Secrets of the City

Re: “I would vote for slavery”

Actually, it’s not called being a “totalitarian”, it’s called being a “trustee”.

Whatever. Clearly this guy is about using extremes to make his point…

In context, the statement is a non-issue. I mean, having your government rep. pledging to act as a “delegate” 100% of the time is a frightening prospect for anyone in any type of minority position but this particular statement is, in my opinion, a non-issue.

Actually, before the context was even explained I pretty much figured out the general point he was trying to get at. However, I understand jumping to conclusions is the only exercise some people get.

kurt vonnegut died?! nooooooooo!!!!!

The pending legislation mandates that local school districts arm students with information about how to prevent pregnancies and STDs.

There’s that word again.

… The primary stumbling block … [an amendment] changes the mandated sex-ed classes from an “opt-out” to an “opt-in” – parents would have to be proactive if they want their kids to take the class.

i.e., have a choice.

Greiling suspects some DFLers in conservative-leaning districts voted for the amendment out of fear for their future electoral prospects.

So much for the new DFL power being about people rejecting republican principles. heh

Indianapolis just lost the best writer the town ever produced. Gonna re-read Player Piano this weekend. Or Slaughterhouse Five.

Whoops. I thought Vonnegut had already passed.

Did Breakfast of Champions mess anyone else up?

RIP Vonnegut!!!

… The primary stumbling block … [an amendment] changes the mandated sex-ed classes from an “opt-out” to an “opt-in” – parents would have to be proactive if they want their kids to take the class.

i.e., have a choice.

No. It just changes the form of the choice from opt-out to opt-in — the choice always existed.

When Maz reinterprets things, they just get more confusing.

The CP article is pretty shameful. Wusses. Hmph.

When I read Maz’s quote, what struck me was the concept of “arming” students.

I never understood why people were so against sex ed. Heaven forbid kids would learn how to protect themselves from teen pregnancy and HIV. But that’s OK, cuz babies are the new accessories and I understand you drop a lot of weight when you develop full blown AIDS. Furthermore, you can always count on MTV and cable to teach your kids about sex and how to respect themselves…

People are against sex ed because it contradicts their values. I sympathize with that, but that’s why I believe it should be opt-OUT, rather than opt-IN. Parents who feel strongly about the subject will make sure they’re kids are not in that class. On the other hand, if it’s opt-IN, the kids with no little or no parental guidance (e.g. the ones who are probably more likely to get knocked-up or get a disease) are probably not going to make the effort to get in to the class.

Plus, with opt-IN you have the potential for kids stigmatizing each other based upon who goes for the class. I can see it now…

Oops, I meant “their” and not “they’re.”

More coffee please.

I ended up at Vonnegut through a lit teacher in high school that first introduced me to the beats, but after he saw my eyes getting a little wild after reading Dharma Bums for the 3rd time, he gave me Slaughterhouse 5 and, to be honest, I fell in love with its brevity before I even opened it. I started reading and did not put that book down until I was done. I was so smitten with the sci-fi entangled with obvious social commentary (it helps to be taking westerna civ at the same time you;re reading S5). After than I went to the library and read Hocus Pocus and Cat’s Cradle (which one was the assasin in the belltower?).

Slaughterhouse 5 and Sirens of Titan have always been my favorites. But for pure fun, I always like Breakfast of Champions. The thought of Bunny’s father smashing his face into the piano keys, his teeth flying from his battered mouth…gold. I heart Kilgore Trout.

Anyway, RIP Kurt, you made an impact on my life and you will live on. Thank you!

PS. Vonnegut’s cameo in Back to School is his greatest work

Tying the Vonnegut news to Minnesota, Slaughterhouse Five was filmed here.

I sometimes thought of Billy Pilgram when I was a young soldier in Germany (thankfully not as a POW like Vonnegut or his literary creation). The term “unstuck in time” became stuck in my mind the first time I read the book.

Is it on google video? I want to see! I want to see!

I note that St. Louis County Commisioner Nelson has, in various interviews, shifted blame for the recent controversy to fellow commisioner Bill Kron, to his diabetes, and — according to Jason — “those who want a smoking ban.”

