Serotonin said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

Serotonin said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

Not sure why it even matters. Once vouchers are instituted, no teacher certification will be needed. Private schools can already hire anyone to teach with no requirement for degree or certification, and when all of education is privatized it will only get easier to hire non-certified teachers.

---

I blue starred this post as a hopeful description of the future of education. Now I realize that you might be saying this like it's a bad thing.

---

So you want people teaching to be LESS qualified. Got it.

---

I am against unnecessary bureaucracy and administrative process.

My wife went through the teacher certification program here in Texas and it is every bit the joke one would imagine.

Do these certifications correlate with actual teacher effectiveness 5 or 10 years down the line? Holding other variables equal do schools with fully certified staff perform better than those without?

I will admit the certification is good at two things: keeping motivated new competition out of the teaching pool and creating a cottage industry of grift where companies make thousands off of prospective teachers.

---

Quote:

---

At least now a teacher is required to pass the cert test you know that they ARE motivated to teach because they are jumping through all the hoops in order to do so. It isn't like becoming a teacher is the only job in the world where an additional certification is required in addition to a college degree.

---

Booma94 said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

Not sure why it even matters. Once vouchers are instituted, no teacher certification will be needed. Private schools can already hire anyone to teach with no requirement for degree or certification, and when all of education is privatized it will only get easier to hire non-certified teachers.

---

That's not how any of this works.

Most schools are certified and belong to various certifying institutions. Many more than 1 at the same time. Each institution requires a very thorough vetting process that takes place every 3-5 years with multiple representatives on site that put together action plans that have to be completed.

There's always varying degrees in every situation. But having been on the board of a parochial school on the value cost end of the spectrum in Houston, the quality of the administration, staff, and curriculum was leaps and bounds from anything the State can enforce. And that was reinforced any time an HISD student that was supposedly top of their class tested and joined our school when their parents finally faced reality.

---

Ah, the argument of anecdotal information. Because your school does it this way, they all must do it this way.

The fact is once vouchers are approved, fly-by-night, for-profit, pop-up schools will not be uncommon- look around Los Angeles in California. There are 'academies' in many strip malls- and not the kind that sell sporting goods. They are glorified daycare facilities that are paid for with vouchers scholarships. There's little accountability, no guidelines, and no state input into curriculum. These grifters will be as common as parochial schools and will only serve to get free government money.

So all of the voucher proponents that think that things will improve when the state forfeits control are in for a rude awakening. There will be as many grifters as legitimate school. There will be some schools set up by foreign influence that teach their own beliefs but paid for with our tax dollars and because there's no guidelines nothing can be done about it. Ahmed's Death to America Academy paid for with American tax dollars would not be outside the realm of possibility.

---

Booma94 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I'll take "things that won't actually happen for $1000, Alex".

The flip side, which you are also forgetting to discuss (like in your other nonsensical post) is this - tell me what about the current setup of our education system makes you think it is super duper awesome, efficient, productive and why a pure monopolistic system is somehow good in education, but illegal in any other sector?

There is only one reason any school system is scared of the prospect of competiton. I'll let you guess what it is.

---

I have never said there is no place for private schools. What I have said is that there is no place for private schools to receive public funds. Big difference.

I'm all in favor of parents having the option of private school, home school, or whatever school they choose to meet the educational needs of their children. What I'm opposed to is tax dollars being used to fund anything but public education. Just like I'm opposed to public funds paying for private roads, private security, and other private services.

---

BBRex said:

---

The kids in my district come from poor households. Their parents likely don't read (or at least in English). They don't know their ABC's. They don't get help with homework. So the kids need extra help in English/Language Arts to catch up. And because STAAR doesn't cover science or social studies until fifth grade or so, those classes get sacrificed to shore up ELA or math.

---

valvemonkey91 said:

---

Could it be that maybe a large problem is the 3rd world having to join your classroom?

