38

In 2013, another proposal to change California’s education funding formula

Next week, when he lays out his 2013-14 budget proposal Gov. Jerry Brown is expected to introduce a new version of an old idea: a simplified funding model for California school districts.

The so-called “weighted student formula” Brown proposed last year and then dropped would have given districts a base amount of money for each student — $5,421, on average (it varies by grade) — and an additional 20 percent for English learners and low-income students. It also would have permanently lifted restrictions on seven more of the state’s special-purpose grants, including economic impact aid and K-3 class size reduction, leaving districts to spend it however they wish. (In 2009, California did the same thing with about 40 such pots of money, including adult education, which has since been dramatically cut back in many districts, including Oakland Unified.)

The Legislative Analyst’s Office suggested some changes, but said it was a “positive first step.”

In a story my colleague Theresa Harrington wrote today, School Services of California CEO Ron Bennett said the proposal’s introduction last year was “an absolute disaster,” with critics saying the new formula would hurt districts with few disadvantaged students.

Of course, we don’t yet know the details of the 2013 proposal, but it’s expected to be conceptually similar. What are your thoughts about it?

 

Katy Murphy

Education reporter for the Oakland Tribune. Contact me at kmurphy@bayareanewsgroup.com.

  • J.R.

    More income redistribution will not help what ails these low performing districts. The CTA says the teachers aren’t to blame for poor results, the root cause of the problem is the home-life of the child, and if that is true then money won’t change much.The government cannot bridge the chasm that fractured and dysfunctional families create( as I have stated before, their parents failed these kids not necessarily society). Borrowing from a wise parable “You can only teach a man to fish if he is willing to learn, he cannot(and will not) be dragged kicking and screaming”.

  • LK

    I would want to keep the class size reduction money for class size reduction. OUSD will never get back to a 20-1 ratio unless forced to. Also, money should be disbursed on students enrolled and attending, not on ADA (average daily attendance). ADA disadvantages title l schools in that attendance is generally poorer in those schools. Monies should follow the students regardless of what time of the year they transfer. This should put an end to the charter school student dump after the 10th day of classes.

  • Doug Appel

    The concept is not in itself unacceptable to me. Some students require more help and resources to be successful. The problem is that the base is now $1000 or so per student below where it was 6 years ago. We have shortchanged a generation. I wouldn’t want to see any weighting formula until we get funding for all students back to where they should be to provide a satisfactory education. Then we can talk about differential funding for students who need more. In addition, the Feds have never fulfilled their funding obligation for Special Education which is a tremendous drain on the resources available for other students.
    Re: Categoricals. If spending on a given educational priority isn’t required, many districts will not offer them. Given “flexibility” during this economic crisis, many districts drastically raised class sizes and dramatically reduced vocational education and adult education programs. Unless some funding requirements are tied to specific programs, those programs will not exist. While I generally favor local control over these decisions, some, like class size reduction, are too important to leave to chance or the whim of local school boards.

  • locally

    Katy,

    I heard that OUSD fails at distributing at least 55% of CA and Federal funds to school sites, which is some sort of minimum percentage.

    Can you confirm? I keep hearing that as student enrollment has gone down, the district office has grown.

    Local

  • Katy Murphy

    That 55 percent figure is the minimum amount that unified school districts in CA are supposed to spend on the salaries and benefits of teachers and instructional aides — and, yes, it has for years fallen below that in OUSD. It does not reflect all spending at schools, however.

    I blogged about this a couple of years ago, and it remains an issue today: http://www.ibabuzz.com/education/2010/05/12/how-much-do-school-districts-in-california-spend-on-teachers/

  • Debora

    What my boys of color need is an additional two hours per day in school. They need to have a place to do their homework with a credentialed teacher to help. The students also need to have the background knowledge taught in an afterschool format. This background knowledge includes vocabulary, photos of items they need to know – for example, reading and annotating the book “Hatchet” we had to spend about 30% of our time building vocabulary – cockpit, co-pilot, altimeter and so on.

