I was particularly disappointed by the lack of conversation around academics and literacy. These are the foundations that pre-k, elementary, and even middle schools must lay so that we PREVENT the dropout crisis. Kids have to be able to read in order for teachers to invest them in topics of their interest which will keep them in school and inspire them to graduate.

Both the panel and the comments were underimpressive…

http://blogs.kqed.org/americangraduate/2012/03/12/watch-live-kqed-teacher-town-hall/

The educrats want to operate concentration camps with barbed wire where they are granted the power to intern people and hold them prisoner under whatever conditions they please to have.

Too Bad, So Sad. People vote with their feet.

In every single school I attended – my family attended – we were there because we were proud to be there and to be accepted. And that worked both ways – the schools knew there were worse students waiting to get in. If we decided to move elsewhere they’d have to see what was available to replace us and collect the tuition from (the church schools). It was a mutually satisfactory arrangement. I went to real schools.

So if OUSD and the other urban schools cause their students to flee that is no crisis in my book. Cut their funding, fire their staff and reduce the urban schools further.

And another thing – if the chillun do not want the education the school is selling, that’s not a crisis either. You don’t need an “education” to be a welfare mother or a prison inmate – or to be dead at 28.

If society wants to run a welfare state, don’t come crying to me that (some of) the chillun don’t see a need to attend classes.

It is never a crisis when things occur that were engendered by the complainers.

Brave New World.

She claims declining enrollment (which teachers say is because of lack of promotion, since E-ville relies on out-of-district transfers) and budget crisis is responsible. Others say her m.o. (and basis of her master’s thesis) is to RIF and non-re-elect as many teachers as she can so she can rebuild financially with cheap beginners. She did this at Castlemont a bit back, and we can all see how well that has gone (viz., previous thread).

It is relatively straightforward to teach large classes of middle-class kids who have support at home. The higher the student ratio, of course, the harder it is, but ultimately you can give assignments and expect them to have them completed, and attendance is on the parents, not you.

At a school for the children of the working poor and the unemployed, students need parenting, psychological intervention, significant discipline, truancy interventions, and consistent relationships with firm yet caring adults OR THEY WILL QUIT because so many of them see no future.

A first step toward this is a significant rerouting of state education monies to the schools with the poor children. It is not enough to get some added federal monies — if you want to stop the drop-out rate, you have to acknowledge it is significantly more expensive to effectively teach those not receiving support at home.