---

schmellba99 said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

Serotonin said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

Serotonin said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

Not sure why it even matters. Once vouchers are instituted, no teacher certification will be needed. Private schools can already hire anyone to teach with no requirement for degree or certification, and when all of education is privatized it will only get easier to hire non-certified teachers.

---

I blue starred this post as a hopeful description of the future of education. Now I realize that you might be saying this like it's a bad thing.

---

So you want people teaching to be LESS qualified. Got it.

---

I am against unnecessary bureaucracy and administrative process.

My wife went through the teacher certification program here in Texas and it is every bit the joke one would imagine.

Do these certifications correlate with actual teacher effectiveness 5 or 10 years down the line? Holding other variables equal do schools with fully certified staff perform better than those without?

I will admit the certification is good at two things: keeping motivated new competition out of the teaching pool and creating a cottage industry of grift where companies make thousands off of prospective teachers.

---

I would argue it does the opposite. People always want to ***** how anyone can teach, blah blah blah. Well if passing a teacher cert test wasn't a requirement I bet the schools would be filled with people who are even bigger idiots who think teaching is simple and an easy buck with summers off. It would be even worse for the kids. Granted, there would always be outliers but my guess would be that it would do more harm than good.

At least now a teacher is required to pass the cert test you know that they ARE motivated to teach because they are jumping through all the hoops in order to do so. It isn't like becoming a teacher is the only job in the world where an additional certification is required in addition to a college degree.

---

Disagree.

Because the cert isn't some super hard thing - it's a headache to deal with at best until it's done. Nobody is staying away from teaching as a profession because of the cert; they are staying away because the pay is low, kids are *******s, parents are *******s, administration in most districts are *******s and teachers are largely left hanging in the wind when it comes to dealing with the 5% problem students.

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I'll take "things that won't actually happen for $1000, Alex".

The flip side, which you are also forgetting to discuss (like in your other nonsensical post) is this - tell me what about the current setup of our education system makes you think it is super duper awesome, efficient, productive and why a pure monopolistic system is somehow good in education, but illegal in any other sector?

There is only one reason any school system is scared of the prospect of competiton. I'll let you guess what it is.

---

I have never said there is no place for private schools. What I have said is that there is no place for private schools to receive public funds. Big difference.

I'm all in favor of parents having the option of private school, home school, or whatever school they choose to meet the educational needs of their children. What I'm opposed to is tax dollars being used to fund anything but public education. Just like I'm opposed to public funds paying for private roads, private security, and other private services.

---

There.Is.No.Such.Thing.

Read that again. And again.

You may not have anything against private schools, you just think they should all be small and only reserved for those that can afford to pay both school taxes and private school tuition and costs.

Keep those serfs where they belong!

---

Jack Cheese said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I'll take "things that won't actually happen for $1000, Alex".

The flip side, which you are also forgetting to discuss (like in your other nonsensical post) is this - tell me what about the current setup of our education system makes you think it is super duper awesome, efficient, productive and why a pure monopolistic system is somehow good in education, but illegal in any other sector?

There is only one reason any school system is scared of the prospect of competiton. I'll let you guess what it is.

---

I have never said there is no place for private schools. What I have said is that there is no place for private schools to receive public funds. Big difference.

I'm all in favor of parents having the option of private school, home school, or whatever school they choose to meet the educational needs of their children. What I'm opposed to is tax dollars being used to fund anything but public education. Just like I'm opposed to public funds paying for private roads, private security, and other private services.

---

There.Is.No.Such.Thing.

Read that again. And again.

You may not have anything against private schools, you just think they should all be small and only reserved for those that can afford to pay both school taxes and private school tuition and costs.

Keep those serfs where they belong!

---

And he clearly doesn't really believe what he's saying. K-12 schooling is one of the very few things that are both funded and directly provided by the government.

Food stamps? They are used to buy groceries at non-government grocery stores.

