You best take a look at the liberal bastion of California, they rank in the lowest in the nation on education. The government throwing money at most things is stupid.

__________________
Cheney is the second executive officer to shoot someone in the face and chest. Clinton was the first.

I bet you'd find a more accurate assessment of what works and what doesn't by comparing localities.
I live in Michigan. Go to Detroit schools... don't expect much.
But some of the schools in parts of rich Oakland County: great schools! All the kids go to college, many to Ivy League schools.
(I went to a mediocre school in the lame part of Oakland County... beats Detroit... but no equivalent to Troy or Birmingham- most of our grads went to tech schools, I went to a mediocre local university)

The problem with all this government v. nongovernment crap is that it overlooks how much of school depends on the environment of the school and the education/educational values/educational resources of the people who live there.

And when it comes down to it, our schools are not bad for what they teach to the best students in the areas with good schools. Those kids are doing great.
The problem is in areas that are poorer, more blue collar, and especially inner city.
They're lacking.
Privatization will not automatically solve that problem.

But on the other hand, neither will more money (at least not that alone).

Voucher programs are found to work best when they are targeted specifically at the populations in need... Oh, I'm sure that'll go over well.

What seems to work better is charter schools. Sort of a compromise. They add competition without sending the system out into chaos. That's what is necessary to improve things for the kids who are behind.
The kids who are ahead are doing fine and will continue to do so.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

Do you think teachers being held accountable for the grades of the students, and paying more to teachers who are teaching in these difficult areas could help to increase the quality of these childrens education?

I know money and incentive won't work to fix the problem 100%, but it might be a good first step towards trying to turn around the slump in public education in urban areas. Sadly the people in these areas are products of their environment and education just isn't something that is valued by many who live in these areas.

__________________

I was referring to the blanket statement of the OP, and my point is, you can't throw money at a problem and fix it, whether it's the US or California.

And yes Charters seem to work much better. My son is a high school English teacher, and he advocates using a system more in line with some European countries, where the child is tested and guided throughout their school years in the areas they are strongest in. Not everyone is geared for college.

__________________
Cheney is the second executive officer to shoot someone in the face and chest. Clinton was the first.

Teachers in NJ are held accountable for the grades of the students...up to a point. If the majority of students from a nontenured teacher are failing classes and state exams consistently over a couple of years, that teacher is not likely to get tenure. Even tenured teachers are not fully protected. They can still be fired, but unlike nontenured teachers, the school has to prove its case, but even if that is not feasible, many tenured teachers are taken out of the classroom if they can't succeed. They often get into administration and counseling. If they realy are just awful, schools have the option of transfering them to the very worst that the district has to offer, in the hope of getting them to quit.

About private school versus public schools, even the very worst teachers can be successful with a roomful of highly motivated students, and even the best teachers can fail in roomful of disinterested gang members. Which do you think makes up the majority of private school students? Highly motivated kids or disinterested gang members? Do you think a private school would accept gang members, or keep them enrolled if they were bringing down the success rate of the school?

__________________
LET ME SEE YOUR WAR FACE!!!

I agree with this, especially in urban areas, where academic failure has been linked to gang enrollment.

__________________
LET ME SEE YOUR WAR FACE!!!

So if the problem is a lack of interest in education in urban areas, and paying the teachers in these school more makes no difference, what can be done?

Privatization sounds great and I used to be all for it, but I don't see how that is going to address this issue, most of the people that are not doing well would either be kicked out or not allowed in from the get start. I'm at a loss. How can you teach people who do not want to learn?

__________________

lol
"From each according to his ability...."

...to each according to their need.

Communist Manifesto?

__________________

That's just socialism in general. Pretty much you do whatever you "want" to do and you get whatever you "need." There's a reason why it doesn't work, I just put it down somewhere, and now I just can't find it. Hmmm...

__________________