Biden picks Miguel Cardona as U.S. Secretary of Education

[domer76]

Of course they do So they get books/funding? And the suburb next door...the conservative one...doesn't?

For starters:

Because the liberal districts are willing to pay for supplemental levies, they are able to build, update and maintain their facilities to a greater degree. Because the liberal districts are willing, those schools tend to have greater extracurricular participation. Because they place greater value on education, the liberal districts tend to have higher academic standards and scores. Because of that value on education, those districts attract better teachers.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Pay the bet....upaws.org....$25.....thanks in advance
Some remind me...next time there's a "real teacher" wager...make it much, much more.....

Sorry, Kumtwat, but there's no teaching certificate with your name on it, there was never a bet, and there's nothing more for you to snorfle about with your strange non sequitur comments that only you find witty. I've already informed you that if it's true all you have to do is post a screenshot of it. And no, not a link that goes to Ohio's board of education that is blank. And not a screenshot where you blanked out everything but the alleged dates. That could be anyone. Like my "medical degree!"

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

They know the truth. Thank goodness, they teach in one of the liberal districts where they value education.

Amazing how that works, isn't it? When my daughter started teaching, she began in a "red" district. Not only was she buying the kids' stuff with her own money, she was bringing them food and even clothing at times. The one she is in now is on the cusp of becoming red but thankfully the last couple of bond issues passed.

 

[cawacko]

For starters:

Because the liberal districts are willing to pay for supplemental levies, they are able to build, update and maintain their facilities to a greater degree. Because the liberal districts are willing, those schools tend to have greater extracurricular participation. Because they place greater value on education, the liberal districts tend to have higher academic standards and scores. Because of that value on education, those districts attract better teachers.

If that's really the case why do so many heavily Democratic urban areas have such poor schools and poor results? Why do some many parents in big urban areas either send their kids to private schools, move to the suburbs or if they do send their kids to public schools it's the ones with merit based application?

At the end of the day we know many/most parents are going to put their kids in the place where they feel they can get the best education possible, whether that's a private or public school. But if we're arguing from a political perspective and who values education, actions speak louder than words and a number of people who claim they support public education don't want to send their kids to a public school. And let's be real, if you really want to improve public education have all these well to do families put their kids in public schools and get involved like they do in their private schools (and I don't mean just wealthy suburbs, I mean the ethnically and economically diverse areas).

 

[Sailor]

If that's really the case why do so many heavily Democratic urban areas have such poor schools and poor results? Why do some many parents in big urban areas either send their kids to private schools, move to the suburbs or if they do send their kids to public schools it's the ones with merit based application?

At the end of the day we know many/most parents are going to put their kids in the place where they feel they can get the best education possible, whether that's a private or public school. But if we're arguing from a political perspective and who values education, actions speak louder than words and a number of people who claim they support public education don't want to send their kids to a public school. And let's be real, if you really want to improve public education have all these well to do families put their kids in public schools and get involved like they do in their private schools (and I don't mean just wealthy suburbs, I mean the ethnically and economically diverse areas).

End of story.

 

[domer76]

Amazing how that works, isn't it? When my daughter started teaching, she began in a "red" district. Not only was she buying the kids' stuff with her own money, she was bringing them food and even clothing at times. The one she is in now is on the cusp of becoming red but thankfully the last couple of bond issues passed.

Bond issues are tough because they require a super-majority. In this state, I routinely watch them fail in the conservative areas and pass in the more progressive areas.

Don’t get me wrong, though. This is Idaho. Dems here are more conservative than other areas of the country.

 

[domer76]

If that's really the case why do so many heavily Democratic urban areas have such poor schools and poor results? Why do some many parents in big urban areas either send their kids to private schools, move to the suburbs or if they do send their kids to public schools it's the ones with merit based application?

At the end of the day we know many/most parents are going to put their kids in the place where they feel they can get the best education possible, whether that's a private or public school. But if we're arguing from a political perspective and who values education, actions speak louder than words and a number of people who claim they support public education don't want to send their kids to a public school. And let's be real, if you really want to improve public education have all these well to do families put their kids in public schools and get involved like they do in their private schools (and I don't mean just wealthy suburbs, I mean the ethnically and economically diverse areas).

Of course, you’re referring to urban inner city schools. Apples and oranges to what I’m referring to.