Lost in the smoke of his ill-choosen words is the fact that he is flat out wrong about what the residents of St. Louis County want in terms of a county ordinance.

St. Louis County is just one of several local governments that have pledged to quickly pass a local ordinance if the statewide Freedom to Breathe bill falters this session.

I’ll tell you why people are so against sex ed: fundamentalist Christianity. Reality has nothing on those people.

“the beaver that men try to look at looks like this….” classic.

I never had a choice about participating in sex ed and I think my parents were relieved, since it took the responsibility of an awkward convo off their shoulders.

Re: “I would vote for slavery”

In context, the statement is a non-issue.

What Bixby said. “In context” being the key part there.

hey, i just realized my last post applies to both the sex ed AND the vonnegut articles…beautiful!

If you listen carefully, the story notes that this guy was asked if he would vote for slavery if his constituents wanted him to. That didn’t make the web video. But using slavery in this context wasn’t even his idea, it was introduced by the person who asked the question. Let’s get him on the web.

I believe in making the world safe for our children, but not our children’s children, because I don’t think children should be having sex.
-Jack Handey

And making sure children don’t learn about sex makes sure they’re kept safe by not having it.

Yeah, teenagers can put some of the blame for their STDs on conservatives and Christians… Yet another positive aspect of organized religion (the true HIV of humanity).

Abstinence-only education has worked in the past, and is working now right? Having just been through college, I think sex-ed should be draconian. Even people who know about STDs are drunk and stupid and make the wrong choices. I’ve seen it happen with several of my roomates.

On the other hand, if women are becoming infertile due to these STDs, at least they will contribute to population reduction. There are way too many people in the world. Global warming, etc. is definitely a function of population size, good for them.

We could have a really boring discussion about the difference between a representative democracy and a direct democracy (Mr. Nelson apparently believes he is nothing more than a conduit for his constituents beliefs).

We see this debate a lot, actually… should politicians follow their conscience and beliefs? Or should they vote for what they people want?

Nelson was asked a sarcastic question and he gave a stupid answer. And whoever put the video on YouTube should have had the decency to at least include the question.

And whoever put the video on YouTube should have had the decency to at least include the question.

But then no one would watch the clip! With YouTube pulling down all the good copyrighted material, we have to have something to watch.

We see this debate a lot, actually… should politicians follow their conscience and beliefs? Or should they vote for what they people want?

Bingo. What happens when an official’s beliefs contradict the general view of their constituents? Tough call.

Re: sex ed. I don’t know if the article is referring to the bill that would provide sex ed to kindergarteners or not. But if that passes, and the bill passes that would evaluate parents as part of determining their child’s readiness for school, we could end up asking parents where babies come from. As we found out last night, the proper answer would be: Juliette’s serum.

We see this debate a lot, actually… should politicians follow their conscience and beliefs? Or should they vote for what they people want?

Not boring at all, Jason. I think the best answer lies somewhere in between these two positions, IMHO. Being a good public servant/lawmaker is a lot tougher than many people realize.

For those of you who might care about Vonnegut and public education, here’s a great short story for you.

Losing Vonnegut sucks…

http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html

My old political science degree is finally coming in handy.

My view is that you follow the voters on the small stuff… but you follow your heart on the big things, like, gee, I don’t know, slavery? If the voters reject you when you run for reelection, at least you can sleep at night proud of what you tried to do.

Re: sex ed going against beliefs, how can it be against your beliefs to give your kids knowlege that could save their lives? I guess that’s where realists and fundies differ, I guess…It’s not just about sex, it’s about health. Maybe we should just go back to calling it “health class” instead of sex ed.

should politicians follow their conscience and beliefs? Or should they vote for what they people want?

A thought. Cleary there’s some aspect of both, but I think an important point is that politicians are faced with complex issues and bills every day – and very few of their constitiuents are educated thoroughly on them. To some degree, this is the failing of the people, but also, I think it’s part of the job of a congressperson to use their superior (I hope) knowledge of the issues at hand, educate themselves by experts on those issues, and make informed decisions that the majority are not prepared to make. We entrust them with these responsibilities when we elect them.

mob rule versus constitutional republic. You decide.

elaborate?