    We cannot continue to hire the “non-profits” who have high school graduates to help. It is simply not working. The students must hear academic vocabulary for the full school day PLUS the additional two hours. The grade level teachers must get together and define and share lesson plans. The teachers providing homework help must know how to do the work and write college level essays.

    Finally, we need to make sure that students understand that we know the path to poverty. The path to poverty (95% or better chance at some point in their lifetime) is to have children before completing high school and trade school or college. We need to be clear with students that generations of evidence have found this to be true and we need to compare it to their own lives. This is not about shaming it is providing corollary evidence that we have collected. This is not to say that we do not have institutionalized racism – our society is racist. However, we have generations of people who choose poverty, either through ignorance, lack of thought or hoping they will be the exception. It is not helping our students. Nearly every one of my underperforming students has a parent who gave birth to their first out of wedlock or committed relationship before the age of 18. None of these young parents completed their high school diploma before they were parents. Only half every earned a diploma or GED at all. All of these children have lived in poverty more than half of their lives.

  • livegreen

    I agree in part with JR and the OEA, but I do think some part can b done in school like smaller class sizes and hauling bad parents into school to hold them accountable.

    I also think poorer school districts should get more money to help with the bigger challenges they have.

    That said the consequences of a broken immigration system show: with an open border costs for education and other basic services increase as standards are lowered.

    We need a fair and legal immigration system.

  • http://www.facebook.com/BridgetheChasm Charlie at Bridge the Chasm

    This is the most thoughtful blog I have read to date. This group of reasonable people, with different points of view, could come to consensus about the issues.

    Thanks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/BridgetheChasm Charlie at Bridge the Chasm

    Debora

    It sounds like you have a lot of insight into what’s needed for Reading and Writing to be successfully learned. I’d love to be able to explore the issue with you. My organization http://www.bridgethechasm.org has clear views in math, but would like to understand and discuss what actions we can take to bring about what’s needs to be done in reading and writing.

    You can also email me at charlie@bridgethechasm.org.

    Thanks.

    Katy

    I hope posting to try and connect with fellow bloggers is OK.

    Charlie

  • Debora

    Livegreen: My Hispanic families often have two parents come to conferences. They are willing to leave their students with me afterschool two days per week for math intervention – particularly when I allow younger siblings to come in and do their homework at the same time.

    The students and parents I have the most trouble reaching are African-American parents. I almost NEVER have a father show up to a conference and I have not one African-American intact two parent family.

    I do not see this as an immigration issue. I see this as a birth control and life preparation issue.

  • J.R.

    Debora,
    You are correct, the system enables(and financially encourages) irresponsible people to have children they otherwise might think twice about having. This casual societal attitude about sex, reproduction, and abortion have led to what amounts to child abuse on a massive scale. Yes, it is child abuse if you cannot give your child a decent life without government intervention. As the teachers have said, “kids come to school hungry,tired,stressed, and incapable of learning. Where does the fault lie in this?

  • Nextset

    Debora: What you are describing is “lower class” or “underclass”. To a large degree it is genetic.

    Managing the lower class is the thing. You have it right that getting in their face about how this is largely a voluntary thing – something in them is prompting them to choose this lifestyle (Low IQ, Laziness, Hormones, susceptibility to addictions, whatever). Poverty never causes poverty – poverty is caused by the behavior of large groups of people.

    If the public school teachers want to “save” the chillun – watch out! Even trying to do this means teaching children to turn their backs on their family, friends and culture. Traditionally this has been done and it does work. This shunning practice is a tenant of many religions (other than the black churches which usually serve to keep it’s participants poor – because they are not taught to shun among other things).

    If you want to teach underclass to stop being underclass the first thing is to get them to change their ways and their associations. You must know that is strictly forbidden to teach in public schools where PC is that all cultures are equally valid.

