The "Hopeless" Millenials

[doc75]

A good part of this is also kids caving to what their PARENTS want, versus what THEY want.

Mom/dad want to boast about their son/daughter the 'lawyer/doctor/accountant'; when the kid really doesn't have a chance, or the network support - and just wants to be a tradesperson. Over-dependency, & fear of kids moving out & the resultant 'empty nest', producing gilded cages.

 

I teach a lot of would-be engineers/accountants/doctors. Many don't have a chance (very weak background skills + lack of effort) ,and in many cases parental pressure has certainly led to them being in such "professional" programs of study. But in my experience very few of these marginal students "just want to be a tradesperson".  They almost uniformly don't know what they want.  All that's clear is that it's a huge waste for them to be paying tuition at this particular point in their lives, for university and likely also for tradeschool.  With engineering, the bubble bursts early for the weakest students, since they flunk out of the early prerequisite courses. But they typically then switch into other programs where they have even less interest, and eventually leave school without a degree -- a true "good money after bad" situation.

 

Just my anecdotal observations.  I've tried to get some hard data on various student success metrics and found that the universities are very reluctant to share these numbers -- even with their employees.

 

At every level of the education system, along with all the waste that is so commonly bemoaned,  there are a lot of smart people who are honestly trying to make things better,  often working tirelessly to do so.  But there are so many vicious cycles operating throughout the system that it's really a Sisyphean battle. 

[DTEJD1997]

SD:

 

You are right on many points, but let me add a few:

 

A).  The education industrial complex is TOTALLY out of control in America.  It is gobbling up a SHOCKING amount of resources and large parts of it are producing NOTHING worth anything.

 

B). In order to continue to gobble up society's resources, the education industrial complex has engaged in wide scale deception.  A good example of this is all the lawsuits brought against law skools for lying about the results of their graduates.  If the truth was widely known, over 1/2 of USA law skools would shut down.

 

C). Another example of the gobbling up of scarce resources is the public skool system in Detroit.  They take in a shocking amount of $$$ per student, and it is simply a failure factory.  It is a disgrace what has been going on, and what is going on.  "A National Disgrace" is the title to Dan Rather's report on the DPS. 

 

Please see:

 

 

So yeah, millenials and their parents can take some of the blame...but don't forget about the teachers, administrators and the education industrial complex...they have a lot to answer for.

Yea, but you guys put Betsy DeVos in charge of Education right? And whatever measures Obama put in place to restrict downright fraudulent practices by for profit "universities" were quickly reversed by the Trump administration right? If you don't want to help yourselves then so be it. But then don't cry about it.

 

How is fraud a "right wing" or "left wing" idea/policy?  Trump has done some very questionable things regarding "education" for sure...but so have the Clintons.  The amount of money the Clintons got from "for profit" education make Trump look like an amateur...

 

Of course, most of the "educators" are liberal/left wing.  They will rail against "the man", but the funny thing is that they are "the man"!  They have set up most colleges like a feudal or plantation system.  I am talking about the tenured/adjunct professor situation.  A lot of adjuncts make LESS than minimum wage.  Compare the amount of work they do and what they get paid compared to tenured profs...

 

OR look at the primary education system.  Most of those teachers belong to unions.  The unions DO NOT have the needs of the students in consideration.

 

Most people, when they learn of what is going on with education find it shocking, does not matter if they are right wing or left wing in their political views.

 

 

[rb]

Yea, but you guys put Betsy DeVos in charge of Education right? And whatever measures Obama put in place to restrict downright fraudulent practices by for profit "universities" were quickly reversed by the Trump administration right? If you don't want to help yourselves then so be it. But then don't cry about it.

 

How is fraud a "right wing" or "left wing" idea/policy?  Trump has done some very questionable things regarding "education" for sure...but so have the Clintons.  The amount of money the Clintons got from "for profit" education make Trump look like an amateur...

