Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, I find YOU to be mentally challenged and completely irrational and blinded by your hate of capitalism. Bronx Science and Stuyvesant are for a select few - by your logic people should be made to pay for them because they offer better teachers & resources. Why don't you take your box of crayons and write up a big poster and parade outside those schools yelling that they are private and people should move and pay for them.
Charters are actually step above that in that they afford the opportunity to ALL kids in the neighborhood.
Yes those are top schools NOT CHARTERS the students have PROVEN themselves to be the best of the best regardless if their teachers were Union OR non Union
I know lots of public school students on honor rolls and who have graduated with honors
used to be called summa *** laude *** laude etc their names were placed in the hall bulletin board and many students were inspired because they earned their achievements
NOT GIVEN IT BY A BUNCHA BUREAUCRATS
You are rapidly devolving into a petty mudslinger, if you're out of arguments then the better option would be to bow out.
Charters do indeed afford the opportunity to all district residents. If the number of applicants exceeds the number of available seats, there is a blind random selection where each and every child has exactly the same probability of being selected. It is extremely remarkable that you would go on such a rambling tirade to take away the choice of parents because you don't like that bureaucrats aren't managing a public school.
It's public education. When you decide where to live, you get a public school with it. If that isn't good enough for the parents, then move or pay for private. How hard is that?
You are rapidly devolving into a petty mudslinger, if you're out of arguments then the better option would be to bow out.
Charters do indeed afford the opportunity to all district residents. If the number of applicants exceeds the number of available seats, there is a blind random selection where each and every child has exactly the same probability of being selected. It is extremely remarkable that you would go on such a rambling tirade to take away the choice of parents because you don't like that bureaucrats aren't managing a public school.
actually YOUR argument has devolved into Union vs Non Union and I dont belive that the Children interests are your priority at all otherwise you would just concede that the choice of the parents can just as well be served by placing their progeny in a private school nobody is taking away their choice
Charter school proponents are taking away the choice of the Children to NOT be second class citizens in their OWN schools
It's public education. When you decide where to live, you get a public school with it. If that isn't good enough for the parents, then move or pay for private. How hard is that?
You are extremely naive to believe that all people can afford to live in the neighborhoods with the best DOE administered schools, or that all are able to plan for the school process before putting down roots. Your elitist notion that only people who live in good neighborhoods can send their kids to a good school is really depressing.
I would prefer that well educated or well motivated parents have the option to provide a decent level of education for their kids instead instead of fleeing and abandoning sketchy neighborhoods instead of staying to support the community. Thankfully, your brutal "I don't care about your kids, if you don't like it leave" attitude is in the minority.
actually YOUR argument has devolved into Union vs Non Union and I dont belive that the Children interests are your priority at all otherwise you would just concede that the choice of the parents can just as well be served by placing their progeny in a private school nobody is taking away their choice
Charter school proponents are taking away the choice of the Children to NOT be second class citizens in their OWN schools
GOT IT?
Perfectly said. Unfortunately, people like Blake pretend they care about all children while endorsing the situation you describe....and he wonders why I think he's not that bright for not seeing the irony in his position.
Bronx Science and Stuyvesent are magnets, not charters and not one teacher in either of those schools will tell you they are better than a teacher at a zoned school. .
do you realize how difficult it is for a teacher to get a position at either of those schools? Teaching very smart kids who actually who want to learn?
fyi, both school principles look very favorable on potential candidates of teachers who were students themselves at those school.
Those are excellent examples of the PUBLIC SCHOOL system at work... for both teachers and students without denigrating anyone... or takin up others spaces
because the cream always rises to the TOP!
No, because they do conform to public school rules and the applicants are accepted on merit. Plus the citizens of NY are okay with the specialty schools whereas they are not okay with charter schools. Last I checked, they weren't displacing neighborhood kids either, the principals weren't making $500,000 per year, and they weren't spending money on lobbying, advertising, or shady consultants.
My sides.
You argue that charters have an unfair advantage because they attract "motivated students" and "involved parents" and do not acknowledge that Stuyvesant has the same advantage (actually a greater advantage since they use a standardized test in admissions, so they are more self-selecting). Maybe charters should start basing admissions on test scores as well. Ah, but those pesky "public school rules" would still be an issue, I guess.
I'm interested to hear that you speak for the citizens of New York. When did you receive that honor? Who are these people protesting the mayor re charter schools?
Also, the American Federation of Teachers spent 1.4 mill last year on lobbying.
You are extremely naive to believe that all people can afford to live in the neighborhoods with the best DOE administered schools, or that all are able to plan for the school process before putting down roots. Your elitist notion that only people who live in good neighborhoods can send their kids to a good school is really depressing.
I would prefer that well educated or well motivated parents have the option to provide a decent level of education for their kids instead instead of fleeing and abandoning sketchy neighborhoods instead of staying to support the community. Thankfully, your brutal "I don't care about your kids, if you don't like it leave" attitude is in the minority.
I can't afford Westchester county. It doesn't mean I deserve to have the residents of that area pay for my education. I prefer to get involved with my kids' schools and make them run well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirtiger
do you realize how difficult it is for a teacher to get a position at either of those schools? Teaching very smart kids who actually who want to learn?
fyi, both school principles look very favorable on potential candidates of teachers who were students themselves at those school.
That's not surprising. Who wouldn't want to teach motivated kids? What would you think is easier? Teaching at Bronx Science or teaching in Fort Apache?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boatshoe
My sides.
You argue that charters have an unfair advantage because they attract "motivated students" and "involved parents" and do not acknowledge that Stuyvesant has the same advantage (actually a greater advantage since they use a standardized test in admissions, so they are more self-selecting). Maybe charters should start basing admissions on test scores as well. Ah, but those pesky "public school rules" would still be an issue, I guess.
I'm interested to hear that you speak for the citizens of New York. When did you receive that honor? Who are these people protesting the mayor re charter schools?
Also, the American Federation of Teachers spent 1.4 mill last year on lobbying.
The last sentence of your first paragraph contradicts the preceding sentence. Charter's don't follow public school rules. While Stuyvesent admits kids on academic standards - discipline, attendance and finances run the same as public schools. If charters were magnets, which they are not, then go ahead with a test.
The people protesting the mayor re charter schools are the parents that Eva has funded both in a trip to Albany and now a lawsuit because she's upset the mayor is not kicking students with disabilities out of their building to make room for her. Gee, if she is a public school then shouldn't she be fired for closing schools and funding this trip?
Wow, the AFT spent slightly more representing every city throughout the country than Eva did on herself.
I can't afford Westchester county. It doesn't mean I deserve to have the residents of that area pay for my education.
So what you're saying is you don't believe in public education. If you don't want residents to pay for your education then your position is that the DOE should pack up and close and all schools should be private.
Not exactly the sort of world most people want to live in. Poor and lower income kids deserve better
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
