No Standardized Tests for Grit and Determination

Kirabo Jackson

Kirabo Jackson

by James A. Bacon

There is near-universal agreement that teachers are a key component of the schooling environment. And few observers would dispute that some teachers are better at their jobs than others. But there is little but discord and controversy over how to evaluate teachers. Teacher-advocate groups like the Virginia Education Association, for example, reject the use of standardized testing data to judge teacher performance. (See the previous post, “What the Virginia ‘Education’ Association Is Trying to Hide.“)

One body of research has shown that teachers who improve test scores (high value-added teachers) also improve students’ longer run outcomes such as high school graduation, college attendance and earnings. But other research shows that noncognitive skills not captured by standardized tests, such as adaptability, self-restraint and motivation, also influence adult outcomes. Thus, judging teachers on the basis of test scores only would overlook important contributions they may make in building students’ character.

Now comes C. Kirabo Jackson with Northwestern University, whose paper, “What Do Test Scores Miss? The Importance of Teacher Effects on Non-Test Score Outcomes,” has been published by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Drawing upon rich administrative data for all public school 9th graders in North Carolina from 2005 to 2012, Jackson captured proxies for non-cognitive skills such as suspensions, attendance, course grades, and on-time grade progression, each of which is strongly correlated with certain non-cognitive skills.

“The results,” writes Jackson, “support an idea that many believe to be true but had not previously been shown — that teacher effects on test scores capture only a fraction of their effect on human capital. This underscores the need for holistic evaluation approaches that account for effects on cognitive and non-cognitive skill.”

Bacon’s bottom line: I have no ability to critique Jackson’s social scientific methodology, but I find his conclusions intuitively plausible. Common sense tells us that it takes more than intelligence to succeed in life. It takes grit, drive, determination, focus and self-discipline. Insofar as teachers may influence those behavioral traits, standardized test scores may not capture their full contribution.

Some might throw up their hands and say, “Well, there you go, there’s no point in evaluating teachers with test scores.” I would argue, to the contrary, if Jackson’s analysis survives scholarly scrutiny, his paper suggests that schools use a broader set of metrics to evaluate teachers than standardized test scores alone.

The larger truth still holds: Teachers vary in quality and effectiveness. Some teachers just aren’t cut out for teaching, and they should be culled from the profession. Because the profession is disinclined to judge anyone harshly, subjective evaluations are largely worthless. School systems need objective metrics by which to evaluate teacher performance — and ideally those metrics should made available to parents. Here in Virginia, if Standards of Learning (SOL) test scores or Student Growth Percentiles (SGPs) provide an incomplete portrait, then by all means let’s gather the data that can.

There are currently no comments highlighted.

17 responses to “No Standardized Tests for Grit and Determination

  1. so your kid fails Algebra I and you are convinced it’s because the teacher is “bad” and you want to see their personnel evaluation?

    Your kid gets sent to the principal so you’re entitled to see the teacher’s evaluation?

    your kid get’s an “F” in French and it’s a “bad” teacher…

    so how do you know if it’s a bad teacher, a bad parent or bad genes?

  2. It’s a bad idea for a parent who is interacting with their kids teacher to have access to their evaluation.

    You cannot believe what kind of idiots parents can be with their kids teacher and they actually do personalize their threats and directly go after the teacher and his/her job.

    You should see some of the stuff that is going on with Facebook these days… it borders on slander… of teachers whose only sin was to not kowtow to some bully parent and their snot-nosed brat of a kid.

    Their kids are hellions -making life hell for the teacher and the worst parents are often the ones who are the parents of the hellions.

    The other problem is that principles who have problems – at their schools will scapegoat teachers to save their own skin.

    If you are going to actually rate teachers – it need to first of all be objective and fair – to take into account oversized classes, or classes with kids who are behind or kids who are disruptive or have ADHD.

    you need to take into account the number of years of experience the teacher has – relative to the aggregate difficulty of the class.

    People who think that any teacher should be able to keep any number of kids on grade level no matter the make-up of the class.. are simple minded in their thinking – and downright dangerous to the profession of teaching.

    the bigger issue by far is the administration and how they resource the schools and how they staff the supervisors of the teachers.

    Few teachers come out of school and turn into top notch instructors in their first years. It takes years of experience crafting their skills and yes – there are folks who fail at teaching and again -anyone here who thinks teachers do not get fired -need to get their heads out of their backsides. Teachers get fired – all the time. It’s not a “firing” of the kind you think. Teachers are offered contracts – every year. If a teacher does not perform according to that principles expectations – they do not get offered a contract – and that’s the end of it. That teacher can try to go get hired at another school but if they do not have a letter of support from their prior principle – it’s tough going.