    Since government schools are so frantic in insisting that even gutter culture is valid, they won’t correct speech much less any moral values of it’s students. Such schools certainly wouldn’t want to have it’s sluts called that – or anybody else made “uncomfortable” for keeping it real.

    Basically it seems Debora that you are in an impossible position. As long as you work for OUSD or any similar public school you cannot tell the kiddies that underclass ways are bad/immoral/disgraceful and/or that they need to change and simply put, “act white” or even worse. You just cannot do it at government schools. So although you complain about grammar and want the kiddies to try harder to read and write or whatever, you are bailing out a flooded basement with a thimble. The minute you start to make a difference you’d be stopped by admin.

    You have to understand. If the lower class weren’t happy with what they were they would change. Individual members do and have done so throughout history. Some called it social climbing. Doing it right always means getting out of Dodge (such as joining service – or going away to school) and joining up with higher society even in increments. How can this happen with someone staying in an Oakland ghetto school, then remaining in Oakland living in their natal society?

    If you want to change these kids you need to help them escape their society physically, socially, vocationally as well as teaching them how to read, write, and speak English.

    And it all starts with being open and up front as to what is going on and what your intentions are. Then the student can make that informed choice as to whether they want any part of your grand scheme.

    Most Lower Class people LOVE being lower class.

  • livegreen

    Debora, I believe your anecdotal experience but at our school (although still scoring above average) it’s the Latino boys who are the furthest behind.

    Either way, it is the African American, Latino and poorer families & school districts (largely the same) that will receive more of the proposed CA Education budget. That means the more poor there are, the more money and therefor effort are spent on those with the least education. The standards are lowered.

    That means less money spent on the needs of higher achieving students.

    As I said, I agree that more money should be spent at Districts with higher needs. However adding indefinitely and endlessly to the poorer student population creates havoc on the spending & education for the higher achieving students (be they poor or middle class).

    Besides undermining the funding & education of both poor and middle class, it also undermines their wages and ability to achieve the american dream.

    We need to allow immigration but it needs to be balanced with our ability to afford them services (including education), our ability to afford the middle class services, and our ability to support the poor already here (be they native or foreign born).

    As I said before, we need a fair and legal immigration system.

  • Observer

    “This casual societal attitude about sex, reproduction, and abortion have led to what amounts to child abuse on a massive scale”

    Abortion? Abortion is not encouraged among poor youths. It’s not even discussed. Birth control is barely even touched on. More early pregnancy abortions should be openly encouraged, widely available, de-stigmatized and free. Condom and other contraception use should be rewarded. It’s so very important that this group stops having babies before they are ready. I take a bus that has many east Oakland teens on it. The girls all are having, have had or are planning on having babies. They talk about names, who to have them with, how many years they want between each child, etc. It’s very odd. Go to Target and hang out near the lunch room and you will hear the same. Ask the clerks there how many of them have children. They all do. They do not EVER think of this lifestyle as not an option and no one bothers to tell them it’s not a good idea so paved is that path.

  • J.R.

    Observer,
    My point was that birth control, abortion etc are not the root cause of the problem(they are but side-notes and symptoms of a more debilitating illness(extreme selfishness,lack of self respect, and sense of entitlement , societal norms and attitudes are the problem. People just continue to wonder why all this societal breakdown happens, and refuse to look at the actual root cause of it all. The problem will get worse because those that don’t care(about anything but themselves) are breeding at an astonishing rate as compared to hard working tax paying citizens. The government is trying its best to squeeze every last dime out of productive people, but the system is so unbalanced, it will collapse under its own weight in time.

  • Observer

    I hope you don’t think that upper economic class white teenagers don’t have sex at the same rate as lower economic class African American teenagers, because that is simply not true ( having the unique experience of straddling both worlds, I can assure you — horny teenagers know ae horny teenagers). The difference is the acceptance of having babies young and unprepared, low expectations out of life and poor or no role models compared with, well? Let me put it this way: upper class girls who have parents that are not going to lead them to birth control (or abortion) and insist on abstinence have peers that will lead them to what they need. They know how to deal with not getting pregnant or terminating if need be.