 

Of course, most of the "educators" are liberal/left wing.  They will rail against "the man", but the funny thing is that they are "the man"!  They have set up most colleges like a feudal or plantation system.  I am talking about the tenured/adjunct professor situation.  A lot of adjuncts make LESS than minimum wage.  Compare the amount of work they do and what they get paid compared to tenured profs...

 

OR look at the primary education system.  Most of those teachers belong to unions.  The unions DO NOT have the needs of the students in consideration.

 

Most people, when they learn of what is going on with education find it shocking, does not matter if they are right wing or left wing in their political views.

I'm not saying it's a left wing/right wing. It is the current administration and when you're in power you own the problem. But they've been atrocious on education. Why would they roll back the protections on fraud? Maybe because they're bad people. But that still misses the point. The bigger point is why did they think they could do it and get away with it (they were right btw)? It's because the people don't care. If the people don't care why should they expect anyone else to care for them?

 

On a separate point since you brought it up. Of course the professors unions don't care about the students. They are paid by the professors to care about the professors. That is their job. If they want a union to look after their interests the students should start their own.

[doc75]

Of course, most of the "educators" are liberal/left wing.  They will rail against "the man", but the funny thing is that they are "the man"!  They have set up most colleges like a feudal or plantation system.  I am talking about the tenured/adjunct professor situation.  A lot of adjuncts make LESS than minimum wage.  Compare the amount of work they do and what they get paid compared to tenured profs...

 

Who?  Who set up the colleges like a feudal system??  And why is it like a feudal system?

 

With respect, I think you're misrepresenting the adjunct situation.  It's a shitty career, no doubt -- but it's also not really intended to be a career.  Adjunct faculty are usually either (1) young people who are trying to find their place in academia (i.e. in a holding pattern, waiting for a full time position to open), or (2) working professionals or retirees who enjoy the teaching and a little extra cash.  The biggest problem is that too many people get stuck in case (1).  A secondary problem is that many well-meaning adjuncts put far more time into the job than is reasonably expected (although the opposite is also true sometimes!).  Teaching can take up an arbitrary amount of time if you let it.

 

 

[rkbabang]

Yea, but you guys put Betsy DeVos in charge of Education right? And whatever measures Obama put in place to restrict downright fraudulent practices by for profit "universities" were quickly reversed by the Trump administration right? If you don't want to help yourselves then so be it. But then don't cry about it.

 

How is fraud a "right wing" or "left wing" idea/policy?  Trump has done some very questionable things regarding "education" for sure...but so have the Clintons.  The amount of money the Clintons got from "for profit" education make Trump look like an amateur...

 

Of course, most of the "educators" are liberal/left wing.  They will rail against "the man", but the funny thing is that they are "the man"!  They have set up most colleges like a feudal or plantation system.  I am talking about the tenured/adjunct professor situation.  A lot of adjuncts make LESS than minimum wage.  Compare the amount of work they do and what they get paid compared to tenured profs...

 

OR look at the primary education system.  Most of those teachers belong to unions.  The unions DO NOT have the needs of the students in consideration.

 

Most people, when they learn of what is going on with education find it shocking, does not matter if they are right wing or left wing in their political views.

I'm not saying it's a left wing/right wing. It is the current administration and when you're in power you own the problem. But they've been atrocious on education. Why would they roll back the protections on fraud? Maybe because they're bad people. But that still misses the point. The bigger point is why did they think they could do it and get away with it (they were right btw)? It's because the people don't care. If the people don't care why should they expect anyone else to care for them?

 

On a separate point since you brought it up. Of course the professors unions don't care about the students. They are paid by the professors to care about the professors. That is their job. If they want a union to look after their interests the students should start their own.

 

Sorry rb, but everything that is wrong with the education system has been that way for a very long time.  Trump has yet to make a difference for the good or the bad.  Your Trump Derangement Syndrome is showing again.

