About that bill President Obama signed today to save teachers' jobs

[proud2BlibKansan]

I teach in an urban district. We have about 16,000 students. 10 years ago we had 35,000 students. 300 teachers in my district have been laid off. The bill President Obama signed today will not put any of these laid off teachers back to work. The reason they were laid off is the decline in enrollment. And the reason there is a decline in enrollment is CHARTER SCHOOLS.

The president supports charter schools.

[havocmom]

1. Trying to look hopey changey while going around the side door to screw the public

Don't even get me started on cutting food stamps to help pay teachers.

edited to add: Obama promoting charter schools is Obama working to increase the divide between the haves and have nots.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Yep. Pretty much what we used to call a reach around

LOL

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. I'm thankful for the districts that are helped by this bill

I just wanted to correct the expected misconception that President Obama saved our public schools today. Cause as long as he supports charters, he isn't helping our public schools.

[defendandprotect]

27. As they say, you can't sell democracy to the necessitous --

that's another reason why we've kept voting for the "lesser of evils" --

putting off the greater evil for another day!

And that's another reason why the downward spiral continues on --

I understand, however -- !!

[Winterblues]

54. All of the Charter Schools where I live are supported entirely by the School district

They are the same thing as Public Schools only trying different techniques in teaching. The School District pays all their bills and it has been that way before Obama came to office.

[LWolf]

63. You just nailed a key point of opposition.

Flexibility should not be limited to charters. It should be available to ALL schools. If it were, there would be no reason for charters. While it isn't, we are creating "tiers" of education. Not equal opportunity.

This is a political war. It's not about students. It's about unions and privatization.

Charters don't have to allow their teachers to organize. Federal legislation connected to NCLB ties union teachers' in regular schools hands while allowing privately run charters more freedom.

When a school is run by the school district, it doesn't need a charter. The only reason for a charter is to opt out of most district oversight. When a district school is allowed to do something different, it's usually called a "school of choice," or a "magnet school," or a "pilot school." I've taught at those for most of my career.

[sandnsea]

3. What was it that Gibbs said today?

Never happy about anything? Yeah, that was it. Something like that.

[Cha]

18. Gibbs got it right...some

will always bitch no matter what the President does.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

45. Oy...

DESTROY PUBLIC EDUCATION....by having an expectation that teachers should display some level of competence.

Here's how some elements (not all, but some) of the teachers' unions are DESTROYING PUBLIC EDUCTION in their own right: When the voters demand accountability, they piss and whine and scream and moan. You know what? Every other profession demands some baseline level of competence. You produce results or you're gone. It's how it works out here in the real world.

By demanding that they NEVER, EVER be held accountable for the actual results of their work, some elements in the teachers' unions are turning voters away from their support of public education. "Fuck 'em -- if the teachers refuse to be held accountable, I'll enroll my kid someplace where the teachers WILL accept accountability."

Understand This: I can ardently support public education and NOT be a fan of the local teachers' union. Demanding accountability from teachers is not DESTROYING PUBLIC EDUCATION. In fact, accountability just might be the most important element in saving it.

[babylonsister]

5. OK. I hope you and everyone else affected pitches a

bitch, aa we used to say. In the meantime, did this bill save jobs? I know it was inadequate; there's a food stamp thing in there, too, rethugs fought against.

proud, I don't know what to say, other than I love you and read what you write.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Yes this bill did save some jobs. That is a good thing.

But it didn't save one job in my district.

What is even sadder are the classified positions that we have lost. Hundreds of custodians, cafeteria workers, nurses and para professionals are out of work here now. We had to close 40% of our schools.

So yes, it was a good bill. But not the great thing it is being portrayed to be.

[babylonsister]

12. SO... what do we do, or get the aid of unions, or the attention

of the powers that be?

I've been reluctant to jump in, knowing the emphasis on education Obama has had; I don't know who is correct.

[proud2BlibKansan]

19. I would recommend a good place to start is with madfloridian's journal

It is now being cited on teacher blogs. She nails it over and over.

Charters have literally destroyed many urban school districts. The supporters say the urban districts were failing anyway. But the charters aren't doing any better. And now tax dollars are supporting for profit charter school sponsors. Some states even allow religious charter schools.

There are so many inequities. Let's start with funding. It varies from state to state but is fairly consistent in that charters are funded differently. In my state (and most others) charters receive funding based on enrollment taken on one day (usually in September). So if a charter school has 400 kids on the official count day, the state funds that charter for 400 students all year long. If that charter's enrollment reduces to 300 in January, it still receives funding for 400. But traditional public schools are funded based on DAILY attendance. So if a public school has 400 kids in September but only 300 in January, they get less money in January than they did in September when they had more kids. But they have already hired teachers and staff for an enrollment of 400.

