cannot mathematically prove the degree which this is the case, that would be totally absurd for anyone to state as total truth.

I actually have no idea how to make a logical statement on how unions cause public schools to fail. Not very educated on the problems of the unions. I'm very interested in seeing how this works because talking to Lyric outside this thread he seems to be very against unions but I have never really understood the issue with them.

[boost]

What I am saying is that if a public school is funded by taxes, it will never fail. This is a true statement.
This is not a true statement. It is harder for a school to be closed down due to unions, as well as other factors, but failing public schools are closed.

I actually have no idea how to make a logical statement on how unions cause public schools to fail. Not very educated on the problems of the unions. I'm very interested in seeing how this works because talking to Lyric outside this thread he seems to be very against unions but I have never really understood the issue with them.

Well the issue is that while unions were at one point necessary and may one day be necessary in the future, at this time they are a power block that serves little purpose yet is reluctant to relinquish its power. A teachers union impedes good education because the people it supposedly serves are the teachers, not the children. This means that if you are a bad tenured teacher, as long as you show up on time and are in the class room and not molesting children, it will be VERY hard to fire you. But in the end, the protection of teachers is not even the unions true purpose, its own survival is its purpose.

Also of note- Unions are seniority based. When there is a budget crisis and the school district declares a state of emergency (which allows them to bypass pretty much every union rule set to protect the teachers) then young promising gifted teachers are kicked to the curb while old disillusioned and disgruntled teachers are the only staff left. Nothing is merit based, which is clearly detrimental to the kids.

[IowaSkinsFan]

Well the issue is that while unions were at one point necessary and may one day be necessary in the future, at this time they are a power block that serves little purpose yet is reluctant to relinquish its power. A teachers union impedes good education because the people it supposedly serves are the teachers, not the children. This means that if you are a bad tenured teacher, as long as you show up on time and are in the class room and not molesting children, it will be VERY hard to fire you. But in the end, the protection of teachers is not even the unions true purpose, its own survival is its purpose.

Also of note- Unions are seniority based. When there is a budget crisis and the school district declares a state of emergency (which allows them to bypass pretty much every union rule set to protect the teachers) then young promising gifted teachers are kicked to the curb while old disillusioned and disgruntled teachers are the only staff left. Nothing is merit based, which is clearly detrimental to the kids.

Thanks, this helps a lot. I still don't understand why though that people shouldn't have the right to band together over a common interest in engage in shared decision making for their own benefit. Is it just because of the bad result?

[boost]

Thanks, this helps a lot. I still don't understand why though that people shouldn't have the right to band together over a common interest in engage in shared decision making for their own benefit. Is it just because of the bad result?

I can see how you misinterpreted what I wrote as to mean that I think unions should be illegal. I think the idea of a union is great, however so far in practice it has become a corrupt self serving, separate entity onto itself. In practice it is just a middle man, not an actual representation of the people who have banded together.

This is an issue that is not easy for me. Unions as they are do more bad than good IMO, especially in schools where the students interest is ignored for the adults. In theory a protected workforce should be able to serve its customers better, but really it just allows bad workers to keep their jobs. For schools specifically we need a system in which award and protection are given on merit, not on seniority. When good teachers are rewarded, there is incentive to be a good teacher. The problem is, in a large bureaucracy, how do we measure a teachers skills? Don't even get me started on the abomination that is standardized testing...

[IowaSkinsFan]

I can see how you misinterpreted what I wrote as to mean that I think unions should be illegal. I think the idea of a union is great, however so far in practice it has become a corrupt self serving, separate entity onto itself. In practice it is just a middle man, not an actual representation of the people who have banded together.

This is an issue that is not easy for me. Unions as they are do more bad than good IMO, especially in schools where the students interest is ignored for the adults. In theory a protected workforce should be able to serve its customers better, but really it just allows bad workers to keep their jobs. For schools specifically we need a system in which award and protection are given on merit, not on seniority. When good teachers are rewarded, there is incentive to be a good teacher. The problem is, in a large bureaucracy, how do we measure a teachers skills? Don't even get me started on the abomination that is standardized testing...

This is what I like about a free market. In a private school, a good teacher is simply what the collection of what everyone believes a good teacher to be. We don't need to try to approximate it. If a teacher does something bad or isn't good in the parents eyes, parents complain and the teacher is fired.