 

[SharperDingaan]

Universities perform 3 jobs

(1) produce PhD's that get Nobel prizes (2) produce PhD's to teach the masses, and (3) actually teach the masses 'higher education'.

The 'masses' thing is only because you & I as taxpayers fund them - and it's the price of our lagresse.

 

As in business, universities specialize in either 'research', or 'teaching'.

Each division also specializes - 'teaching' can be (1) Internships (docs, surgeons), (2) Apprenticeships (tool & die, mold makers), (3) Documentary making (Doctor 'X' presents) (4) Skills retraining (continuing studies), (5) Grad/Undergrad, and even (6) Social Services skills training. Done under either a private/public umbrella.

 

As in business, conflict is also part of the territory in each division/specialization.

Research looks down upon teaching, research PhD's look down on research DBA's. Those training surgeons/doc's look down on the tool/die makers, who look down on continuing studies, who look down on the grad/undergrad, etc. Often the person teaching you 1st year 'business' in day-school, is little more than a freshly minted grad with minimal business experience, and no professional designations. The blind leading the blind.

 

Most folks have no idea what they want to do upon entering university. For most, 1st year is all about the 'leaving home' experience, and working the system to raise GPA; decisions are not actually made until mid-way through 2nd year - after 4-5 semesters of costs on borrowed money. Those doing what mom/dad want, appear 'advantaged' because they seem to 'know' what they want versus their peers; when they are actually DISADVANTAGED - often going on to complete an undergrad they have no interest in. Where's the harm? mom/dad are paying, and I can 'fix' it by doing a Masters later. Hard to argue that some of these debt levels are not deservedly 'earned'

 

A school can't scalp, unless thousands are willing to pay up; the basic defence against scalping is to research the place you are thinking of attending. Consumer protection against predatory behavipur only requires that a business disclose relevant facts; if the punter chooses not to read the disclosure - its buyer beware.

 

Agreed there's a growing problem in education.

But it would seem to be primarily families inability to make decisions, and a lack of due diligence. The smartest thing a great many NA kids could do for themselves - is to simply sign up for a voluntary draft, and come back to university 2yrs later, a lot maturer and with a GI bill to offset some of the cost. Sadly, way 'too radical' for NA tastes,

 

SD

 

 

 

[DTEJD1997]

Universities perform 3 jobs

(1) produce PhD's that get Nobel prizes (2) produce PhD's to teach the masses, and (3) actually teach the masses 'higher education'.

The 'masses' thing is only because you & I as taxpayers fund them - and it's the price of our lagresse.

A school can't scalp, unless thousands are willing to pay up; the basic defence against scalping is to research the place you are thinking of attending. Consumer protection against predatory behavipur only requires that a business disclose relevant facts; if the punter chooses not to read the disclosure - its buyer beware.

 

Agreed there's a growing problem in education.

But it would seem to be primarily families inability to make decisions, and a lack of due diligence. The smartest thing a great many NA kids could do for themselves - is to simply sign up for a voluntary draft, and come back to university 2yrs later, a lot maturer and with a GI bill to offset some of the cost. Sadly, way 'too radical' for NA tastes,

 

SD

 

SD:

 

As you say, there needs to be "consumer disclosure"...and I agree 100%, but there is no consumer protection in USA in regards to schools.  This has been litigated in the lawsuit against Cooley Law School.  It is strictly "caveat emptor".  The courts have also found that students/purchasers of education are also "sophisticated purchasers" and it is a commercial transaction, thus not subject to "consumer protections".

 

It is not just law schools that are publishing false/misleading figures.

 

There are swarms of liberal artists (and others) who simply can NOT find employment in the field in which they studied. 

 

If the schools told the truth about the outcome for their students...a lot of them would shut down as enrollment would collapse.

 

That is the problem...the schools have a vested interest to keep the seats full, and they will dissemble to keep the gravy train going.

[doc75]

Universities perform 3 jobs  (1) produce PhD's that get Nobel prizes (2) produce PhD's to teach the masses, and (3) actually teach the masses 'higher education'.

