Breaking News: The Free-Market May Not Be the Answer to All of Our Problems!
In an amazing turn of events, newly discovered data may prove that market reforms cannot solve the problems facing America's public schools!
While plowing through the mountains of online data commonly referred to as the "nation's report card," the American Federation of Teachers discovered federally collected statistics that shockingly suggested charter schools may not perform as well as other public schools. It looks like the AFT is going on the offensive with this one; pointing out the Department of Educations obvious bias towards releasing statistics in support of Bush's claim that failing public schools ought to be replaced by free-market alternatives while burying findings that some (read: everyone with a fucking clue) might see as proof that charter schools do not provide a better alternative. So far the National Education Association is playing it safe and standing by their already existing policy statement on charter schools. I guess they are hoping to be removed from the Bush administration's list of terrorist organizations, but for some reason (the fact that Rod Paige is still the Secretary of Education maybe) I doubt it will work.
Can someone with an education background please explain what this means in light of the aforementioned data. I tried to read it, but I just don't have the patience to trudge through anything that juxtaposes the author's interpretation of top union priorities with his own version of what failing schools really need.
"[A]ny federal effort to reward high-performing teachers and dump the bad ones must go through the states and districts that run the schools, and states and districts have traditionally bowed to teachers' unions, which have long opposed any move that they see as undermining teacher tenure or seniority-based pay scales." Vomit.
While plowing through the mountains of online data commonly referred to as the "nation's report card," the American Federation of Teachers discovered federally collected statistics that shockingly suggested charter schools may not perform as well as other public schools. It looks like the AFT is going on the offensive with this one; pointing out the Department of Educations obvious bias towards releasing statistics in support of Bush's claim that failing public schools ought to be replaced by free-market alternatives while burying findings that some (read: everyone with a fucking clue) might see as proof that charter schools do not provide a better alternative. So far the National Education Association is playing it safe and standing by their already existing policy statement on charter schools. I guess they are hoping to be removed from the Bush administration's list of terrorist organizations, but for some reason (the fact that Rod Paige is still the Secretary of Education maybe) I doubt it will work.
Can someone with an education background please explain what this means in light of the aforementioned data. I tried to read it, but I just don't have the patience to trudge through anything that juxtaposes the author's interpretation of top union priorities with his own version of what failing schools really need.
"[A]ny federal effort to reward high-performing teachers and dump the bad ones must go through the states and districts that run the schools, and states and districts have traditionally bowed to teachers' unions, which have long opposed any move that they see as undermining teacher tenure or seniority-based pay scales." Vomit.