    I’m curious also – how we intend to evaluate teachers at charter and choice voucher schools… apples to apples?

    Per my practice here – and unlike the conservatives – I will offer an alternative.

    first – principles should be evaluated – by teachers as well as the administration. If too many teachers at a given school get bad evaluations there ought to be an external review.

    Second -DO come up with a standard for evaluating teachers that DOES include the class size, class makeup, whether or not a para is assisting, how many kids get sent out to Title 1 and other reading and math help.. etc – and have that evaluation done – by a 3rd party who is a professional not affiliated with that school or even that school district.

    In other words – get rid of subjectivity especially from principles trying to save their own skin or even school district administrators trying to shift blame for a low-income school that has an inordinate number of “failing” teachers.

    And – yes -let’s put those same standards of any school and teacher that is funded from tax dollars.

    and finally – just as we anonymous the identify of students – do the same for teachers – the point is not to enable witch-hunts for those who are out to get someone – the point is to identify the problems – which is more than just individual teachers – and especially so when an entire school in a district has problems – it’s not the individual teachers…

    • First off, let it be said that you can always rely on Larry to make an impassioned defense of teachers, to deflect blame onto someone else (Parents, administrators, genes) and ignore the larger questions. For starters, C’ville raises the problem of so-called “objectivity” in Larry’s “alternative proposal”, which of course is not a proposal for evaluation at all, but more deflection from the issue whether any particular teacher should be in a classroom in the first place.

      So, e.g. the “principles who have problems – at their schools will scapegoat teachers to save their own skin.” And this is based on what evidence? None supplied. Further, if the principle has “problems at their schools”, what is the nature of those problems? If the problem is the principle-is-balling-one-of-the-assistant-principles, it seems difficult to conceive how he/she scapegoats the teachers for this. Poor behavior is where you find it. If the problem is low test scores, was it the principle who was supplying the education/teaching/ in the classroom? If so, then Larry has a point. But we all know that this is simply not the case.

      OK, so, parents: This morning at breakfast my brother told me a story from his teaching days. Mom made an appointment to see my brother because her little dear had been given a B+, and Little Dear was used to getting all A’s. Mom wanted to know why and was quite demanding. Thinking along the lines of LarryG, my brother expected the worst. Little Dear had missed an A- by .27%, so my brother expected a comment like “Isn’t it close enough”? But even with the .27, Little Dear still only had an A-, and the shortfall was not raised by Mom. Next, my brother expected the race card to be played, since Little Dear was black. Neither did that come. Instead, Mom wanted an understanding of what made Little Dear “fail”. My brother went through all the tests, homework grades, quiz grades, class participation. Later the same day, he got an email saying she still did not understand. Further explanations from my brother, who stood his ground. Silence from the parents.

      Now comes the rest of the story: Little Dear got all non-gift A’s the rest of the year. Little Dear wound up at Harvard, where he graduated Summa Cum Laude.

      Class size: This is the standard defense of teachers from the Left. As usual, the Left cherry picks the data. They ignore the meta analyses from the University of Chicago some years ago showing there is no appreciable difference in outcome after the class size goes over 15, and on up to about 32. Below and over that size, there are differences. But what public school do you know that has class sizes below 15? How many are over 32? A “really good” public school system has class sizes around 19-20. The vast majority are in the high 20’s. Indeed, if you are going to include class size in the evaluation of teachers, you would get some really skewed results. Larry and the Left ignore this, because, for them, it is not about truth , it is about unionism and protectionism. Only the ignorant teachers raise class size as a defense to their performance.

      Further on class size and money in education: I was on the school board of a very wealthy school system on Chicago’s North Shore. I almost did not survive the experience, it was so depressing. At the time, our expenditures per student exceeded everyone else in the state by a lot. We spent $14,000+, the next highest was around $10,000. Our teachers’ salaries were the highest in the state. Resources were not a problem. If the school needed something, one of the Lehman Brothers types who lived in town would come up with the cash.

      For all that money and resources, we got a crappy result. Only 92% of our kids went on to college, and the colleges were not your Ivy League types as you might expect from such great raw material input. Why? Our kids were simply not made to perform by their teachers. School was a lark, and the teachers were untouchable because of the union and tenure. Probably the majority had died but had forgotten to fall down.