The 'masses' thing is only because you & I as taxpayers fund them - and it's the price of our lagresse.

 

There's a pretty big group of highly functional people with PhDs  who neither have a Nobel prize nor "teach the masses". 

 

Research looks down upon teaching, research PhD's look down on research DBA's.

 

You're stating your opinion as fact.  In my experience, what's written above is almost entirely a myth.

 

[SharperDingaan]

Granted, it should be (4) jobs. The large group of folks in think tanks/research facilities accross the land was missed.

 

Opinion/fact depends on experience.

Agreed academia is a collegial environment, with the goal of advancing knowledge to the benefit of all. But it often doesn't work that way when it comes to commercialization of that research; especially in agriculture. The person granted the patent, typically ends up a lot poorer than the person commercializing it - which tends to breed resentment. Ultimately both may be millionaires & it shouldn't matter, but it seems to seldom work out that way.

 

SD

 

[doc75]

Granted, it should be (4) jobs. The large group of folks in think tanks/research facilities accross the land was missed.

 

Opinion/fact depends on experience.

Agreed academia is a collegial environment, with the goal of advancing knowledge to the benefit of all. But it often doesn't work that way when it comes to commercialization of that research; especially in agriculture. The person granted the patent, typically ends up a lot poorer than the person commercializing it - which tends to breed resentment. Ultmately both may be millionaires & it shouldn't matter, but it seems to seldom work out that way.

 

SD

 

Opinion depend on experience.  Facts tend to be rather more rigid.  In any case:  How is what you've written above linked to your assertion that "research looks down on teaching"?

 

I don't know anything about the commercialization of academic research first hand, or the rewards/perils thereof.  A good friend of mine started a biotech firm. He was very successful himself, but once he was travelling in those circles he was horrified to learn how technology developed through public research funding and charitable donations can be turned over to private enterprise, effectively wiping out the initial "investors".  He also had many stories of big firms buying up competitive tech and then sitting on it so they can sell more of their less-efficient MRI machines etc.

 

 

[Jurgis]

There is some truth to what SharperDingaan says. There is tension/dichotomy with teaching and research (at least with time allocation - definitely). There hasn't been a great working solution proposed for that though.

 

And, overall it's a spectrum/matrix. Great researchers may be great teachers or very crappy teachers. Crappy researchers may be great teachers or very crappy teachers...

 

Been there, seen/done that, somewhat.

[rb]

As you say, there needs to be "consumer disclosure"...and I agree 100%, but there is no consumer protection in USA in regards to schools.  This has been litigated in the lawsuit against Cooley Law School.  It is strictly "caveat emptor".  The courts have also found that students/purchasers of education are also "sophisticated purchasers" and it is a commercial transaction, thus not subject to "consumer protections".

 

It is not just law schools that are publishing false/misleading figures.

 

There are swarms of liberal artists (and others) who simply can NOT find employment in the field in which they studied. 

 

If the schools told the truth about the outcome for their students...a lot of them would shut down as enrollment would collapse.

 

That is the problem...the schools have a vested interest to keep the seats full, and they will dissemble to keep the gravy train going.

Well under Obama the Department of Education put up a set of regulations called the Gainful Employment Regulations. That would require for profit schools to do pretty much everything that's on your wish list with respect to schools. Trump/DeVos first delayed the implementation then watered down that regulation to the point that it's meaningless.

 

But apparently me knowing or pointing that out just points to my Trump Derangement Syndrome.

[DTEJD1997]

As you say, there needs to be "consumer disclosure"...and I agree 100%, but there is no consumer protection in USA in regards to schools.  This has been litigated in the lawsuit against Cooley Law School.  It is strictly "caveat emptor".  The courts have also found that students/purchasers of education are also "sophisticated purchasers" and it is a commercial transaction, thus not subject to "consumer protections".

 

It is not just law schools that are publishing false/misleading figures.

