Trump's Five Million

[TheReal_ND]

http://www.fox4news.com/news/267002861-story

Prosecutors have made their first criminal indictment in the investigation of widespread voter fraud in Dallas County.

Miguel Hernandez, 27, is charged with illegal voting, a felony that is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

Investigators have been searching for Hernandez since an arrest warrant was issued in early June. He is not yet in custody.

[PartyOf5]

What's wrong with the current setup is it localizes resources so that poor districts have underfunded schools and rich ones opulently appointed ones.

I'm calling BS. In Wisconsin, MPS (Milwaukee Public Schools) gets more money per student than any other district in the state, and by a wide margin. The rest of the state subsidizes them quite a bit. The "poor kids" district spends the most and still gets the worst results.

[Okeefenokee]

What's wrong with the current setup is it localizes resources so that poor districts have underfunded schools and rich ones opulently appointed ones.

I'm calling BS. In Wisconsin, MPS (Milwaukee Public Schools) gets more money per student than any other district in the state, and by a wide margin. The rest of the state subsidizes them quite a bit. The "poor kids" district spends the most and still gets the worst results.

If we had school choice, I could have bought a house in Killeen for half of what the one in Belton cost. I would be paying municipal taxes to Killeen rather than Belton. As it stands, Killeen ISD schools are shit, so Belton it is. There's nice areas in Killeen, too, but everyone goes to the same shitty schools.

The best part of it is that the real upper crust are in Harker Heights, and they stand between me and Killeen. I just gotta count on them to hold the line until I can put the kids in private school.

[katarn]

I know all of my schools have been medium-low funding, and they churn out a good mix of great students and poor (as in terrible, not as in poverty) students. Sure, it's not sound to rely on personal experience for broad insight, but it does seem that a family's economic status is more associated with their success than the school's spending. Places like Leavenworth or Killeen have economically diverse student populations, and have schools nearby that are less diverse and have mostly rich or poor kids (who usually have more state funding).

I was one of those Harker Heights kids in KISD while we lived at Hood. Nice times.

A lot of you will probably agree with this, but whatever, I'll post anyway. Also, the following is true for all schools, but especially high school.

The funding of the school is less important than reaching the student and activating whatever drives them and turning it towards at least a desire for basic learning. But that's a lot harder than shoveling money for standardized tests and ineffective common core curriculums. I've seen first-hand how those affect kids around me, and it's not great. Conventionally 'boring' subjects like math and history can't be cookie-cutter classes; at least, they can't if we want kids to actually learn them and retain the information. A lot of the difference is made in the teacher and their teaching style, but the teacher is restricted to their curriculum in these cases, so can only do so much.

The vast amounts of money poured into (especially) poor, under-performing schools could be put to better use ensuring teachers are motivated and enthused- swapping the drone waiting for retirement for the person of any age willing to try and show kids their potential.

[TheReal_ND]

That's a whole lot of words for just saying you want more white kids in your child's school. Although... no, the Asian problem is kind of something we want to avoid as well. Bunch of over achieving suicidal fucks.

[Speaker to Animals]

The thing about those inner-city schools, apparently so-called negro-fatigue is a real thing. They can't retain good teachers because people lose their motivation after a while and give up.

Tommy Sotomayor talks about this stuff all the time.

[The Conservative]

I know all of my schools have been medium-low funding, and they churn out a good mix of great students and poor (as in terrible, not as in poverty) students. Sure, it's not sound to rely on personal experience for broad insight, but it does seem that a family's economic status is more associated with their success than the school's spending. Places like Leavenworth or Killeen have economically diverse student populations, and have schools nearby that are less diverse and have mostly rich or poor kids (who usually have more state funding).

I was one of those Harker Heights kids in KISD while we lived at Hood. Nice times.

A lot of you will probably agree with this, but whatever, I'll post anyway. Also, the following is true for all schools, but especially high school.

The funding of the school is less important than reaching the student and activating whatever drives them and turning it towards at least a desire for basic learning. But that's a lot harder than shoveling money for standardized tests and ineffective common core curriculums. I've seen first-hand how those affect kids around me, and it's not great. Conventionally 'boring' subjects like math and history can't be cookie-cutter classes; at least, they can't if we want kids to actually learn them and retain the information. A lot of the difference is made in the teacher and their teaching style, but the teacher is restricted to their curriculum in these cases, so can only do so much.

The vast amounts of money poured into (especially) poor, under-performing schools could be put to better use ensuring teachers are motivated and enthused- swapping the drone waiting for retirement for the person of any age willing to try and show kids their potential.

Want to fix education, remove the fat from the top...

I worked in a school system before, several actually, and I found many people in the trenches looking for money, dealing with antique technology, etc... but yet I got to the Office of the Superintendent, if anything was under a year old I'd be amazed... and in some cases the secretaries were making more than I was a Network Admin.

Remove the graft, remove the cushy jobs at the top, or at least pay them what a teacher makes +5% of the same year... So in other words, a year 1 makes $35K, that is the salary +5% everyone in the offices not teaching. They get raises the same rate as the school teachers, and you'll see probably another million or so minimum flooded into the school systems for those things that were "too expensive" before.

If that's too little, then the teacher's pay gets increased... otherwise, they live like the rest of us.