      By contrast, consider Paul Adams, who ran Chicago’s Providence St Mel High School, drawing its kids from in and around one of the worst housing projects on the west side of Chicago. Paul bought the school from the Catholic Archdiocese and turned it into a private school. The poorest of poor parents showed up every Friday at the school’s pay window to cash their checks and pay the next week’s tuition on a sliding scale. Teachers’ starting salaries were 17,000/yr.

      Paul sent 100% of his kids to college,

      Larry, I just am tired of hearing the Left’s defense of the current school situation in this country. We need a change to vouchers. Which brings me to the “same standards” Do you think those poor, as well as poorly educated, Providence-St. Mel parents would have showed up every Friday if the “standards” were the “same”???

      • bullfeathers.

        it’s inappropriate to have parent have direct access to the personnel evaluations of teachers and especially so the teachers of their kids.

        it’s a recipe for really ugly things to happen and a good way to make teaching even harder to do.

        I’m not a “defender’ of teachers – but I recognize the idiocy of the right these days.

        class size – anyone who has not seen a teacher actually trying to deal with larger class sizes in ELEMENTARY school with one or more disruptive hellions just is wretchedly and blissfully ignorant – and dangerous to others.

        at the upper levels – class size is not as important as kids who have the basic skills can and do pursue education more independently.

        but anyone who thinks 7 year olds are not affected by class sizes, the skill and experience of the teacher, access to Title 1 (Masters degree) resources, etc.. is just not informed.

        re: ” Further on class size and money in education: I was on the school board of a very wealthy school system on Chicago’s North Shore. I almost did not survive the experience, it was so depressing. At the time, our expenditures per student exceeded everyone else in the state by a lot. We spent $14,000+, the next highest was around $10,000. Our teachers’ salaries were the highest in the state. Resources were not a problem. If the school needed something, one of the Lehman Brothers types who lived in town would come up with the cash.

        For all that money and resources, we got a crappy result. Only 92% of our kids went on to college, and the colleges were not your Ivy League types as you might expect from such great raw material input. Why? Our kids were simply not made to perform by their teachers. School was a lark, and the teachers were untouchable because of the union and tenure. Probably the majority had died but had forgotten to fall down.”

        jesus H Keeerist – “only” 92% – Crazy do you have a clue what that number is in Virginia?

        do you have a clue what the best education systems in Virginia spend or the best State education systems spend – and their results?

        re: ”
        By contrast, consider Paul Adams, who ran Chicago’s Providence St Mel High School, drawing its kids from in and around one of the worst housing projects on the west side of Chicago. Paul bought the school from the Catholic Archdiocese and turned it into a private school. The poorest of poor parents showed up every Friday at the school’s pay window to cash their checks and pay the next week’s tuition on a sliding scale. Teachers’ starting salaries were 17,000/yr.

        Paul sent 100% of his kids to college,”

        right – and pigs fly – crazy… if this “works” why does it not spread?

        why keeps it from working in a place like Richmond – for instance?

        you guys live in LA LA Land on this. you refuse to deal with the realities.

        in your own minds you earnestly believe but if you think someone can live on 17K a year and produce 100% college graduates – you are truly not connected to reality.

        I’d be 100% supportive of anything that moves the ball down the field on this – but it has to be real – not some imagined ideology that there are no examples of except in one’s imagination.

        where in the US/ Virginia do teachers get 17k in salary and produce 100% college graduates?

  3. “Objective” measures are never objective. It’s amazing how few allegedly “intelligent” people understand this point. Especially when they start believing numbers are objective.

    The Big Short was a good movie, but it did a disservice to a big contributing factor to the 2008 crash: the rise of the quants. Around 2002, Wall Street became convinced that the “quants” had all the answers because “math is objective”, right? So much of the bubble was fueled not only by fraud but also “models” which contained the almighty “data” in the form of “numbers” prepared by quants with PhDs from Stanford.

    Numbers are just as subjective as words. Ask any accountant.

    I think the best one can do for “objectivity” is to take years and years worth of data and detect trends. Simply pointing to numbers with less than 5 (preferably 10) years of data is a recipe for a bad assessment. How many times do we see studies scrapped after a few years because the researchers determine that the measurements are worthless? Too many to count. Why do some insist that a measurement that contains numbers is somehow sacrosanct and therefore objective?