 

There are swarms of liberal artists (and others) who simply can NOT find employment in the field in which they studied. 

 

If the schools told the truth about the outcome for their students...a lot of them would shut down as enrollment would collapse.

 

That is the problem...the schools have a vested interest to keep the seats full, and they will dissemble to keep the gravy train going.

Well under Obama the Department of Education put up a set of regulations called the Gainful Employment Regulations. That would require for profit schools to do pretty much everything that's on your wish list with respect to schools. Trump/DeVos first delayed the implementation then watered down that regulation to the point that it's meaningless.

 

But apparently me knowing or pointing that out just points to my Trump Derangement Syndrome.

I will grant that Obama STARTED to make some "good" moves in the reigning in/regulation of education....The "gainful employment" rules need to be applied to "non-profit" skools also.

 

Just because a skool is "non-profit" does not mean it can't be a failure factory like the "for-profits".  "Profit" is also kind of misnomer...there are plenty of people at "non-profits" making a lot of profit!

 

I'll say it again...the reigning in and regulation of educators should not be a "right or left" thing...it should be what it is right and what is needed by society.

 

Finally, one of the HUGE problems with regulation is that the problems of the educational industrial complex are not well known/understood by the population at large.  Most people think we don't spend ENOUGH on education! hahaha

 

 

[Cigarbutt]

"I'll say it again...the reigning in and regulation of educators should not be a "right or left" thing...it should be what it is right and what is needed by society.

 

Finally, one of the HUGE problems with regulation is that the problems of the educational industrial complex are not well known/understood by the population at large.  Most people think we don't spend ENOUGH on education! hahaha"

 

1+

 

More money is not the solution to all problems.

It seems that the positive aspects of sensible cost cutting and restructuring have been forgotten in many public circles.

 

[SharperDingaan]

"! don't know anything about the commercialization of academic research first hand, or the rewards/perils thereof.  A good friend of mine started a biotech firm. He was very successful himself, but once he was travelling in those circles he was horrified to learn how technology developed through public research funding and charitable donations can be turned over to private enterprise, effectively wiping out the initial "investors".  He also had many stories of big firms buying up competitive tech and then sitting on it so they can sell more of their less-efficient MRI machines etc."

 

Public research is routinely turned over (for a royalty) because private enterprize is a lot better at commercializing it. The cure for cancer is useless as just an academic paper, but extremely useful if it can be delivered as just a weekly/monthly pill (commecialization). While the royalty may be $1/pill, the profit/pill may be $10+ which tends to feed resentment.

 

Squashing technology is disagreeable to many, but is routine & simply good business practice.

The Edison Trust strangling the supply of film during the early years of film (20's). The Standard Oil trust strangling the electric motor in favour of the IC engine - to create a market for 'mineral oil' are classic examples. This fundamental difference in approach, tends to be amplified by the typical personality differences between camps. 

 

Nothing wrong in this - it simply recognizes that it takes 'all sorts' to turn research into practice, and that they each bring their own value propositon. Whether 1st class passenger, or coal stoker - they both need each other if their collective ship is to go anywhere.

 

Research/teaching snobbery.

The average comp for a researcher (across all levels) is 'X'. The average comp for teaching (accross all levels including TA's & sessionals) is 'Y'. Numbers will vary with geographic location - but in most cases X will be bigger than Y, and the numbers will be perceived as 'proxy's' as to the 'societal value' of the occupation. The same thing occurs when 'professions' are compared to 'trades' ; parents even try to steer their kids away from the trades to professions - simply because the professions are deemed to be 'higher status' (re their higher 'average earning'' power).

 

Of course average is just that - there will be outliers in both research and teaching that screw it up  ;)

 

SD

 

 

 

 

[DTEJD1997]

"I'll say it again...the reigning in and regulation of educators should not be a "right or left" thing...it should be what it is right and what is needed by society.

