didn t have money for chalk last year

Your school board better find some better administrators.

“Us” aren’t? I attended public schools through high school and have attended private (don’t know how elitist) and public universities. Somewhere along the line I learned that ain’t correct useage.

You’ll notice quite a difference, trust me. I’m amazed at the poor level of education in our public schools. I had the education level of a Columbus public school graduate when I was in 8th grade.

At least here, it’s horrible.

Because obviously, no one died in the WTC attacks.

I am still waiting for all you lefty hypocrites to comment on the fact that old Rahm had his ass handed to him and took the ad down already& .

The dems are idiots. What else is new? Not all liberals like the demecrats. Someday, you’ll understand that.

Again, JWG, you were proven wrong.

By what? I gave you the actual data for every district in California (every district in the US, actually). You gave me a sloppy news article.

And I note that you re now backtracking on your original assertion that  all per-pupil spending was equal to  most per-pupil spending is nearly equal.

For Christ’s sake. Of course it’s not EXACTLY equal. But districts in which wealthy people reside are not predominately spending more money per pupil than districts with lower income families. Some do, but most spend equivalent amounts per pupil when you factor elementary vs secondary and enrollment size. (And there are many low income districts that receive and spend much more than high income districts. There are examples on both ends, but you article conveniently ignored that.)

It s not just in CA, it s everywhere. And your conservative bretheren often make it an issue; e.g., how come we get lower test scores in Washington DC where it costs $X per pupil but we get get higher scores in Nebraska where it only costs $Y?

Exactly. Districts in which families overtly value education do well regardless of the money. That’s not to say more money is not useful to each and every district to increase services.

But the criticism was about using our military war dead against the republicans….not using a national image representing the war on terrorists.

Llike I said, I haven’t seen the ad, but suspect, as usual, it will be apples and oranges.

I am still waiting for all you lefty hypocrites to comment on the fact that old Rahm had his ass handed to him and took the ad down already….

The link is
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/07/gop-senator-dewine-r-oh-using-images.html

Paul, I guess they agreed with MY criticism eh? Bad for the republicans though, I think that ad would have been good for 5% or so of the vote& .

So, I guess you also are opposed to Senetor DeWine’s new campaign ad?

It’s things like school appearance, safety, pride (go PS 142???), and commitment of teachers and administators that can make a big difference. Things like drop out rates and bullying greatly affect the psychological aspects of concentartion and effort.

I don’t think vouchers are the answer. All that does is create roaming students who will enter other schools at a different level than the rest of the class. This can create more problems in itself.

In some cases money is the answer (buiding and grounds inprovements, supplies, etc.), and in others it is personnel as previously noted. A system is needed that recognizes early on where the problems existand has a system to deal with them.

If we are to ever have a level playing field in this country it has to start in our education system. I’m not big on Federalism, but the altrnative is 40,000 local systems.

Of course with the latter, we can expand on Affirmative Action.

In other words, the liberals just want these kids to suffer until someone thinks of a better idea. Great, one more generation in poverty.

Oh, and I notice it didn’t take long for you to pull the race card out. Yea, so the DC schools are top performers when the democrats are in office then?

No, not so much.

There goes your myth of the compassionate liberals looking out for out poor. As usual, the leftist talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk.

It’s not just in CA, it’s everywhere. And your conservative bretheren often make it an issue; e.g., how come we get lower test scores in Washington DC where it costs $X per pupil but we get get higher scores in Nebraska where it only costs $Y?’

IOW, money.

The solution nationally, as I’ve proposed numerous times, is to force every state to adhere to the standards of the top American and foreign schools. But that would involve some pesky federalism which you guys hate (at least when you disagree with it).

exactly OW, so what does the poor single mother in DC do? Right now, nothing but hope for the best& .
At the very least you guys could cut her taxes instead of the taxes for Ken Lay’s widow so she wouldn’t have to work so much and could stay home and help her kid with his or her homework.

No Paul is getting a PhD in film studies….which is ironic. USC has one of the best film schools in the country, that paul apparently can’t get into, but now brags on UCLA after he couldn’t get in there for his baccalaureate degree.

Paul,paul,paul….when will you learn?

Paul, I guess they agreed with MY criticism eh? Bad for the republicans though, I think that ad would have been good for 5% or so of the vote….

& is the same amount of money spent per pupil as in poorer districts.

Uh uh

It most certainly is, and I can prove it. The Census Bureau publishes a document every year that lists every school district in the country and their expenditures. The most recent is 2004 Annual Survey of Local Government Finances  School Systems. Download the Excel files called “Elsec04T.xls” and “Elsec04.xls” and you can find all the California public schools (they are state 05). Use the explanations to understand the headers to organize the schools by type (elementary vs secondary), enrollment, and per-pupil expenditures.

By looking at a scatter plot it is obvious that the vast majority of schools are very close to one another in per-pupil expenditures when you consider the type of school and enrollment. There are a very few exceptions.

Your linked article did either very sloppy or very deceitful work. It used the extreme examples as a comparison and ignored the overwhelming majority that are much more equal. Additionally, it compared a purely elementary district to a unified district that pays for a high school education. The article makes for good sensationalism (they tell us that the high end of the range is $34,000, but they don’t tell us it was for a K12 district with 25 students), but it is not supported when you look at the entire state in context.

If you’re wondering why I would go through this much effort to prove a point, it’s because I know this data very well as it was part of my thesis for one of my master’s (educational administration).

Public schools are not the problem. BAD public schools ARE…

Hence, the DC School System