Bunnicula, the scourge of vegetables everywhere

You did say he was more to the right on some issues. And then promptly didn’t give any examples. Not super helpful when we could see if his position on those stances had changed since 2008 (considering it’s been 16 years since…)

How dare they mess with Sh, It Just Works.

De bang de bang

So you are coming from a place that has:

1. no experience with how this system works
2. Your kids are not actively in the public system and you yourself admit you don’t know what it’s like in your area
3. You have no understanding of the current teacher shortage by saying that people will just train up to fill new roles (we already have a shortage in stem, with overloaded classes, but sure there will magically be people who want to train to enter this low income career that you’re suggesting take on either lower pay for small classes or more pay for even larger classes in another section…)
4. You’re advocating for a charter model while talking about the public system despite there being a huge gap between the two in terms of responsibility towards the entire student population in their area (charters don’t have to follow all the rules that are tied to federal funds thanks to the Supreme Court, so they can deny the difficult to teach students, not even talking about behavior or grades but disability, which I guess is fine by you as long as it’s not your kid getting excluded)
5. Common core is simply the idea that there needs to be a standard set of knowledge taught to everyone as a baseline for well educated citizens. That’s not a bad idea conceptually though it does get messed with a lot because there isn’t enough funding to actually follow through on it vis a vis teaching staff and support.

I’d be happy to keep going with this but you’re missing a lot and I already am overworked with my current students.

What experience do you have to back up any of your ideas? I have a degree, certification, and about a decade of teaching experience and I do not see it working the way you describe.

First off, it seems you’re sampling from the Arbitur system (German system of last two years being work related, which only really works because the school system segregates children based on scores for their elementary and middle schools, and which we do not do here and which you did not mention)

Secondly, you say that the school bus system is holding us back and would allow for schools to specialize but we already have that occurring in school districts with normal school bus systems. The bus system clearly isn’t preventing magnet schools from existing so that’s not the issue.

Thirdly, there are only so many seats at each campus and so how are you going to discriminate as to who gets entry? Will it be based solely on teacher/counselor recommendation, or will there be testing requirements? If you look at private schools which are not in districts and have significantly more funding to specialize, they also do not let the majority of applicants enter. How do we make education accessible without creating these hurdles to allow for specialization that will literally do the opposite for the majority of students (skewing mostly towards lower income/immigrant families who will have issues either with the language or with educational support at home since time has to be allocated towards survival earning instead of spending more time on reinforcement for the student)

Fourth, how do you propose these individual schools get funding to allow for these specializations without tying it to attendance and creating a huge fight over who gets which student (thus going against what might be best for the student)? With district’s, at least the money can get moved from one school to the next if there is excess or you need to specialize a school in the district. You can also share physical resources between schools in district’s, not so much between individual schools across town.

Fifth, which schools aren’t going to have sports fields? Those are typically district property to be used by multiple schools to cut down on costs.

That’s just off the top of my head, there’s a lot of moving parts and shared resources that look easy to split from the outside while actually being incredibly interconnected.

You’re incorrect there. The main limitation for schools k-12 to specialize is funding. To get the equipment and staff necessary takes a lot of money (which is why universities use funding not just from grants that aren’t available to public k-12, like from their research sides that do not exist in public k-12). The salary is also a huge problem for specialists since they can easily make more with less stress and more validation on the private sector side.

Even if all that got sorted, you would still want to use districting to consolidate some positions in admin, and to make it easier to plan specializations of k-12 schools (so there’s less overlap if it’s not needed and you don’t have a bunch of waste expenses).

One of the benefits of districts is that you can then afford to have magnet type schools that specialize in one specific field, like performing arts, science, etc. That allows for students who are excelling in that district to get more specialized instruction. As for the transit bit, yes doubling up is troubling but we would need to provide additional routes and runs on each route to improve coverage to the point that school buses become moot. I’m not sure which would be easier to do, though I do want to support the swap to public transit.

The problem for that is logistics. It would be more effective to have those different sized classes taught in the same building rather than different schools so that we wouldn’t have to be bussing people all around the district. It would also require both an increase in counselors who can help with identifying learning styles and in teachers who can be matched with the class that suits their teaching style as well.

That would also require an increase in pay for many of these positions since people already don’t want to do them because the workload is significant, and that would have to be without increasing the workload because that just keeps the imbalance in place.

We already don’t try to hold onto them for funding. I would love smaller classes so I can focus more on each student. It’s the admin and that we’re funded by attendance.

Teachers already have enough shit to do. How about properly staffed support positions like counselors to do that considering it’s already part of their job?

Probably out of some sense of getting the rest of the school to learn a lesson, and creating anger at the racists. Probably misguided.

Vance is together with trump running as his second. Kennedy was an independent running against trump and then joined him, but didn’t file his withdrawal soon enough so he’s still on the election ballot as an option running against trump. Basically, you can vote for him in a few states which might keep his followers from swapping with him and costing the conservatives the state.

That’s a fair point. Maybe bundle a lesser known sport with the really popular ones and alternate showing so that you can have rest and review periods for both?

Maybe even hold the different sets of events in their most suitable months so it’s not just one smorgasbord but bite sized world competitions.

Well that’s a shit way to put it.

Biden was an ok choice and he was still polling strong. Him deciding to abstain from the final run doesn’t mean he was a bad choice, not does it make any of your analysis correct.

Also: You’re still a doomsaying asshole. Not once did you make a reasonable argument supported by data other than your feelings but you continued to push out “If we keep behind a president who has arguably been extremely effective at doing shit, we’re handing the election to the guys who eat horse paste and spent double Bidens addition to the deficit for tax breaks while screaming about fiscal responsibility… because he’s a couple years older than the other guy and seems like he’s old instead of spouting gibberish and easily proven lies”.

With Kamala now the democratic nominee?

I’m not a big fan of former law enforcement (prosecutor at least) being in charge but everything else she’s done seems to at least suggest that she takes her jobs seriously along with the responsibility they entail.

I’m waiting to see who the VP is before I get too gung ho, but so far I’m pretty on board.

I don’t know exactly why Biden waited so long to decide not to run again but I am happy he provided a good bit of shielding and wasted a ton of the GOP’s money on attack ads that can almost be mirrored for free against their nominee.

I think we’re gonna see some really ugly rhetoric from the right over her being the nominee and that doesn’t make me jazzed. I worry that it will spark another rise in anti immigrant/minority rhetoric and violence like the BS about COVID did, and I work in and among minority groups so I worry what it will do to their outlooks on their future and how they feel about the country they are a part of.

Any specific aspect you want to ask me about or is that just a generic response request?

Yeah but you could say the same about a lot of people. Doesn’t mean it’s a “good movie” so much as a lot of people want to see that person in a thing and would pay regardless of what the thing is.

That’s the attitude that gives us the race to the bottom in creative work

Well, yeah. But that’s an exception to the rule not the rule itself.

I mean, it probably will be cheaper while also being a logical move for what could be a dope passion project.

Good movies don’t need big name actors to be good, they need a good story, good world, and a cast that can pull off the immersion with a director that knows how to harness it all together. Big name actors are just a draw and I would argue a lot of the time they don’t help so much as ruin immersion a bit.

Like in nineteen ninety-eight when the undertaker threw mankind off the top of hell in a cell.