Mr. Nelson’s comments only remind us that democracy, the right to vote, is not the true measure of freedom. Mobs could vote for slavery, for example. The true measure of freedom is a constitutional government that limits government’s powers and ensure’s the people’s rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of private property. I only mention this because too many people point to “democracy” as nirvana. It’s not. They vote in Cuba too.

And making sure children don’t learn about sex makes sure they’re kept safe by not having it.

It’s not the role of government to teach you how to procreate or avoid pregnancy when you do.

During the time I was in public school grades 7-12, attending an alleged ghetto school, exactly two (2) girls became pregnant during that entire time.

Two.

Govenment didn’t have anything to do with that statistic and government doesn’t have anything to do with today’s SDT or pregnancy-amongst-children statistics. And it’s not the role of government to “fix it.”

What doesn’t make Marsh angry?

During the time I was in public school grades 7-12, attending an alleged ghetto school, exactly two (2) girls became pregnant during that entire time.

So your anecdotal evidence outweighs what is going on across the country because…

It doesn’t outweigh it. It’s called “compare and contrast.

Is it the role of the government to teach anything? If so, what? If you’re thinking, “math and reading”, why not sex ed?

Two that you know of, Maz. Lots of girls back in the day had abortions, or were “sent to visit relatives” for a few months, etc., and nobody ever knew they’d been pregnant. I happen to know a couple of those girls myself.

sigh. i found Vonnegut about a decade ago near the end of high school. a perfect time too. so much idealism. whatever writer or artist i was into seemed so significant and their words profound. i too for old times sake want to dust off Saughterhouse 5 this weekend.

That Marsh piece is the best Merchant of Venice review I’ve read yet. Say about you will about him, mnspeak haters, but dude can write. Too bad he’s stuck in the “group AE blog” ghetto.

Is it the role of the government to teach anything?

Since education has basically become an industry, I don’t think government belongs in the education business any more than it belongs in the automobile business.

I guess I’d rather have my tax dollars go to preventing teen pregnancies than have it go to supporting teen mothers on welfare…just my opinion…

I guess I’d rather have my tax dollars go to preventing teen pregnancies than have it go to supporting teen mothers on welfare

I’ll drink to that.

You’ll drink to anything, as long as Matt’s buying…

I can only begin to imagine the degree to which the country would go up in flames sans an education system.

sans an education system

I said the government education system, not the entire education system.

I can only begin to imagine the degree to which the country would go up in flames with a primarily home schooled populace.

Science and math skills (which has made this country what it is) would go down the tubes at an even faster rate. Just ask anyone, math and science is hard.

Well, Douglas, the weathly could pay for private schools. And with their now-coveted educatations, they’d get even wealthier… I’d estimate without a government-run education system, we’d be back to the middle ages in about, oh, 20 years.

Did Maz go to private schools?
Or is this a varient of “in my day, we walked six miles to school through an alligator swamp filled with pirahnas… and we LIKED it!”

Along those lines, if people’s beliefs really opposed with that of the public education system, there’s plenty of private religious schools that would be happy to take their money and indoctrinate their children with the religious rhetoric of their choice. That or they could educate their children themselves, something my aunt and uncle did with their kids. Which had the wonderful result of one child in a gang and another pregnant at 16 and then again at 18…

Marsh has gone beyond white guilt, straight to gentile guilt…he’s so ready for Hollywood.

I have yet to see Merchant @ the Guthrie…but FWIW I did have the same reaction to Borat as Marsh’s Jewish friend.

Educated people get better paying jobs requiring them to pay more taxes. I’d say the government certainly has a vested interested in education.

I’d say the government certainly has a vested interested in education.

The government would have a vested interest in selling cars too. That’s not the criteria. I can get a car at a privately-owned car lot and I can get an education at a privately-owned school. I believe you went to one, didn’t you?

I can get an education at a privately-owned school

Aren’t private school students still subject to government-dictated testing standards? Especially when it gets time to go to college.

Had I lived in a city other than the one I did, I might have been in public school. Some school districts work fine. Public schools are under a lot more scrutiny than private schools are because of that whole public financing thing. Doesn’t mean the private schools necessarily run better or necessarily provide a better education.