    • Cville, Is objectivity even possible, then, in evaluating teachers? If objectivity is impossible, do we simply give up on the effort to evaluate teachers? By what means do we hold anyone accountable? Or is accountability a chimera?

      • you can have objectivity – if you work to do it – and not purposely try to cause trouble … and that’s the problem with the right these days –

        they’re not truly interested in actual solutions – it’s all about pursing ideology and just plain partisan foolishness. They have no answers.
        The reason things don’t work is because of “conspiracies”…

        if you want the kind of system you advocate – why don’t you advocate it as part of charter/choice schools and show how it works instead of advocating charter/choice schools without standards and accountability and instead say it’s needed only in public schools?

  4. it’s totally inappropriate to demand employee ratings – for any profession.

    Would you, for instance, require that every employee evaluation for the police department be made public? How about DMV or county employees , DEQ , SCC folks?

    where in the world does this come from?

  5. In a consumer society, that’s EXACTLY what should happen, if you’re talking about employee evaluations by “customers.”. A teacher’s “customer” is the kid – or the kid’s parents if he’s under 18. And police? You’d better believe my local police department has fought like hell to prevent disclosure of the record of complaints by the public against certain officers on grounds of personnel privacy, which I think is specious reasoning. I’m not talking about supervisor’s evaluations, but evaluations by, resulting from interactions with, THE PUBLIC.

    • I agree with Larry that the potential exists for teachers’ statistical profiles to be misused. That said, I don’t think that’s a sufficient reason to keep the data secret. If people of good will go together and discussed the issue reasonably and rationally, it should be possible to put in safeguards to prevent the kinds of problems Larry foresees.

      Moving from the real world to the ideal world, I envision a totally free market in which individual teachers are allowed to sell their services in an open marketplace — much like they do in Korea and the Chinese-speaking countries for after-school educational programs. You can bet your bottom dollar that parents would like to see statistical profiles of teachers they’re paying thousands of dollars to. And the good teachers would love to have empirical verification of the value they provide.

      • it’s not only potential for misuse – it’s just plain old stinking ignorance.

        there is NOT a one-to-one relationship between teachers and kids taught. It’s a myth that folks apparently believe without even taking the time to find out.

        It’s ignorance of how schools work these days.

        parents are not paying “thousands” of dollars. Taxpayers are. The parents are paying how much of the 10K per year with their taxes? In many cases the parents are paying less than 2K of that cost.

        No publicly-funded employee is accountable directly to the people they serve – – you donj’t get to see the performance rating of the cop that gave you a ticket or the DMV clerk that you felt insulted you or whatever.

        this is total foolishness… and ignorance coming from folks who have not thought deeper than an inch on how schools actually work these days.

        The SGP is a TOOL for the schools to use to determine if kids need ADDITIONAL help beyond the classroom – which is COMMON these days in no small part because much more data is now kept on each child so that THEY KNOW where to target help. SGP is similar to PALS so the next thing you know, people are going to want PALS data and then say that if their kid scores low on some aspect of PALS – it’s the teacher’s fault.

        If you think ONE TEACHER provides all the education that one child needs – then you’re living in a dream world.

        K-12 education, done right, is a complex, multi-discipline activity where Title 1 and other specialized resources are brought to bear to target areas where kids need help – beyond what the classroom teacher can provide.

        I cannot believe just how uninformed people are – about this – and content to remain ignorant about it – and actually form opinions based on that ignorance.

        in the age of the internet where folks COULD become more informed, – what happens is any fool can publish anything – and folks believe it without doing any due diligence to really understand the facts.

        schools are no longer one room with one teacher – folks. there is NOT
        a one-to-one relationship between one teacher and one kid.

        and no -you as a parent are not paying the 10K it takes to educate your child -you’re paying more like 1-2k… if you want to take that 1-2K and go buy a teacher on the open market – go for it rube.

    • I agree Acbar.

      There are two new good books out on this subject.

      Grit: the Power of Passion and Perseverance, by Angela Duckworth, and

      Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World.

      Two things are for sure. Great teachers make a great difference in a great many kids lives, and bad teachers too often do far more harm than good.

  6. For specific incidents there should be further investigation no question – whether it’s police or teachers –

    but routine public disclosure of each teacher relative to the performance of each child is not appropriate and is harmful.

    and it’s based on ignorance because one teacher is not solely responsible for everything one child learns or not – it does not work that way and has not for decades.