Medicare? Pays for health care at (thank God) private hospitals and doctors offices. Also, it pays for medications that were (thank God) researched and developed in non-government labs.

Remember government housing projects? Weren't those awesome?? Um, no.

I have no idea why people have these supposedly principled positions about "my taxpayer money shouldn't go to any private enterprise, ever, period." They only ever really mean it about schools, and when pressed they can't explain why schools have to be provided directly by the government. Not can they explain why federal Pell grants are okay to be spent at private universities but vouchers (even if they're means-tested) are evil.

Most of the time, I think these folks are either in the public education establishment or they have loved ones who are. They can be conservative in every way, except they drink the socialist kool-aid from the public school lobby.

---

Booma94 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I'll take "things that won't actually happen for $1000, Alex".

The flip side, which you are also forgetting to discuss (like in your other nonsensical post) is this - tell me what about the current setup of our education system makes you think it is super duper awesome, efficient, productive and why a pure monopolistic system is somehow good in education, but illegal in any other sector?

There is only one reason any school system is scared of the prospect of competiton. I'll let you guess what it is.

---

I have never said there is no place for private schools. What I have said is that there is no place for private schools to receive public funds. Big difference.

I'm all in favor of parents having the option of private school, home school, or whatever school they choose to meet the educational needs of their children. What I'm opposed to is tax dollars being used to fund anything but public education. Just like I'm opposed to public funds paying for private roads, private security, and other private services.

---

AgLA06 said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I'll take "things that won't actually happen for $1000, Alex".

The flip side, which you are also forgetting to discuss (like in your other nonsensical post) is this - tell me what about the current setup of our education system makes you think it is super duper awesome, efficient, productive and why a pure monopolistic system is somehow good in education, but illegal in any other sector?

There is only one reason any school system is scared of the prospect of competiton. I'll let you guess what it is.

---

I have never said there is no place for private schools. What I have said is that there is no place for private schools to receive public funds. Big difference.

I'm all in favor of parents having the option of private school, home school, or whatever school they choose to meet the educational needs of their children. What I'm opposed to is tax dollars being used to fund anything but public education. Just like I'm opposed to public funds paying for private roads, private security, and other private services.

---

Funny though, you have no problem doing exactly that the other direction.

---

Booma94 said:

---

Jack Cheese said:

---

And he clearly doesn't really believe what he's saying. K-12 schooling is one of the very few things that are both funded and directly provided by the government.

Food stamps? They are used to buy groceries at non-government grocery stores.

Medicare? Pays for health care at (thank God) private hospitals and doctors offices. Also, it pays for medications that were (thank God) researched and developed in non-government labs.

Remember government housing projects? Weren't those awesome?? Um, no.

I have no idea why people have these supposedly principled positions about "my taxpayer money shouldn't go to any private enterprise, ever, period." They only ever really mean it about schools, and when pressed they can't explain why schools have to be provided directly by the government. Not can they explain why federal Pell grants are okay to be spent at private universities but vouchers (even if they're means-tested) are evil.

Most of the time, I think these folks are either in the public education establishment or they have loved ones who are. They can be conservative in every way, except they drink the socialist kool-aid from the public school lobby.

---

You read words that are not there. I didn't say anything about groceries, or health care, or higher education. I did not say that public funds should never go to private entities, and to imply such is a straw man argument. I specifically limited it to public k-12 education and other public services (roads, police) that the state constitution says are to be funded by the state.

---

schmellba99 said:

---

WES2006AG said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

WES2006AG said:

---

valvemonkey91 said:

---

One would think that the current state of public education in Texas would make every public school teacher the most rabid Trump supporter based on his deportation plans alone. Every teacher I've ever talked to decries how hard it is now. Could it be that maybe a large problem is the 3rd world having to join your classroom?

---

Yea, public school teachers should clamoring to vote for someone who degrades them by saying that all we teach is CRT and we are currently transing all of your kids. Don has said MANY times this election cycle that kids go to school, have a surgery, and come back home trans.

