Hi Laurie, RB has some fighting words for you...
"Gee, too bad about the setbacks for high-performing charter schools! It's so unfair that the charters that are no better than the public schools they would supplant (i.e. most of them) are able to color policy making decisions in that way.Does your school have shareholders who are making a huge profit from that excessive Charter School funding?
Won't someone think of the shareholders; by which I mean, the children?" RB
I left a comment calling for equal funding... And some clarification regarding who is making all that money... Maybe I should start a charter school. (not)
5 comments:
My thoughts to RB...
"That's why I call it a wash.
I just think that a Minneapolis located Charter Public school should get the same funding as a Minneapolis located Status Quo Public school. (ie based on student demographics) Not just a fraction of the State provided funding.
And if a Status Quo School public building is empty, a charter should be able to lease or buy it at a reasonable price. (since tax dollars built it) Instead the districts would prefer to knock it down before welcoming competition into their boundaries.
If these changes occurred, then we would have some true competition and improvement occurring." G2A
Not directly applicable, perhaps, but I want to know. Dayton vetoed two other bills, after this one. Were there actually reasons given for those other vetoes, or was it all to give him additional leverage on his stupid pre-K vendetta? I mean, if he can't close the state parks (the environment bill), all he can do is cut off funding for all the schools and he doesn't seem to really care about that.
The other 2 bills.
Star Tribune Elements of Deal are Present
I stand corrected. These other two bills are NOT just a smokescreen to gain leverage on Dayton's extreme pre-K plans. To the contrary, they clear the smoke and reveal the Gov. to be a radical environmentalist, big labor toady AND in the pocket of Big Ed.
As for the other article, I find it just absolutely laughable that "a lot is riding on low-income children having a chance to catch up and keep up academically with the rest of the class. High-quality preschool greatly increases those chances." In what world can we give a kid a great pre-K education (in a public school setting), then turn them over to those same public schools in which up to 80% of them can't read at grade level, or pass a basic skills test? Sure, they're "keeping up with the class," but the whole class is failing! Shouldn't that be fixed FIRST?
Post a Comment