Next lesson - charter supporters will reply to this claiming I am wrong or I hate kids or asking why do I support the status quo. I have most of them on ignore so I won't see these comments. :)

I respect you enough to allow you to do your own research before you decide what to believe.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[maryf]

33. It's more of a stop gap measure...

to keep the teachers from gathering in the streets too quickly...what's the story about the frog in the slowly heated up water???

I'm not sure if any jobs will be saved in my district either, the board played the numbers game to lay off here too, some valid, some pushed.

[proud2BlibKansan]

36. Oh absolutely

On this week's spelling list:

appeasement
:)

[maryf]

38. next week's:

obfuscation

[4lbs]

7. So, what did your district do with the salaries of those 300 teachers?

300 teachers at approximately $30,000 per teacher is about $9 million.

They must have spent that on something, since they weren't spending it anymore on 300 teachers.

Did the district use it to hire more police or firefighters?

Did it lower tax rates to the citizens of the district?

Did it use it to start up government works jobs (like new roads, bridges, etc.) before the stimulus bill ?

[Catshrink]

10. If they lost the kids, they lost the funding...

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. Time for a Math lesson

Every time a public school district loses a kid, it loses the funding for that kid. So there is no money to spend on other things.

Charters, on the other hand, get to keep the funding when a kid leaves the charter school.

Time for a Government lesson. School districts don't employ police or firefighters.

Time for an Economics lesson. School districts don't raise or lower taxes. Voters do that.

[4lbs]

15. When I said "district" I didn't mean school district. I was meaning more like your entire area.

Like your precinct or town/city. Your city council.

What did they do after they got rid of 300 teachers? Did the people of the town/city and city council do anything about it?

Here in my city, they were faced with school districts laying off almost 60 teachers. The residents protested in the city council and a compromise was worked out to keep the teachers, and find the funding for them. This was a function of lack of funds, not lack of enrollment, in my city's case.

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. The school district closed 40% of the schools

There was quite a bit of negative feedback from the community about closing schools. But when you lose kids, you can't help but close schools. So the people really couldn't do anything to prevent the layoffs.

The teachers are being laid off just this week. So the public hasn't had much time to react yet.

[4lbs]

24. Then that is unfortunate, and I'm sorry that your city is undergoing such a hard time.

My city is a little more fortunate. This teachers bill that just got passed is expected to bring in tens of millions more dollars to the San Diego county schools.

The public enorollment in San Diego county has been steadily increasing over the past decade, even with a growing number of charter schools.

In fact, my high school that I graduated from had to add about a dozen ready-made classrooms hauled in by those wide-load trucks, over the past several years. They are sitting where I used to have my P.E. classes 20+ years ago, near the football and baseball fields.

So, enrollment has increased, and the additional funding from the teachers bill will help the school to not only keep the current amount of teachers, but actually add another dozen or so.

[proud2BlibKansan]

25. That's wonderful

I am glad the bill will help your schools.

[mzteris]

8. The reason there was a decline in enrollment

is because students weren't being served in their neighborhood schools. At least now they're getting a good education. Don't blame the people who had to take up the slack for the system failing to do it's job.

edit to add - and from what I've read - a LOT of that was "FLIGHT" from the inner city to outlying areas as well.

[lonestarnot]

17. Charter schools are crap and we shouldn't offer tax dollars to them. Tax dollars should be used to

pay for public education, excellent public education.

[mzteris]

55. broad brush much?

Ever stepped foot in a charter public school?

Not every one is great, and the best thing about charters is - if they're bad - THEY get closed asap.

But I'm here to tell you that there are thousands of children in this country who are now getting a first rate education ONLY BECAUSE they have had access to a charter public school.

There's a REASON people were leaving the KC, MO traditional schools in DROVES - if there weren't a NEED for charters there wouldn't be any.

[REP]

34. KCMO schools are dangerous and have very few good teachers left

There was a "strategic plan" in the early 80s to make the test scores look better by lowering the requirements, dropping AP classes, and forcing AP teachers to take 'remedial' (aka Knife, Rock and Gun Club thugs) students. The day that was announced, there was a mass walk-out by the best teachers ... and they never came back, and they were never replaced. Even then, the schools had armed security guards - something my friends in Shawnee Mission schools thought was shocking and appalling. Well, so did I, especially since the male guard liked to drag female students into empty rooms for a little one-on-one intimidation. Gosh, those awful parents not supporting that kind of school. Tsk tsk.