I get your free market education point, but I disagree that the government should be completely uninvolved in the education system.

The government has proven that they can’t run an education system. If they had been operating in the private sector, they’d have been forced out of business about 20 years ago.

… and that dives straight into the question of government’s purpose. Whether you’re a tax-cheating Libertarian (as in party) or a one-world Marxist, your belief is probably very close to correct.

Aren’t private school students still subject to government-dictated testing standards?

That’s another joke. The government has no business setting standards for anyone, let alone educators, unless they can prove they themselves could measure up. And of course, they can’t.

If the ed system were all private, how would we ensure that the poor had access to schooling? Hence a government run education system…

Not to mention other areas where government let private contractors run publicly funded, government agencies. Private doesn’t always equal better…

The government has a vested interest in education because it’s a positive externality. The free market tends to over-provide negative externalities (like pollution) and under-provide positives. That’s where the government steps in to offer corrections.

If the ed system were all private, how would we ensure that the poor had access to schooling? Hence a government run education system…

You’ve just argued for the existence of government-owned and operated grocery stores too then. Are the poor starving because only the government can feed them? heh

The free market tends to over-provide negative externalities (like pollution) and under-provide positives. That’s where the government steps in to offer corrections.

Haha. Are you a stand-up comedian?? That’s the funniest thing I’ve read in a long time.

“I never understood why people were so against sex ed.”

Which “people”? If you mean, “people with kids”, we’re not against it. We love it. You think I wanted to have that talk with my sons and daughters? No way. I’d much rather have them get the techie details from someone else, using nicely-drawn-and-written course materials, encompassing all the new issues and tools and concerns that I never had to worry about, and then leaving me free to add in details about the non-techie stuff, like the morality of pre-m boinking, the joys of diapers, why females are all needy b____s and guys simply want orgasms in the presence of breasts, (okay, only have these talks while in a good mood, I guess), and how college and grad school can be tougher while breast-feeding.

(I’d do it if I had to, but my old copy of the Reader’s Digest “I Am Joe’s Sperm” article isn’t going to cut it in the age of AIDs, friends w/ bennies, and lesbians forsaking Subarus.)

“I never understood why people were so against sex ed.”

Which “people”? If you mean, “people with kids”, we’re not against it. We love it. You think I wanted to have that talk with my sons and daughters? No way. I’d much rather have them get the techie details from someone else, using nicely-drawn-and-written course materials, encompassing all the new issues and tools and concerns that I never had to worry about, and then leaving me free to add in details about the non-techie stuff, like the morality of pre-m boinking, the joys of diapers, why females are all needy b____s and guys simply want orgasms in the presence of breasts, (okay, only have these talks while in a good mood, I guess), and how college and grad school can be tougher while breast-feeding.

(I’d do it if I had to, but my old copy of the Reader’s Digest “I Am Joe’s Sperm” article isn’t going to cut it in the age of AIDs, friends w/ bennies, and lesbians forsaking Subarus.)

Feeding the poor=welfare and food stamps

I’ve seen plenty of poor people ate the grocery store who didn’t use food stamps. I’ve been poor. I’ve never been on food stamps or welfare. It’s a dangerous myth that only the government deals with the poor. Because the government probably does the worst job of anyone dealing with the poor. Ever hear of Mary Jo Copeland? Catholic Charities? Salvation Army? United Way?

Yeah, I’m not denying that private agencies help out with the poor, but the government is a resource the poor can use to get there needs met. I grew up poor as well, and we didn’t use welfare either, but plenty of other families need it, especially in areas where food shelves are scarce, like my hometown.

their, not there…christ…

“The government has proven that they can’t run an education system. If they had been operating in the private sector, they’d have been forced out of business about 20 years ago.”

Utter bullshit. There are plenty of public school systems that are just as good as any private school. Also remember that private schools get to accept only thoset that they want, from a self selected group, whereas the public schools are required to accept all comers.

“Because the government probably does the worst job of anyone dealing with the poor. Ever hear of Mary Jo Copeland? Catholic Charities? Salvation Army? United Way?”