 

Finally, one of the HUGE problems with regulation is that the problems of the educational industrial complex are not well known/understood by the population at large.  Most people think we don't spend ENOUGH on education! hahaha"

 

1+

 

More money is not the solution to all problems.

It seems that the positive aspects of sensible cost cutting and restructuring have been forgotten in many public circles.

 

Here in Detroit, the Detroit Public Schools (DPS) is constantly agitating for more & more money.

 

I did a little digging and found out a shocking fact...

 

DPS spends MORE per student than the Grosse Pointe School system. 

 

The Grosse Pointe School district is relatively wealthy, and amongst the best in the state.  Student outcomes are excellent by any measure. 

 

Contrast that to Detroit.  The results for students in Detroit are simply SHOCKINGLY bad.  So bad that Dan Rather did a documentary on it called "A National Disgrace".

 

 

I would suggest that it is well worth the 90 minutes to watch this documentary.  As comprehensive and as well done this documentary is, it only scratches the surface.

 

Outcomes in Detroit are terrible by ANY measure that you would wish to make.

 

Of course, the typical Detroit student has more challenges in front of them as compared to the typical Grosse Pointer...but the simple fact is that more money does NOT equal better outcomes.

[Cigarbutt]

"I would suggest that it is well worth the 90 minutes to watch this documentary.  As comprehensive and as well done this documentary is, it only scratches the surface."

 

I did watch the report when you suggested it the other day. Apparently one of the worse scenarios but still, quite typical of many neighborhoods, it seems.

 

Education is important (for all).

 

I don't know the answers but, when reading the link below about Chicago this morning, I wondered if the school problem is simply about the level of funds that a particular district receives versus another.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/03/chicago-segregation-poverty/556649/

 

In many big cities, there has been a noticeable "divide" that seems to be growing.

Conundrum: better schools will tend to become better and worse schools will tend to become worse.

 

"In the American economy today, there’s no guarantee that improved conditions benefit everyone."

Probably worth thinking about but it may take more than just goodwill.

 

[rukawa]

Schools performance is mostly a function of expectations and selecting the right student body. High expectations along with students who are willing to learn leads to basically great outcomes.

 

Trying to force equity by keeping students who aren't interested in learning and lowering expectations to accommodate them is what leads to horrendous results.

 

We should have accepted that schools are the wrong environment for a certain percentage of kids. The next question should have been: what do we do with the ones that hate school. I would guess a large proportion of those kids would do extremely well if there was an easy way for them to enter the job market and gain skills while working. And a small proportion of them will not do well no matter what opportunities they are given.

[Cigarbutt]

"Schools performance is mostly a function of expectations and selecting the right student body. High expectations along with students who are willing to learn leads to basically great outcomes.

 

Trying to force equity by keeping students who aren't interested in learning and lowering expectations to accommodate them is what leads to horrendous results."

 

Excellent points.

Would add however the following opinions:

 

-economic mobility helps to "renovate" and maintain the dynamism of society.

-economic mobility has been decreasing in the US.

-school is an ideal time/place to switch tracks.

-need hurdles not barriers.

 

 

 

[rukawa]

"Schools performance is mostly a function of expectations and selecting the right student body. High expectations along with students who are willing to learn leads to basically great outcomes.

 

Trying to force equity by keeping students who aren't interested in learning and lowering expectations to accommodate them is what leads to horrendous results."

 

Excellent points.

Would add however the following opinions:

 

-economic mobility helps to "renovate" and maintain the dynamism of society.

-economic mobility has been decreasing in the US.

-school is an ideal time/place to switch tracks.

-need hurdles not barriers.

 

I think that we really need to start thinking about better options for kids that don't like school other than school itself. My cousin is a Senior partner in Deloitte...he makes >600k. But he was horrible at school. Always a failure. He only succeeded once he got out. His kids are like him...they hate school. School is a great way of achieving equity for most kids but there is a substantial component for whom it just doesn't work. We need a better method  of dealing with these kids. I actually think most of these kids when hugely benefit from entering the job market very early (lets say 13 years old) or being exposed to more entrepreneurial type situations.

