I guess when the data doesn’t support your agenda, you dismiss the data.
You’d think from Commissioner Schundler’s statement (as quoted from his spokesman), that NJ’s schools really suck:
"The NAEP rankings are irrelevant. We should not take solace in the fact that we score well in a wretched system that fails to adequately teach such a high percentage of children.’’
This is in reference to the latest 4th and 8th grade reading and math results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a testing program of the U.S. Department of Education, in which NJ ranked at the top in the nation (only Massachusetts ranked significantly higher) in all four categories.
In related news, Gov. Christie is recommending legislation that would cap property tax (which are the main source of school funding) increases at 2.5%. Why he’s intruding in local funding issues is beyond me. And how did limiting increases work for California?
"The NAEP rankings are irrelevant. We should not take solace in the fact that we score well in a wretched system that fails to adequately teach such a high percentage of children.’’
Does the NAEP ranking not show the percentage of underperforming (“below basic”) students as well? Seems to me they’re doing quite well in that regard.
"The NAEP rankings are irrelevant. We should not take solace in the fact that we score well in a wretched system that fails to adequately teach such a high percentage of children.’’
Does the NAEP ranking not show the percentage of underperforming (“below basic”) students as well? Seems to me they’re doing quite well in that regard.
Property taxes are high in NJ and in PA in the counties surrounding Philly. They are low in Delaware. Those public schools in Philly and PA score among the top in the nation. Delaware, OTOH, doesn’t do very well. Imagine that.
I’m not sure what the problem is. the NAEP assessment only looks at reading scores, which certainly don’t provide a comprehensive view of the education system. Additionally, should educationadministrators always be striving to do better, regardless of scores? I don’t think there’s anyone in America that would argue that our public education system is a success, so I don’t see a problem with an education administrator saying that we shouldn’t take comfort in scoring well in a broken system. In fact, I would hope that, in order to keep any movement forward, those whose States scored well would be the ones who would need to keep pushing forward, instead of sitting on the laurels.
So what’s the big problem with Schundler’s statement?
This came on the heels of a huge funding cut, so it would be interesting to find out exactly what he meant.
I can only imagine: “Our schools that are the best in the country are not doing well enough, so I’m calling for a funding cut. Once we freeze teacher pay and fire the music and art teachers, then we’ll get on track.”
Of course, maybe this guy is speaking out against the funding cuts. shrug
It would be helpful to know how he measures success and failure. There are excellent public school districts, and there are abysmal school districts within what I would consider an average (relative to other Western PE systems) public education system. Both extremes produce students that achieve varying levels of higher academic and professional success, from Rhodes scholars to dropouts. Saying that success within our system is meaningless is itself a meaningless statement absent clarifying context.
I’m not sure what the problem is. the NAEP assessment only looks at reading scores, which certainly don’t provide a comprehensive view of the education system. Additionally, should educationadministrators always be striving to do better, regardless of scores? I don’t think there’s anyone in America that would argue that our public education system is a success, so I don’t see a problem with an education administrator saying that we shouldn’t take comfort in scoring well in a broken system. In fact, I would hope that, in order to keep any movement forward, those whose States scored well would be the ones who would need to keep pushing forward, instead of sitting on the laurels.
So what’s the big problem with Schundler’s statement?
The NAEP also recently released their 4th and 8th grade math reports, with the same conclusion: NJ ranks at the very top in the nation.
There is nothing wrong with striving to do better. What is going on in NJ is that the new administration is attempting a major overhaul of one of the best-performing educational systems in the country, based on their own political agenda. And according to all studies, the changes they are proposing have not been shown to improve anything. Indeed, like capping property tax increases (shouldn’t the locals have some say in how much they wish to pay for local schools?), some have been shown to downright suck.
This came on the heels of a huge funding cut, so it would be interesting to find out exactly what he meant.
I can only imagine: “Our schools that are the best in the country are not doing well enough, so I’m calling for a funding cut. Once we freeze teacher pay and fire the music and art teachers, then we’ll get on track.”
Of course, maybe this guy is speaking out against the funding cuts. shrug
Since he’s calling for merit pay, and nobody has come up with a meaningful way of actually measuring performance, especially in subjects like music and art, just canning those departments kills many birds with one stroke. Genius.
15% of the student population is compromised of children of illegal immigrants. That cost is estimated at $4-8 billion per year. It’s further estimated that illegals, through taxes, kick in about $1.5 billion per year. So, the offset that the rest of us pick up is somewhere between $2.5 and $6.5 billion.
15% of the student population is compromised of children of illegal immigrants. That cost is estimated at $4-8 billion per year. It’s further estimated that illegals, through taxes, kick in about $1.5 billion per year. So, the offset that the rest of us pick up is somewhere between $2.5 and $6.5 billion.
So the fact that you are faced with a deficit right off the bat shows that tax increase caps aren’t an issue, exactly how?
Wouldn’t try to convince you there is NO connection as clearly if there is ZERO funding than public education would not take place and if there was INFINITE funding that public education would do far better.
That being said the “Connection” between funding and performance is proven to be far more tenuous than between performance and other factors, particularly that of the community in which the education is taking place.
In short if the community thinks education is important those students will typically outperform equally or lesser funded students in communities that do not value education. Outside of extremes funding almost becomes moot.
Everyone loves to say how Prop 13 killed CA schools, but ignore how MA with Prop 2.5 has the best schools. Hmmmm maybe it isn’t about the $$
As far as I can tell, a significant portion of MA school funding is provided by the state (over 40%)? In addition, costs per studing in MA have been steadily if not dramatically for the last couple of decades. Hmm, maybe it is about the money.
In NJ, nearly all school funding is provided via local property taxes. In many districts (even more after losing that $800 million in state aid), 100% of school funding is from local property taxes and other non-state sources. In my particular district, the local tax levy represents about 95% of the expected budget, and the state aid is about 1.5%. Rather different scenario from Massachusett’s, don’t you think?
I’m not sure if I’m following your question due to the weird construct - but I’ll try.
Funding isn’t the issue for the CA schools - it’s the fact that we are educating far more kids than the system (budget, facilities, staff, etc.) is intended to. Throwing more money at this problem won’t solve it. The cap is not an issue in this case, because funding isn’t the issue. The issue is a school system overburden, in large part, by illegals. Also, performance in California is further burdened by the fact that a large number of illegals don’t speak English well enough to learn…again, not a funding issue.
Your original assertion was that California schools are the way they are because of strict caps…and that isn’t the case.
Out of curiosity, how many illegals do you think own homes in California and are paying property taxes?