And what fraction of those in need of services do these private organizations serve compared to public programs? THe private organizations don’t have the resources to serve the number of people that the government does.

And again, how do you ensure that those in need receive the services? Many private organizations refuse to serve selected individuals or groups. Catholic charities quit doing adoptions in MA because they were told they could no longer discriminate against gay couples. There was a church run
elder day care in Anoka that kicked a trans-sexual out of their program. (So much for following Christ’s example).

Maz, I don’t think every aspect of your libertarian worldview is ridiculous (which is why I discuss things with you and ignore more traditional Republican types), but some things just are not best run in a capitalistic sense. If poor people can only afford mediocre food, while rich people eat roast duck cooked by their personal chef every night, at least the poor don’t starve (although sometimes they do). But if the poor afford a mediocre education and the rich really good one, there are major consequences. It would only increase the already increasing divide between the upper and lower classes.

Further, if public education weren’t provided, I think it’s easy to imagine education slipping into a trap where it’s all trade education. Within 50 years we’d have a populance that was educated only in one specific task, and a country of 300 million ignoramuses would be ripe for takeover. The upshot, the generality here – and I’ve said it before – when you measure everything in dollars, shit happens.

But if the poor afford a mediocre education and the rich really good one, there are major consequences.

You weren’t referring to the Mpls public schools, were you? Because that’s what you have now. No private school would ever be allowed to deteriorate to the level the Mpls public schools have because the marketplace would force them out of business. And that’s my point. By defending the government school system despite its failings, you’re ensuring that they stay open to continue to deliver substandard education to who? Not the rich kids. They left. Only the poor are subjected to the inadequacies of government education.

If all schools had to compete in a marketplace like autos do, there would be no fundamentally flawed products like the Edsel because they’d be forced out of the marketplace. And poor kids would benefit from that phenomenon more than rich kids would.

Fuck Copeland. Dick cunt.

What I’d like to know is how would the poor be able to afford this private education?

Yes, the auto industry runs without any government incentives or regulation at all.

Private education is only expensive because it’s exclusive. If you doubled or tripled the number of private schools, they’d have to compete for students. When they compete for students, what happens to the price? It goes down.

This nation has a “poor” population that has cell phones, home computers, internet access, cable tv and hundred dollar sneakers. They could afford $100 a month to educate their kids.

Government regulations on the auto industry add to the price of the cars. In case you haven’t noticed, they’re losing the competition for business with foreign automakers, partly based on price. So what’s you point? You want more regulations on them or something?

We also have poor people that can’t afford to eat. Just ask Mary Jo Copeland.

The biggest nutritional problem this nation faces is obesity. And it ain’t amongst the rich.

God, are you out of touch.

They stole those.

you have an answer for everything…

He’s just contrary. And, apparently, hasn’t met a poor person in decades.

That’s what I was thinking…I’m bored with this argument already…this phrase about arguing on the internet keeps running through my mind…

Hey Max, you used to be poor. How come you’re not poor anymore?

I’m still poor.

why do so many people on here brag about being poor, or growing up poor. does that give you more “street cred” or something?

Oh, I ain’t bragging. I’m sort of embarrassed by the fact.

“Government regulations on the auto industry add to the price of the cars. In case you haven’t noticed, they’re losing the competition for business with foreign automakers, partly based on price. So what’s you point? You want more regulations on them or something?”

Those foreign cars are subjected to the same regulations as domestic cars.

The biggest competitive advantage the foreign auto makers have is that they don’t have to pay for health coverage for their employees and retirees. In fact, health care costs add something like >$1,200 to the price of a domestic car.

And why aren’t the foreign auto makers paying health costs of the workers? Because their governments are paying the costs.

just buy a house, you’ll be rolling in it…

why do so many people on here brag about being poor, or growing up poor

I think what’s happening is people talk about their experiences being poor so that people who have never been poor can understand the other perspective. Funny how that works.

Except wayne. He just likes to piss and moan sometimes.

The US has also had a lot of protectionist policies for the domestic auto industry. I wouldn’t hold GM or Ford up as ideals right now.

I included the bit about “regulations” because if I didn’t, you would certainly do so.