    The difference is the upper class kids do not consider being an uneducated single mom a viable lifestyle while poor kids absolutely see it as a way to get some love, live and survive. Why would they believe differently if that’s all they know? This other life they see in movies or walk by n the streets makes them uncomfortable. They are so isolated in their reality. They cannot relate to what they largely consider the “white world” at all.

  • J.R.

    Observer,
    I know very well that most kids have sex(that is not in question. Here is a segment taken from the link below.
    “According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, sexual activity exists amongst teenagers of all income levels; however, having a baby does not. “Adolescent childbearing is heavily concentrated among poor and low-income teenagers,” the Institute reports”.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/teen-pregnancy-not-just-for-the-lower-class-and-underprivileged

    The social safety net system just makes it easier to not do anything rather than make a better life for your child (even if that is at the very least being a parent helper in school). It all begins with the parents(not the children), and whether they have created a stable home, and are good examples to their children. We have too many irresponsible breeders and not enough responsible parents. The cycle of poverty can be broken, but its far easier to lay in the hammock of welfare section 8 and so on.

  • J.R.

    Poverty and despair are being used as a cop-out in this country when people who are supposedly desperately poor(although not poor when compared to Mexico, India, and Bangladesh)have kids they supposedly(being poor) cannot afford. You either choose(or not) to subject a child to poverty when you become a parent. On an economic note, jobs just do not happen out of thin air nor does the government create them. Businesses create jobs, by selling goods and or services to make a profit. If there is no profit to be made, the business fails and jobs are lost.

  • makeitgoaway

    Debora- teacher to teacher you are right as rain! But think about the undercurrent here. We are saying the more time away from their families and neighborhoods the better. This is the successful,strategy of schools in the Harlem Children’s Zone.

    Of course the poorer schools should get more money. Of course the rich districts should not. Our system is insane. Brown is right again. It takes truly strained logic to argue against this.

  • Juanster

    It has been my general observation that it’s infinitely more “acceptable” for whites to act black than for blacks to ‘act white,’ especially when white teacher job security is on the line. [Tip for White teacher guys: Don't let your pants hang too loose and low or they might fall off, and you'll be arrested for literal indecent exposure!]

  • Nextset

    Makeitgoaway:

    “Of course the poorer schools should get more money.”

    No. We don’t reward failure.

  • makeitgoaway

    No nextset, the poorer schools are “poorer” because they are in communities with populations which require greater resources. (see Debora’s post) That is where smalller class sizes, qualified teachers, pull out sections, and after school programs make the biggest impact. The rich just hire tutors and coaches or the PTA contributes money for the extra computers or band instruments.

    In our district, one school on the well to do side of town auctions off its children’s art to parents to raise thousands of dollars for extras. On the other side of town parents question why they need to pay for their own children’s art.

    I am sure you know that the social darwinism you espouse is a theory associated with many fallacious belief systems.

  • J.R.

    LAUSD and the public schools in D.C. get far more money per child than OUSD, and as a matter of fact OUSD gets much more than nearby districts with comparable demographics and yet those districts outperform OUSD. Is money important, yes it is to a degree. After a certain point its just like flushing money down the toilet.

    http://www.ibabuzz.com/onassignment/2011/09/07/a-closer-look-at-spending-and-test-scores-in-east-bay-schools/#comments

  • Debora

    Make it go Away: I have been thinking about you post. Yes, in theory I am saying that these my students need more time away from their families. However, I have been told by my students that (if there is a man in the house) he plays video games and watches TV. In fact two underperforming students said that the TV was on so loud it woke them up. The adult in each of these households was a man, who is not married to the woman of the house, is not working and is not the father of the children. Both of these students came to school tired and were agitated all day.