 

I have a friend who quit school at 16 and started working as a VC. He is the most knowledgeable person I know. I don't think he finished high school or his undergraduate degree but he was making around 200k when he was 18 years old. School never worked for him.

 

If we had an alternative where kids could apprentice, or network or maybe do a coding competition and attempt to work at a startup I think you would produce far far superior results. I knew a lot of  kids that hated school but where amazing coders.

[LC]

That's pretty anecdotal. I don't think the majority of kids who "hate school" would  be making 3x the median income if they just weren't burdened by geometry class.

 

[SharperDingaan]

In any population of people there will be a portion for whom the hypothesis (go to school) doesn't work - the left hand tail on the normal curve. In wealthy communities that may be 2%, whereas in the ghettos it may be 10%. Same isssue, just different numbers.

 

The solution has always been the 'trades' - except that 'trades' here includes the various 'hustles' of all types. To do well you must become good, it's achieved through dawinism, & it is the same process - on both sides of the law. Hence the phenom of very good detectives often actually knowing their counterparts 'on the other side'. 

 

In my time the trades were bootlegging, cigarettes, and money lending. Everybody knew each other, & the best in each trade were all on the far right hand side of the normal curve. One of us even went to Eton on a scholarship, a career in the City, & did very well. As the saying goes ... 'scum floats to the top'.

 

Of course we only hear the successes, & the 'anecdotes' tend to rhyme.

The failures aren't mentioned.

 

Ultimately it means cutting the apron strings, & letting little Johnny/Suzie find their 'level'.

Darwinism may be upleasant but it works extremely well, & generates a lifetime of skills; that Johnny/Suzie will continue to use as they move through life. A man/woman has to know thier limitations.

 

SD

 

 

[mrholty]

"Schools performance is mostly a function of expectations and selecting the right student body. High expectations along with students who are willing to learn leads to basically great outcomes.

 

Trying to force equity by keeping students who aren't interested in learning and lowering expectations to accommodate them is what leads to horrendous results."

 

Excellent points.

Would add however the following opinions:

 

-economic mobility helps to "renovate" and maintain the dynamism of society.

-economic mobility has been decreasing in the US.

-school is an ideal time/place to switch tracks.

-need hurdles not barriers.

 

This is exactly correct.  I live in a ex-urban middle class district.  We have issues with poverty and parents on drugs but for the most part its a great place to raise a family.  Opportunities exist, etc.  I recently ran for and won a spot on my local school board.  I am hated by the entire administration in 6 months and I've started to develop a reputation outside of my district in nearby towns "as that asshole who wants to cut funding".  I'm exactly the opposite.  I oppose our Advanced AP classes and want those $ and time to flow into bringing the lower up.  The city council and Mayor hate this as while our state allocates funding/student to give all kids in each district an opportunity - if the city kills AP and talented and gifted the parents who care will choose to live in other districts. 

 

One of the reasons we choose this district is the extremely strong emphasis on civics and real world skills (home ec and trades) that were part of the HS.  Our district for the past 20 years had a class of 15 young people who spend 4 hours each morning of their senior year to build a house.  This house since it was built without any labor would be then sold at market rates and would make the district $50k/annually which provided funding for lots of other programs.  Our new Superintedant killed it 2 years ago which is why I ran. 

 

In my district our teacher costs have grown 4.8% annually on average over the past 10 - primarily driven by increased pension and healthcare costs.  But the bigger problem is the huge increase in administrative costs.  We have built entire admin armys. Privately some teachers support me but we'll see what happens. 

 

My stance has gotten the state Republican office to call me up to talk but they realized I was not a good candidate for them as I also support a single payer healthcare and a $15 minimum wage.  I consider all of this to be related.  I enjoy Mike Rowe so the dems don't like me either.