And it was so, so . . . brilliant . . it went in twice . . .

oh, is that why erica? it’s for me, then. gee, thx.

“why females are all needy b____s”. bobby, can i borrow your notes? i’ll need to have the talk with junior in a couple years, and i like your style.

A big part of the problem – how we end up with this “public v. private” argument – is the perception that the education industry has served its employees – the teachers and staff – over its true constituents – the kids – and that it has also made itself impervious to any pressures to change, to improve. I doubt people would be trashing public schools if they really did a good job.

We now turn out relatively unlearned grads while spending a ton more (time-adjusted) bucks on the process than we used to, but we keep listening to the same people who designed what we have now for ways to fix it. I think we need to look elsewhere for some systemic suggestions. The teachers’ unions and the professional admin types have a conflict in this regard, because they have one solution to every complaint – more money – and one place to put that additional money – in their pockets.

And, yeah, I know that we need to define what “the job” of our ed system really is, and decide where the burden of inclusion and special needs and piss-poor-parenting should fall, and whether we want the ed industry to be the arbiter of our kids’ morals or to have the narrower role of educating kids on specific subjects.

We can make those determinations, but we’ve avoided doing so, and in the process we’ve made the more general “why does public ed do so badly” issue unanswerable. In the face of this apparent inability to ever fix public ed, more people see private ed as a viable alternative. In reality, though, it will always be a small national component of educating kids; its true value lies in its worth as leverage to get the ed industry to come to the table and clean up their own act.

Bobby- you made my point…obviously I was speaking of those who’s religion won’t tolerate any teaching except for abstinence…

oh, is that why erica? it’s for me, then. gee, thx.

It’s the same thing that anyone here does. Everyone has their own experience which they feel compelled to share and supposedly everyone learns something or at least maybe sees something in a way they didn’t before.

I get kind of tired of condescending homeowners, but at least I get what they’re saying, even if I disagree or it doesn’t apply to me or whatever. And sometimes I even learn something.

Thanks and you’re welcome.

“Everyone has their own experience which they feel compelled to share and supposedly everyone learns something or at least maybe sees something in a way they didn’t before.“

This is not true at all. Why, when I was a kid . . .

i guess erica. but it doesn’t seem to add much…”hey, i used to be poor, i know what it’s like.” ok then, good for you…for the 100th time. (well i’d say i’ve beaten this subject that only i care about thoroughly into the ground.)

“I doubt people would be trashing public schools if they really did a good job.”

Don’t count on it. There area LOT of public schoolsthat do excellent jobs. And yet, people like maz insist on lumong all of them in with the disfunctional districts like New Orleans, Minneapolis, etc.

Even within Minneapolis, Southwest High, I am told, is a very good school. And I know of several Washburn and Roosevlet grads that attended Carleton College.

Hey, Maz brought it up.

Very true, I went to a great public high school in SD, they offered an advanced AP class for every regular class and the teachers made time for every student (even knew their names) despite having at least 25 students in each class and with pay ranking nearing the bottom in the US. I didn’t end up going to Harvard, but I did get accepted into a great private college as well as a few public ones.

“There area LOT of public schoolsthat do excellent jobs.“

Not disagreeing with this at all. I think probably MOST do a good job. But the ones that don’t tend to be screwing up the population already most at risk, and in most need of good education. But those systems have proven to be the most intractable when it comes to change and improvement.

One thing that never got noticed here: Kathrine Kersten, in the Strib, jumped all over Chris Stewart in the Mpls school board race. But, a few weeks ago, she wrote a very complimentary column about him, doing the mea culpa thing about how she had maybe misjudged him. Turns out he’s become a huge proponent of drastic change in who we look to for our education system design and improvement; he’s stated repeatedly that teachers, and their unions, and admin types, cannot be the source of change, because they always simply look out for themselves at the expense of the kids. He’s put out some drastic proposals for disempowering the whole industry, and re-empowering kids and their true advocates.

I was wrong about him, too. Turns out he’s going to be a great shot in the arm for public ed, and for the kids.

by and large public schools do a good job. there’s only a few schools in this state i wouldn’t send my kid too…but those are in areas which have a lot of other challenges. tough to pin the blame on the school system there.