    A new teacher does not have the experience and skills that a veteran teacher has. Often new teachers are not given the same number of students that an experienced teacher might get – unless there is no choice and there are no m more resources available.

    class size is vitally important in K-3 and much less important in upper grades once a kid has the basic core skills needed to learn – it’s more a matter of them applying themselves than a teacher. There are millions of online courses available for individual study.

    back to K-3 – In the better schools – with adequate resources – attempts are made to match the classroom to the teacher. For instance, if there are 2 or 3 kids who have issues that could be a history of disruptive behavior, ADHD or they are at risk and need additional help, or even gifted kids that will need MORE than average – all of these things go into figuring out what kids to assign to what teachers are available.

    If the classroom is going to be a difficult one – that teacher may be given a para-educator to help with reading groups. Other kids will be sent out to Title 1 instructors or other math specialists to try to get those kids back up to grade level while the teacher concentrates on the kids who are at grade level to move them further along.

    New kids may come into the class..others leave… suddenly you have a kid that now lives with grandparents… or Dad has left and Mom is alone and struggling to keep the kid in clothes and food… etc, etc…

    it’s NOT the stereotypical one room school with one teacher and one set of standard kids…

    Consider what happens when you’d give that teachers name out along with the SGPs of the kids in his/her room – that the people seeing those number have no clue as to the other issues going on and proceed to do what Jim is doing here with charts…

    Again – I am NOT arguing that there be no accountability and transparency. Unlike the critics – I SUPPORT No Child Left Behind AND Common Core – and I support objective rating systems for teachers where these myriad complexities are taken into account – AND those teachers are protected from principals who are trying to scapegoat others.

    This can and does happen when a principle will knowingly overload a teacher with bigger class sizes or known disruptive students or at risk kids and not provide the extra resources they need.

    There needs to be a fair and objective way to fairly evaluate the experience of the teacher, relative to the make-up and size of the class.. and that information should not be made available to the public on a routine basis – because most of the public and that includes parents of the kids in those teachers classes – has a clue of the complexity and difficulty of getting classes built each year and assigned to teachers.

    Every year, in elementary school, a brand new classroom of kids is assigned to teachers. In good schools, meetings are held and each kid’s academic and performance history is reviewed as the new classes are “built” for the teachers.

    There is never enough resources. Good para-educators leave – for more money elsewhere.. Title 1 teachers with Masters degrees in teaching kids with learning disabilities are hard to come by – and hard to keep.

    Teachers themselves get sick, get pregnant, transfer to other schools, etc.

    there is no such thing as one teacher teaching one kid any more in most schools. Anyone who thinks that and expects the SGP to be a good way to rate teachers – those folks themselves need an “education” so they can get past their simplistic view of how things work.

    What you’re looking at with the SGP is how that kid performed – as a result of many different resources provided to him/her – that were available. It’s also a tool for the educators – like PALS is to help identify the specific area where the kid needs more help.

    I’m in favor of SGP – properly used to good purpose to benefit kids but not for the current simple-minded ideas that some have on how it should be used.

  7. >>class size – anyone who has not seen a teacher actually trying to deal with larger class sizes in ELEMENTARY school with one or more disruptive hellions just is wretchedly and blissfully ignorant – and dangerous to others.>>

    I have in fact seen it, Larry. But you’re talking about onesies, outliers. Otherwise, the data just don’t support your claim.

    >>..right – and pigs fly – crazy… if this “works” why does it not spread?

    Very simple, Larry, you just categorically refuse to recognize the truth and are in fact the one who is blissfully ignorant: State governments and unions fight Paul’s approach tooth and nail, instead engaging in self-preservation. Paul doesn’t even take state money like he would get with a voucher program.
    This is not some imagined ideology, Larry. This is actually happening. All you can do is engage in those informal fallacies that you so love, here, argument by assertion. If you don’t believe it, just check out their website and other commentary on line. I know you won’t, because you can’t bring yourself to be found wrong. Pathetic.

    We are sailing across the sea of progress, Larry, but you are holding on to the dock.

  8. re: ” But you’re talking about onesies, outliers. Otherwise, the data just don’t support your claim.”

    Crazy – did you read the VDOE report on the incidents in elementary school?

    virtually EVERY elementary class has kids that have issues that require more direct attention. It’s more than just disruption. It’s kids who are behind or have ADHD or need other services beyond basic.

    you’re in denial about this or you just flat ignorant about it.

    you even TOUT private schools that won’t allow disruptive kids as a “solution” – right?