In this state, other than perhaps the reservations, we have no significant pockets of such staggering poverty. This state is quite homogeneous. So, the demographic differences I refer to are more political in nature. Not racial or ethnic. If anything, rural vs suburban. Rural, meaning conservative. Suburban, meaning more liberal. This is Idaho, not Massachusetts. Liberal here is a far cry from that version.

I watch the bond levies all over the state. The ones in rural and conservative areas fail much more frequently than those in the less conservative areas. The academic performance of the few (more) liberal areas always exceeds that of their conservative counterparts.

For reasons I mentioned before, the difference is obvious and consistent and has been so since before I attended school here.

 

[TexanManWithPlans]

why did you think Doctor Jill was the rich white girl in question?.......

I wasn't referring to her. Pay attention.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I wasn't referring to her. Pay attention.

dumbfuck, you named her.......get your head out of your ass......

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Bond issues are tough because they require a super-majority. In this state, I routinely watch them fail in the conservative areas and pass in the more progressive areas.

Don’t get me wrong, though. This is Idaho. Dems here are more conservative than other areas of the country.

When I moved to a rural Missouri county NW of the STL area in 1998, my daughters stayed behind (at my request) in their more suburban and better-financed school districts. They eventually came home and both graduated from the little rural h.s. in our area. Two bond issues failed there, by less than a dozen votes, in our sojourn there. Both of my daughters took college-credit courses and graduated with honors, and won scholarships. Most of their friends did not fare so well.

 

[gemini104104]

(Reuters) - President-elect Joe Biden is set to name Connecticut’s Commissioner of Education Miguel Cardona as his pick for U.S. Secretary of Education, according to a transition team source.

Cardona, a veteran teacher and school administrator, would be another Latino addition to Biden’s Cabinet.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-secretary-of-education-source-idUSKBN28W1T4

Well the fake so-called President tRump illegitimately picked and pardoned over 30 enemies of the State, humanity and civilization. And? Obviously the first legitimately elected POTUS in over four years, Biden has the type of dream team that should make America and civilization great again, which is why tRump's sewer and toilet trash creatures are on here speaking like the hell bound critters and worthless parasites that they are.

 

[TOP]

UPAWS is waiting...they can surely use the money, especially this time of year

 

[TOP]

For starters:

Because the liberal districts are willing to pay for supplemental levies, they are able to build, update and maintain their facilities to a greater degree. Because the liberal districts are willing, those schools tend to have greater extracurricular participation. Because they place greater value on education, the liberal districts tend to have higher academic standards and scores. Because of that value on education, those districts attract better teachers.

Can you give me an example of a "liberal" district" in Iowa? A conservative one? I live in one of the top school districts in Ohio...I taught in the largest district in Ohio.... they're not "liberal" or "conservative".... They are suburban/urban.....Is there a difference? Yes....But it's not political...lol
Can you guess what the biggest difference is?

 

[Hawkeye10]

Can you give me an example of a "liberal" district" in Iowa? A conservative one? I live in one of the top school districts in Ohio...I taught in the largest district in Ohio.... they're not "liberal" or "conservative".... They are suburban/urban.....Is there a difference? Yes....But it's not political...lol
Can you guess what the biggest difference is?

OMG....I admire your optimism!

 

[TOP]

If that's really the case why do so many heavily Democratic urban areas have such poor schools and poor results? Why do some many parents in big urban areas either send their kids to private schools, move to the suburbs or if they do send their kids to public schools it's the ones with merit based application?

At the end of the day we know many/most parents are going to put their kids in the place where they feel they can get the best education possible, whether that's a private or public school. But if we're arguing from a political perspective and who values education, actions speak louder than words and a number of people who claim they support public education don't want to send their kids to a public school. And let's be real, if you really want to improve public education have all these well to do families put their kids in public schools and get involved like they do in their private schools (and I don't mean just wealthy suburbs, I mean the ethnically and economically diverse areas).

Excellent post

 

[TOP]

OMG....I admire your optimism!

We never give up on wanting what's best for the kids...even when we retire.... And I am a retired teacher....You can bet on that...if ever offered the opportunity

 

[Hawkeye10]

We never give up on wanting what's best for the kids...even when we retire.... And I am a retired teacher....You can bet on that...if ever offered the opportunity

The number of people who decided in the 80's that the Boomers refusing to pay our bills was AOK argues otherwise you understand.