Don’t the proponents of privatization recognize some things must be left in public hands? Do they want, for instance, private police forces/armies running around with the same authority as real cops? Turn our cities into Mogadishu? I doubt it. It would be easier to carry on this discussion if both (all?) sides articulated their justification for what is proper in addition to complaining about what isn’t.

So maz points out that Minneapolis schools are crappy – not as good as private schools – as part of an argument to eliminate public education so that the poor have… nothing. I see. Sounds to me like he’s actually making an argument for funding them better.

Wait, if public schools were eliminated then we’d just have a bunch of really good private schools and a boat load of really bad private schools.

I attended private school for K-12 except in 2nd grade when I went to a Minneapolis public school (and after returning to private school, my mom had me do 2nd grade again because I’d learned nothing new). There’s a lot to be said about parental involvement at successful private schools (among other factors). Successful public schools have the same thing. Until you can find a way to incorporate parents into the equation successfully, your schools are going to suck – be them public or private.

There’s a lot to be said about parental involvement at successful private schools (among other factors).

There was a discussion the other day about home ownership versus renters and how people care more about things if they have something invested in it. When education is “free” some people don’t treat it with as much respect than if they had to pay for it. When parents are paying for their kids’ education, and not just through property taxes that cover a whole range of government costs, but have to actually take out the checkbook and write a check … they care more about what that money of theirs is buying. That’s why private school parents pay closer attention … they’re financially invested in it. They want their money’s worth.

So, then what happens if schools were privatized and families that cannot afford to pay at all are given vouchers? Wouldn’t that lead the the same problems?

Also, I think to say that private school parents pay closer attention because they are financially invested in it, is a bit of an oversimplification. I think they pay attention for other reasons… Furthermore, how does this explain suburban schools that are working well?

It doesn’t explain why suburban schools are doing well. It only explains why parents who pay tuition pay close attention to their little “investment.” Perhaps suburban schools do well because people who care about their kids’ education move to a school district that has a history of delivering a quality product. They’re not motivated by their investment, they’re motivated by insisting on quality for their kids.

Any parent who would leave their kids in a lousy school is a lousy parent. And if there’s no money to help pay tuition, most private schools have tuition aid programs for families in need. My wife came from a poor family but the parish priest saw to it that they were enrolled into one of St. Paul’s finest catholic schools. It happens. Barring that, vote for those politicians who advocate school vouchers.

So Maz thinks parents who aren’t invested in public schools are going to get invested in private schools. Why shouldn’t we assume that these parents just don’t care? What stops them from ignoring the differences in private schools or picking entrepreneurial schools that figure out how to please or gratify the parents regardless of what they do for the kids? The market theory only works when people are spending their own money. That seems unlikely with this group.

Wait a minute… this is getting a little cloudy.

Is there such a thing as a good school, or not?

I understand that parental involvement means a lot, but I want to say that that’s a different (albeit interrelated) issue.

Are you guys saying that a school could be technically great, but if it’s in the ghetto where single moms smoke crack then it’s automatically no good because of the parental problem?

Or, that a private school will always be great, because parents are financially invested? (What about some rich parents who throw money at their progeny in lieu of interaction?)

I’m just asking. I don’t have kids, and I’m really curious about this.

Ranty -

I think that there is such thing as a good school. I asked my mom why she chose to send me to the school I attended and she had several well thought out reasons. Furthermore, she had several reasons why she didn’t send me to various private schools.

I was talking with a couple of my friends and most of them would send their kids to the school we graduated from. Then again, I know of people who left my school for public schools including Southwest, several suburban schools, and the arts high school. Many of these people had parents who could easily have paid for them to remain at my school.

I think that any school where the parents are invested in their child’s education, is probably going to be a better school than one where more parents aren’t. If the school is in the ghetto but there are enough parents who care, it can be a great school. If a school is really rich but the parents don’t care, then it can be a bad school.