    The two hours per day that the students would be at school is not time they would meaningfully spend with parents, grandparents or other adults they care about. This time would be spent watching TV, playing video games and prowling the streets.

    There is so much money at this very moment that is spent with reasonably good intentions – afterschool programs by non-profit organizations that have done business with OUSD forever. We need to make it clear to these organizations the type of programs that we need for our students. Then we need to give them an opportunity to step up to the plate and provide the credentialed teachers or intern teachers who know how to lesson plan with classroom teachers and give them a ratio of 1 to 10 or 15 for two hours per day (this is a lot cheaper than special ed which is where we put many of our boys of color after failed attempts in the classroom).

    If the non-profit organizations working with the district are not able to provide the services we need, we must tell them that they were first given the opportunity and now we will take our business elsewhere. We need to start spending our money in ways that actually improve learning in our boys of color.

    In my class today, of the six boys of color in my original post, one produced a full six hours of work (boy and I agreed), five produced between 1.5 and 2.5 hours of work (boys and I agreed with one-half hour). They were tired, weren’t interested, didn’t want to, got bored, were hungry and didn’t have enough time. Of the six, two came to school with completed homework, one with partially completed homework. All need background knowledge in terms of vocabulary for reading, science and history. Three have not learned addition and subtraction facts nor multiplication and division facts. When I talk to a parent about it most will talk a good game but the students do not come to my twice weekly math intervention sessions, the science club or my weekly writing workshop.

  • Nextset

    makeitgoaway: No amount of romantic fantasy will create a new reality where failures are to be financed.

    You cling to this nonsense mainly because you can do it with other people’s money. That money is moving to Nevada.

    You will run out of other people’s money.

    Your collectivist paradise is steadily heading for Superinflation and the fascism that always follows. Be sure to follow the arguments for the Trillion Dollar Platinum Coin. It’s a variation of the Printing Press runs of larger denomination bills that occur in a Superinflation. So here in 2013 were are now seeing open discussion about “solving” our fiscal (ie spending constraints) problems by doing so. These are historical markers for the things that we know will follow.

    Back to the point, there is no money for any more spending for failing schools full of failing students and that goes double for the very notion of expensive armed guards for such people (like the black schools in Chicago for example). Not going to happen.

    Such things are reserved for high value children, not “poor” children (ie black children). High value children include the children and grandchildren of the Mayor of Chicago, the SF Board of Supervisors, and other such luminaries who are given automatic admission to schools such as Lowell High (without regard to the racial quotas and admission screens everyone else is subject to). That way even their lower IQ kids get to associate with the children of the highest castes who have the money.

    So no matter how much you yell and scream – reality is here and it is in operation.

  • livegreen

    Nextet, nonsense, the money is NOT going to NV. It’s either staying in SF, going to private school in Oakland, or bypassing Oakland all together to go to Lamorinda.

    MIGA, it’s not either highest poverty/highest need schools vs. wealthy schools. As with most things there’s a LOT of grey area in between and these are the middle class schools that get little support from OUSD, and move from Oakland. Moving the tax base with them.

    Yes, higher poverty/higher needs schools and school districts need more money than wealthier districts. But as both the posts from JR and Debora point out (from different perspectives) they need to be doing the right things with the money.

    Some teachers/schools/principals/REXO’s (or whatever they’re called now) are doing the right things. Their programs, teaching and enthusiasm should be rewarded and modeled.

    That is a responsibility of the District, but ALSO of the teachers/schools/principals and REXO’s. Those who aren’t need to get with the program, give our children the services they need first, and then if they aren’t (after a fair process) move on.

  • livegreen

    BTW, to help fund programs like those Debora mentions, besides State money isn’t RBB supposed to be avail more money to higher needs/poorer schools to implement such programs? If they still aren’t able to, why & where’s the money going to?