We don't have enough money to transport our kids or give teachers a raise but we do have the facilities and expertise to perform surgery on your children without your permission.

---

Nothing like taking what was said and twisting it into something that wasn't actually said or implied, all the while ignoring actual issues that he and many others are talking about.

But it's you, nobody is really surprised. If Trump said the sky is blue you'd find some way to argue that you think he's wrong.

---

Quote:

---

"Can you imagine you're a parent and your son leaves the house and you say, 'Jimmy, I love you so much, go have a good day in school,' and your son comes back with a brutal operation? Can you even imagine this? What the hell is wrong with our country?" Trump said Saturday at a campaign rally in Wisconsin, a vital swing state.

---

You are right Don would never say something like that...

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/trump-false-claims-schools-transgender-surgeries-rcna170217

---

Funny, our state AG is investigating 2 doctors that are accused of prescribing transition therapies to minors without parental consent, and altering paperwork to hide the fact that they were doing so.

But yeah, it's just another right wing lunatic conspiracy.

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Bert315 said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

Booma94 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I'll take "things that won't actually happen for $1000, Alex".

The flip side, which you are also forgetting to discuss (like in your other nonsensical post) is this - tell me what about the current setup of our education system makes you think it is super duper awesome, efficient, productive and why a pure monopolistic system is somehow good in education, but illegal in any other sector?

There is only one reason any school system is scared of the prospect of competiton. I'll let you guess what it is.

---

I have never said there is no place for private schools. What I have said is that there is no place for private schools to receive public funds. Big difference.

I'm all in favor of parents having the option of private school, home school, or whatever school they choose to meet the educational needs of their children. What I'm opposed to is tax dollars being used to fund anything but public education. Just like I'm opposed to public funds paying for private roads, private security, and other private services.

---

Funny though, you have no problem doing exactly that the other direction.

---

Exactly. I'm opposed to my tax dollars going to a broken public education system that is producing sub par results that would result in any normal company going bankrupt.

Thats not an attack on teachers, it is reality. Any other company that did the crap schools do would be severely punished in the market, schools have a semi-monopoly due to cost of most private schools.

---

Markets don't really describe what schools do since they can't control their inputs. They have to make due with what walks through their doors instead of finding better students. Chik-fil-a does far less business with McDonald's chicken nuggets.

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Apparently you live under a rock, or are intentionally obtuse.

What's broken is that we consistently spend more and more money on the education system with less and less return. Overall American public school test numbers have fallen over the last several decades while costs have increased exponentially. Most ISD's are severely bloated in the overhead, most are running massive deficits because they don't know how to manage money and because of things like Recapture, discipline is rarely enforced in most schools, teachers often do not have the backing of admin when it comes to managing students or parents, etc, etc, etc.

Hell, look at Cypress ISD just outside of Houston this year as an example. Something like $50MM budget shortfall, couldn't even coordinate bus routes properly and it was an absolute sht show. But the superintendent makes $500k a year and there are at least 20 "associate superintendents", all of whom make well into the 6 figures. That doesn't even get to the actual school admin or other support admin either. HISD - the state had to take it over because of the fact that it was so poorly managed over a period of years/decades that it was on the verge of losing certification.

Not too long ago one of the bigger metro districs was looked at and it was discovered that something like half or more of the high school incoming class couldn't read above a 4th or 5th grade level and math was around a 3rd grade level. Yet the kids were continually pushed to the next grade even though they were being failed by the education system.

These are not new stories, nor are they isolated incidents. This is across the state for the most part as well.

How many stories have there been of DEI, common core, drag queens, etc. as well?

As far as public universities - that's a dumb comment. They are provided what they are provided, and even with across the board poor results in education there will always be the handful that truly are smar and truly do learn. Those are the ones that are at the universities, outside of those that are accepted for quotas and other metrics anyway.

---