I just don’t think money is enough to guarantee a good school. There are a lot of wealthy parents who don’t give a flip about their kids. Look at parents who pay for their kids to go to college for eons without doing anything…

Granted, this alone does not make the school great but it goes a long way.
For example, the high school in the town where my college is located has a good number of professors as parents. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that these parents are invested in their kids educations. Yet, some professors are opting to leave the school because, at the high school level, the school isn’t that great. For example, it almost cut the French program this year but the parents put up a huge fight. So clearly, invested parents can’t solve for everything but they can do some things.

I agree with Bixby. Just out of curiosity, where did you go to school?

The school I went to isn’t open anymore (mechanic arts h.s. in st. paul), but it was where the poor and immigrant kids from east 7th street, selby-dale, university ave., rice street, and McDonough housing project went to school. We had two alumni who ended up on the u.s. supreme court … Whizzer White and Harry Backmun.

Maz, I know for a fact that you have been outspoken against two of my school’s alumni…

Okay, I understand what you are saying, Bixby, and Maz’s points as well.

What I’m trying to get at, though, is that segment for which we should hold teachers and the district responsible. In other words, there must be something beyond parental involvement, right? Yes it’s important, but if we put all the onus on parents then aren’t we giving the school system a free pass? What is the baseline for an acceptable school, parental influence notwithstanding? (Or is that even a fair question?)

Oh, and for the record, I attended Southwest High for fresh/soph and (Convent of the) Visitation in Mendota Hts for jr/sr.

Viz!

I think that we should hold teachers and the district responsible but who is going to be the one to force this? Parents. I mean, honestly, parents tend to be the ones to put the most pressure on the schools to change. This is not to say that others can’t do it but parents are probably the biggest and best advocates for change.

I don’t think that it’s possible to come up with a general baseline for what’s an acceptable school. I mean, it varies from child to child. What resources can it provide that the student needs beyond just teaching them basics.

I guess my number one criterion would be how much room for growth does the school provide for the child. What I mean by this is that there are plenty of opportunities for students to develop an understanding of academics beyond what they’re supposed to learn and that they have plenty of options for extracurricular growth.

However, I would say that this reasoning mainly applies to people with a choice as to which schools to send their kids to and not as guidelines as to what a school must do to be considered a “good” school (only because “growth” is such a subjective term).

Then again, when the kid gets to high school, I’d definitely start looking at how the school does getting kids into college. I don’t mean how many kids go to Ivy League schools. I mean, how effective it is when it comes to helping kids find the right college for them.

Obviously, this is something that I’d expect more out of in a private school than a public school, which has many more students.

The Ely Timberjay does a followup on the Keith Nelson slavery comments. Meanwhile, some local bloggers are circling the wagons to defend Nelson.

Fellow news junkies on this site may have noted that DeRusha’s story ran the day before most other Twin Cities media covered it. Be sure to mention that to the boss, Jason.

Duluth News-Tribune editor says Keith Nelson tops Imus.

“So maz points out that Minneapolis schools are crappy . . . Sounds to me like he’s actually making an argument for funding them better.“

You’ve just nicely illustrated my thesis that those with vested interests in the industry itself should not be our source of plans for improvement.

There are a ton of steps that could be taken to begin addressing the problems and shortcomings of the Mpls system. Problem is, most of them are opposed by the unions and admins, not because they wouldn’t help the kids, but because they would make things not as good for the unions and the admins. So, when the discussion turns to fixing things, they always simply say “give us more money.”

We’ve given more and more money to the problem districts, and history shows us that the only real improvement brought by that extra money accrues to the teachers’ benefit, not the kids’.

The big push for private schools isn’t really about a love of private schools, or even a desire to have gawd stand by the blackboard. It’s more of a frustrated backlash caused when years and years of discussion of problems results only in repeated “give us more money!” cries.

Some people in Mpls are doing a shitty job now. How on earth would paying them more fix things?

Some people in Mpls are doing a shitty job now. How on earth would paying them more fix things?

I just wonder what the proof for that is…it’s an assumption that because test scores or graduation rates are not as high as in the suburbs that it’s because people aren’t doing a good job? MPLS public schools have a far more challenging job to do than the suburban schools.

Why did MSP remove the Marsh blog post that provoked a front-page story in Sunday’s Star Tribune?