    What makes the difference between a higher needs/poorer successful school that’s succeeding, and one that’s failing (In OAKLAND)?

    Now that’s a story I’d like to see and insight I’d like to have…

  • Observer

    I’ve been hearing that the money is Cali is moving to Nevada for 30 years. Pah! I go to Nevada several times a year. The schools are deplorable. Maybe not AS deplorable, but they don’t have the private options that California does because there’s not enough wealthy people to support it. The homes values have plummeted, there’s no decent work and the weather and landscape are brutal. Yet California grows and grows. If everyone is leaving in droves, why have rents increased in Oakland a whopping 20% during the worst recession in 80 years? The public education system stats does not accurately tell the story on California’s education system.

  • Nextset

    livegreen: While you may want more money for urban schools, CA as a whole is having problems with the tax base. The baby boomers are taking their life savings and pension streams and leaving for such garden spots as TX, OR, NV, WA and parts elsewhere. There is no reason the extent the trend of white flight out of CA not to grow.

    The boomers I know plan to leave. Many are already selecting destinations and making plans.

    You propose that in a time of shrinking funds you can take more funds for your pet projects – where exactly is that revenue going to come from? Roads? Prisons? Welfare? White Schools?

    CA cannot continue to raise sales taxes, income taxes, phone/utility taxes, etc forever. And just imagine what will happen if the Feds through the AMT or new tax legislation wipe out the ability of CA people with money to deduct all these things for the Federal Income Tax? More reasons to move to OR and NV. The AMT must be adjusted every year in Congress to avoid a fiscal cliff of tax increases.

    And not everybody has to go (skip the state), the unemployable blacks will certainly stay. If you are on welfare you need the better weather. Ditto the Mexicans. Those who are leaving are the Baby Boomer Whites – ie “tax base”.

    Anyway bad schools don’t need any more money, they have too much already. They need jack-booted discipline and the elimination of those “students” who do not produce. If you are not going to learn to read and write you need to be somewhere else, not in a school with those who do.

    The clear plan of the Federal Legislature is to let inflation handle all of it. Just print the money. It’s not like there isn’t historical precedent. individually they plan to be dead or over the border when the big bang occurs. It’s later than they think. Besides, the chaos will occur in the states first as they cannot print money.

    Back to the point. The states are not going to fundamentally refinance urban school budgets. they are too busy covering payroll and making interest payments. Kind of like the Spanish Provincial Governments. If you want more $$ for your district get your Federal Reps to print some money for you. If you’re so special you can get preferential treatment in Congress just for your district. Good luck with that. Best they can do is special capital improvement funds and not operating money.

    We are already using that to install Solar Systems, shifting future utility operating costs to Capital Improvement spending. It’s not enough to do what I think you want to do for the urban schools.

    Brave New World!

  • J.R.

    One thing is for sure, in the not too distant future we will be dealing(once again)with a budget shortfall(mark these words down, prop 30 and other tax scams notwithstanding). Until unnecessary items are actually cut and or drastically reduced in the budget(fed and state level and not just the increases reduced)we will suffer, and our children will bear the increased financial burden for decades to come( if we can even sustain it that long.

  • 1day at a time

    The educational community’s general lack of respect for the people in the city is mind-blowing.

    You’re having too many kids
    Your kids are unteachable.
    You should be having more abortions
    The more time your kids spend away from you, the better they’ll be…

    And by the way, please vote for this bond measure so we can get better salaries even though your kids aren’t learning anything.

    And we only want 20 of your difficult kids in a class at a time or else all bets are off.

    And how dare you listen to some “community organization” that isn’t aligned with our wants/ideas/demands.

    Tired of people saying they want community involvement, but then can’t work with the community unless they come neatly packaged in the way they can understand.

    Even more tired of people assuming that the local citizenry shares their values. The ONLY thing that can be assumed is that the educator and parent both want the child to learn. That’s it.