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. When was the last time you were even in a KCMO school?

Or a Shawnee Mission school? They have cops in them now.

There are also some really crappy teachers in Shawnee Mission and some absolutely outstanding teachers in KCMO.

Your 30 year old anecdote doesn't explain the current situation.

[REP]

42. They were that bad then. 30 years later, no one wants to be in them

The best schools are either closed or warzones.

30 years ago, armed guards in the 'jewel' of the school district was but one symptom of the rot in the KCMSD.

[mike r]

9. What did ya expect from the anti-educator Dept of Education?

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. I'd like to see them be a bit more pro-child

[maryf]

52. Sadly they are all pro-business...

and the kids only get what the businesses want, yes sir, no sir...three bags full sir...

I can fill bags, I learned how in skool...

The ptb wants to destroy any semblance of a real education... and make money while doing so...

[asdjrocky]

14. But on the bright side it takes money from the food stamps program, right? nt

[babylonsister]

16. Thank a rethug. Look it up. nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. Hungry and poorly educated

It's a perfect storm.

[Radical Activist]

20. Obama saved teacher's jobs? FUCK HIM!!!

Proving Gibbs point once again.

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. You fail at inference.

I may be a teacher under attack, but I can still teach reading comprehension. :)

[Radical Activist]

44. So that explains it.

The Florida legislature tried to end tenure and Mad blames Race to the Top. You think it will replicate the problems you're seeing.
Personally, I think both cases reflect situations unique to your areas and not as much on Race as you both claim it does.

And it sounds as though some of those students/schools were lost to the Independence school district rather than all of them going to charters.

[REP]

37. He didn't force people to send their kids to KC's crappy, dangerous schools

Wonder why no one wants to send their kids there ... terrible teachers, corrupt administration - what's not to love?

[stray cat]

26. Most of us would love to have government funding to maintain jobs!

Great if the teachers don't want it - use the money for unemployment for those who do want it. Although I suspect many teachers are glad to have jobs and not be laid off - Most of us would love to have government funding to maintain jobs!

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. Huh? Did someone say the teachers didn't want this money?

[REP]

32. Your district's - KCMO - schools are dangerous and poorly staffed. That's why they lose students.

I was unlucky enough to attend KC schools with their crappy teachers in the 70s and 80s. My junior high had armed security guards; one of them was reassigned after harassing female students (a practice he continued at his next assignment at one of the high schools). I don't have the time to catalogue the various incompetencies of the teachers, but they ranged from mild to criminal. I can't imagine the situation has improved much in the intervening years. Parents who can make a choice do - to send their kids to Sion, any of the Shawnee Mission schools, or any place else where there's a chance their kids will be taught something other than which drunk teacher is most likely to set the break room on fire.

[proud2BlibKansan]

35. I think it has more to do with marketing

Tell me a free Wii wouldn't have persuaded you to leave that junior high and enroll in a charter school. Or maybe $200? A free computer?

[REP]

40. I would've paid $200 and given a Wii to get out of those cesspool schools staffed with morons

[proud2BlibKansan]

41. Yet you didn't?

LOL

[REP]

43. Not an option back then. But you know that, right?

I remember the SoEd students when I was in college, so I can type slowly for you...

[TomCADem]

46. Amazing! A bill saving public teacher jobs is attacked by Republicans and DU!

Up is down.

[Drunken Irishman]

47. It's often easy to blame charter schools for the problem...

But you've got to ask yourself why charter schools are drawing students away from your district in the first place?

It's easy to find a scapegoat for problems, however, I'm guessing this goes deeper than charter schools. Not to say they don't play a role, however, it seems rather unfair and simple to blame Pres. Obama's support of charter schools solely for the decline of students in Kansas City.

[mzteris]

57. see post #34 - that sums it up exactly. n/t

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

48. Obama is Incompetent...

What a dope. Here he is trying to bust the teacher's unions and destroy public education, and then the moran goes out and saves tens of thousands of teachers jobs.

God, how I miss the Bush Administration. Now THERE was a fucking wrecking crew for you. You could just turn Cheney loose and, come hell or high water, somebody would get shot in the face before the day was done.

That's what I'm talking about. Obama is like Bush? Feh. He wishes.




...for the humor-impaired

:sarcasm:

[Yo_Mama]

49. But aren't charters public schools?

This is a serious question.