    >>..right – and pigs fly – crazy… if this “works” why does it not spread?

    Very simple, Larry, you just categorically refuse to recognize the truth and are in fact the one who is blissfully ignorant: State governments and unions fight Paul’s approach tooth and nail, instead engaging in self-preservation. Paul doesn’t even take state money like he would get with a voucher program.”

    I’d like to see the actual data – the same level of transparency and accountability so we have a fair comparison and if they produce better results – then I’m in favor of tax dollars for that method. – period. But I’m a skeptic of the results .. I think some of this is a myth promoted by anti-govt “believers”… who really are not interested in better results – just a belief that if less govt is involved it is “better”.

    “This is not some imagined ideology, Larry. This is actually happening. All you can do is engage in those informal fallacies that you so love, here, argument by assertion. If you don’t believe it, just check out their website and other commentary on line. I know you won’t, because you can’t bring yourself to be found wrong. Pathetic.”

    like I said – if this is “happening’ – lets have transparency and accountability. What qualified teacher is going to accept 17K in salary that is not enough to survive on when they could easily get 3 times that much to teach at a “bad” public school?

    “We are sailing across the sea of progress, Larry, but you are holding on to the dock.”

    no, we’re drinking right-wing swill and willfully ignorant of the truth and reality.

    If what you say is true – then around the world – in all other countries – public school would fail and lose to private schools.

    it’s not happening. The best schools in the world are public schools in the advanced economy countries and they simply do a better job than us on core math and language, technology such that kids in those countries are capable of solving real world problems with their education they get – and our kids much less so. It’s not private schools that make them better than us.

    I’m not opposed at all to private, charter, choice, non-public schools that, in fact, do a better job. I just ask that we have a level playing field on judging effectiveness and performance and once we have that -if they are better – then by all means – fund them with tax dollars.

    but just like other cockamamie ideas from the right these days -they really don’t want apple-to-apple real world govt vs private. They have “theories” that they want to implement AFTER they’ve blown up the govt version.

    Instead of reform and evolution from govt to private – they want to destroy the govt version first then claim that non-govt “has to be better”.. if you “just let it work” . That’s the working theory and not buying it.

    let’s extend transparency and accountability to non-public schools so they can definitively prove they are better and once that is established as true – then – again – I have no allegiance to public schools per se – as it is clear that they will segregate schools into ones for the “haves” and ones for the “have nots”.

    You guys kill me. I do not know which county you are from – but most every county in Va – spends millions of dollars of local money on discretionary things – not mandated by the Feds or the State on public schools. Millions of dollars of local taxes – and not a word from you folks on requiring it to be specifically accounted for – so taxpayers KNOW what that money is being spent on over and above what the State SOQs mandate.

    • Larry, you say, “I’m not opposed at all to private, charter, choice, non-public schools that, in fact, do a better job. I just ask that we have a level playing field on judging effectiveness and performance and once we have that -if they are better – then by all means – fund them with tax dollars.” Isn’t that precisely what school vouchers are? With vouchers, consumers (the parents) judge, and choose what’s best for THEIR child. They do so based largely on each school’s reputation for educational effectiveness and performance. Taxpayers fund their choice. That’s as level a playing field as you can get.

  9. re: ” Isn’t that precisely what school vouchers are? With vouchers, consumers (the parents) judge, and choose what’s best for THEIR child. They do so based largely on each school’s reputation for educational effectiveness and performance. Taxpayers fund their choice. That’s as level a playing field as you can get.”

    no it’s not. it’s based on perception not actual results. For instance, how many kids take the APs and pass? How do they do on math and language compared to other schools and countries? How many go to college ?

    you and others forget – that all taxpayers pay for school – not just parents.

    you forget the PURPOSE of taxing everyone for public schools…

    it’s NOT to satisfy what some parents believe .. it’s to produce an employable workforce that benefits ALL taxpayers and that includes education of ALL kids – not just the one of parents who want private schools that would effectively restrict attendance.

    For any publicly funded education – it has to have standards for academic performance – and those standards need to apply to ANY school that receives tax dollars.

    Funding de-facto private schools with tax dollars that have no transparency and accountability for the use of those tax dollars is hypocrisy of the first order. Parents are not the only ones paying for education. 10K a year on average and how much do the parents themselves pay of that 10k per kid?

    I’m in favor of funding on a per kid basis for any school that has the same level of transparency and accountability that we say public schools should have. Otherwise – no tax dollars.

Leave a Reply