  • Juanster

    ‘Let inflation handle it’, coz da government won’t!
    http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EW5IdwltaAc?rel=0

  • Nextset

    1day at a time:

    “The ONLY thing that can be assumed is that the educator and parent both want the child to learn.”

    That is a false assumption.

    It’s a feel good assumption. It hurts when you admit it’s not true. Kind of like when Doctors have to realize their patients intend to eat/drink/drug themselves to death – and they need to get out of the way. Or when Lawyers realize their client intends to destroy themselves legally and you cannot/should not get in the way of their “wishes”.

    It hurts, you get used to it, and you deal with it. Because it’s their life not yours.

    If the parent wanted the child to learn they wouldn’t subvert the teachers, reward bad behavior, tell them they don’t need academics, etc. They would send them to real schools, make them study and work on assignments, limit their associates to good students, etc. I’m sure the teachers reading this can add a list of behaviors they see parents happily indulge in to prevent education and educational progress in a child. I hope teachers answer this post with such observations. My experience is limited.

    I can tell you about self destructive legal behavior. And not just committing crimes all day long, they have the right to remain silent, they do not have the ability to remain silent.

    Anyway, lots of people do as they please not what is beneficial for their future health, wealth or prosperity. Those most prone to bad behavior are those referred to as the “lower class” who are present oriented as all get out. They are found in the public schools. Public school teachers have to work with them. And no, they don’t want to learn. They only value information that can be used at once. (read Banfield in sociology…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_C._Banfield)

    That’s not an evil thing, it’s just what they are.

    So no, you cannot assume everybody wants to learn. Quite the opposite.

  • Nextset

    Banfield’s “The Unheavenly City Revisited” which was required reading when I was at UC taking political science is available free online:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/49096486/Edward-C-Banfield-The-Unheavenly-City-Revisited

    I found it the definitive book on the urban underclass and how to manage them. And it’s a fun read! I loved the chapter on “Rioting mainly for fun and profit”.

  • Nextset

    There is also a chapter on “Schooling vs Education” – which expresses my concepts of what we are dealing with in OUSD and LAUSD policy. He is not politically correct so liberals might want to take something before reading this.

  • Juanster

    Hey Nextset, I read ‘The Unheavenly City’ riot analysis totally drug free, a self confirmation of political pedigree – fun and profitable indeed! Hope I don’t end up in an Obama re-education FEMA camp? Maybe I’ll take advantage of Romney church genealogy research to see if any of my Boston ancestors were white rioters. If any of em stole somethin I guess I gotta pay some reparations.

  • Debora

    1 Day at a Time: I am not saying what it appears you have stated I said. I am not saying I do not want a classroom of 32 students. I am not saying that I will not teach my boys of color. I am saying that I have tried, tried and tried more things to reach them and this particular group of six boys is very difficult. They slam desks, dump over chairs to make noise, take approximately 45 minutes of every hour just to keep them on task. And, I am saying that every one of them was born to a mom who never completed high school, neither did her mother.

    We have evidence of how to have heathly, successful students in this community. Students who will not bring guns to school, students who thrive in a learning environment. We do not want to state it if it is not in the Oakland political agenda.

    So, I ask you, is it fair to have nine children, none of whom have access to their fathers, all of whom do not feel as though they get enough attention at home, all who live in poverty and who have never witnessed either parent with a job, career or education and not tell that child how to keep himself out of poverty?

  • J.R.

    Debora,
    This rant is not directed at you(you teachers are caught right in the middle of this mess).It is a sad cycle of sickness that has been perpetuated for decades by so-called progressive politicians, poverty pimps, and the people themselves(each one for their own selfish reasons). To all the progressive liberals out there:How come no one takes pity on the children who were placed in poverty by their own parents? What about the children who are excelling in school and will have jobs and careers(with wage slave pay, never progressing in life)in order to pay for all the social safety net costs of all the people who don’t work? Where is the pity for them?