 

[cawacko]

Of course, you’re referring to urban inner city schools. Apples and oranges to what I’m referring to.

In this state, other than perhaps the reservations, we have no significant pockets of such staggering poverty. This state is quite homogeneous. So, the demographic differences I refer to are more political in nature. Not racial or ethnic. If anything, rural vs suburban. Rural, meaning conservative. Suburban, meaning more liberal. This is Idaho, not Massachusetts. Liberal here is a far cry from that version.

I watch the bond levies all over the state. The ones in rural and conservative areas fail much more frequently than those in the less conservative areas. The academic performance of the few (more) liberal areas always exceeds that of their conservative counterparts.

For reasons I mentioned before, the difference is obvious and consistent and has been so since before I attended school here.

You're right, I'm not familiar with Idaho so I'll defer to you on that. Having lived much of my life in a liberal stronghold I've gotten to see firsthand what that has meant for educational outcomes around me.

All things being equal I'd always rather have more money for schools. New books, newer facilities, new fields etc. are better than old and outdated. But I think at a certain point we put too much emphasis on money and this idea that spending more money is how we show we care. And the reason I believe that is its implying that the status quo of how we deliver education is fine, it just simply needs more money. And I don't agree with that.

I was listening to podcast today on education with a more free market host interviewing a socialist/marxist author about his book on education so the topic is on my brain. It was interesting to hear various areas where these two who are pretty much on the opposite spectrum agree in regards to issues/challenges with our system.

 

[domer76]

You're right, I'm not familiar with Idaho so I'll defer to you on that. Having lived much of my life in a liberal stronghold I've gotten to see firsthand what that has meant for educational outcomes around me.

All things being equal I'd always rather have more money for schools. New books, newer facilities, new fields etc. are better than old and outdated. But I think at a certain point we put too much emphasis on money and this idea that spending more money is how we show we care. And the reason I believe that is its implying that the status quo of how we deliver education is fine, it just simply needs more money. And I don't agree with that.

I was listening to podcast today on education with a more free market host interviewing a socialist/marxist author about his book on education so the topic is on my brain. It was interesting to hear various areas where these two who are pretty much on the opposite spectrum agree in regards to issues/challenges with our system.

I don't know what a free market person nor a socialist/marxist would have to say, but I do know a few things.

Basic education (K-12) should never be a for-profit enterprise. The profit comes with an educated society. I also know that something is awry when teachers, at their salaries, need to purchase basic supplies for their students. Before my son ever even considered education as his career, I volunteered in his schools. His grade school had a quota on the number of photocopies each teacher could make. Really, I thought! A limit on photocopies? What kind of organization limits something as basic as that?

Schools these days, despite what right wingers claim, are not training grounds for left wing extremists. Unfortunately, in public education, they have to balance the needs of all. That's the way it is. One gets out of education what they put into it. But basic needs such as adequate facilities, adequate teachers, adequate supplies, equal access, etc. are almost like the bottom tier of Maslow's pyramid.

Too many teachers are expected to be surrogate, or in some cases, primary parents to too many kids. And, to be honest, that's probably where education truly fails. At home.

 

[BidenPresident]

I don't know what a free market person nor a socialist/marxist would have to say, but I do know a few things.

Basic education (K-12) should never be a for-profit enterprise. The profit comes with an educated society. I also know that something is awry when teachers, at their salaries, need to purchase basic supplies for their students. Before my son ever even considered education as his career, I volunteered in his schools. His grade school had a quota on the number of photocopies each teacher could make. Really, I thought! A limit on photocopies? What kind of organization limits something as basic as that?

Schools these days, despite what right wingers claim, are not training grounds for left wing extremists. Unfortunately, in public education, they have to balance the needs of all. That's the way it is. One gets out of education what they put into it. But basic needs such as adequate facilities, adequate teachers, adequate supplies, equal access, etc. are almost like the bottom tier of Maslow's pyramid.

Too many teachers are expected to be surrogate, or in some cases, primary parents to too many kids. And, to be honest, that's probably where education truly fails. At home.

Well said. Agree with everything you said.

The very idea of school choice already subverts the concept of public education.