I don't know that much about charters, but every time I've read about charters and magnets the articles said they were a different part of the public school system. And there must be teachers in those schools, surely?

Please, I am honestly confused. What school district are you in?

[LostinVA]

53. No

[mzteris]

56. Yes - all charter schools are FREE AND PUBLIC schools

Don't let anyone try and tell you different. By every definition - Federal, State, Local - and even websters - Charter schools are free and public to all students.

[LWolf]

62. Yes, no, and somewhere in between.

First of all, each state has it's own legislation authorizing the use of charters, or not. So the laws affecting charter schools are different in each state.

Charters receive public money, and some public oversight, so they fall under the umbrella of "public."

Charter schools are run privately, and are exempt from much of the regulation of fully public schools, so they also fall under the umbrella of "private."

In addition, charters can be for-profit or non-profit. As a matter of fact, many for-profit charter corporations, who run many charter schools in different areas, also run a few non-profits for the sake of propaganda. And non-profit charters can, and some are, still run by non-profit corporations who are serving private agendas.

Some other facts:

Charters don't have to allow their teachers to organize.

Schools are funded per pupil. Every student that leaves a public school is a loss of funding for that school. When students leave charter schools to go back to public schools, though, the funding stays with the charter.

Charters can control student populations in ways that public schools cannot. They can reject students, they can decide that the school is not a good fit, they can send them back to the public system. They also, though, self-select and self-filter the population through more subtle means. Charters don't serve neighborhoods; they serve a wide area. Often, parents who want to attend a charter have to be responsible for transportation themselves. That automatically filters out the poorer families without the resources to do so. While technically charters have to abide by legal requirements for serving students with IEPs, they tend not to have as many resources to do so, (unless they are designed to serve ONLY those students,) which means that most of those students stay in the public system. The same can be said for ELL students. While charters technically have the same responsibility to serve their ELL populations, they tend to have fewer resources to do so, funneling many of those back to the regular school system. That leaves most students in the groups that have the hardest time getting the test scores to make AYP, and are, not coincidentally, the most challenging to teach, the poor, the learning disabled, and ELL students, to public schools while charters generally serve the easiest: those with motivated, involved parents.

Charters, on average, do not perform any better, and often perform worse than their public school counterparts. Even with the advantages noted in the last paragraph.

Some other discussions on this subject:

http://www.districtadministration.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=2501


http://gothamschools.org/2010/03/31/charter-schools-are-still-not-public-schools/

[SunsetDreams]

50. Hmmm I thought you were happy about this

Senate approves jobs bill to stop teacher layoffs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4492937 "Phew, great news"

Huge March on Washington planned for October 2, 2010 demanding jobs and changes we voted for! "I'll be there"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8892453

Don't teachers jobs count too?

I'm just curious, what changed your mind?

[Barack2theFuture]

51. give a scrap, take away a meal.

then arm your apologists with "facts" so you can have it both ways.

[Arkana]

58. So...you're saying he shouldn't have signed the bill then?

[geek tragedy]

59. No, they're saying

"Gibbs was right about us."

[geek tragedy]

60. Yes, it's Obama's fault your district had declining enrollment before he took office.

Whine, Bitch, Moan, and Complain: The Four Horseman of the DUCopalypse.

[county worker]

61. Here are some real facts about how some of the money from that bill will be spent.

I work for a county alcohol, drug and mental health services department. Most of the local services provided to those without insurance is provided by counties. We treat people with alcohol and drug related problems, we provide mental health services and we work with homeless people to try and get them back to self sufficiency. The states get Medicaid money and pass it on to counties. Counties took over providing the services from the states in the 70's and 80's. The term used for it back then was realignment. The medicaid money in CA that pays for services is call Medical. Before the stimulus Medical paid 50% of our cost of the services. AARA added another 11.59% making the amount of reimbursement we now get 61.59%.

That 11.59% was scheduled to end on 12-31-10. The bill just passed extends it into next year. That means we will be able to provide a greater level of service than we had budgeted for.

Basically more people without insurance will be able to get alcohol, drug and mental health services this year than would have without the bill being passed.

So using the OP's logic, Obama cares about people with alcohol, drug and mental health problems.

[DevonRex]

64. So, how many students did your district lose in the last 2 years?

And how many teachers have been laid off in the last 2 years? And how many jobs were saved in your district by the bill Obama just signed? What other benefits does this bill provide for your district?

I am not a fan of charter schools and I don't like the tests that are being given, just so you know.

I'm sympathetic to your problems and hope things get better for you and for your students since I know you care about them and the quality of the education they receive.