Get Schooled

By Jeff

December 5, 2008 8:19 AM | Link to this

I may give them the no longer paying school board members. But then again, I think not paying ANYONE in ANY public office would result in better politicians and an overall better country by pretty much ensuring fresh ideas every few years rather than careers in politics.

Otherwise, I’m actually in favor of LARGER local school boards. The more input and the more people you have to convince something is a good thing, the more likely bad things won’t happen.

I also say teachers NEED to be on the local boards. They are the ones that see the results of any policy, good or bad, on a first hand basis.

Education decisions, like ANY government decision, needs to be made as close to the people it affects as possible. Therefore I OPPOSE any effort to allow State control of local BOEs. (Though I also question why government needs to be in education at all.)

By Graham

December 5, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this

I am a teacher with the Atlanta Public Schools and having worked with or for many school systems across the country, I can say there is a large difference between a well run system and a poorly run system.

I believe that the state should have the ability to take over a failing school system because it is unfair to the children in that school system to suffer because local politics put adult interests first. However, there needs to be rules on how and when a school system is given back to local control.

By SouthFultonMom

December 5, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

Jeff you are right on the money. There needs to be more input from the people that are affected by these changes. One of the major issues in education is the fact that teacher input is rarely considered. I left the profession because the expectations were unrealistic due to this very fact among other things.

To take a teacher off the board would only make matters worse. There should actually be several. Make the boards larger. And yes, the government needs to stay out of education. NCLB is a unrealistic joke.

By momtoAlex&Max

December 5, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this

In theory, I agree with not paying school board members, as Jeff said, it would discourage career politicians. However, in practice, I wonder if this would mean that only the wealthy could be school board members if that was the case. I am not familiar with what (exactly) school members do, but would this be something that can be done after hours, so people could still have a regular job and still be members? You know, similar to church leadership positions (deacon, elder).

I am again in THEORY in favor of the state taking over troubled districts, assuming that enough provisions are in place for this to be a TEMPORARY solution and that troubled is defined clearly. In practice, I wonder if the state would not be too eager to take over school (I’m thinking dollar signs here)

By swolf

December 5, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

Most, though granted, not all local school boards do at least an adequate or better job at running their school systems. Schools can be their most responsive to the needs of the particular district or county with local control. No one in Atlanta has the foggiest clue as to the needs of the students, teachers, and citizens of, say, Grady County down in extreme south Georgia… just as those Grady County folks have no clue of the needs of a huge Metro area school. Perhaps the answer on teacher sitting on school boards is to have ONE designated seat on each board for a teacher. Also, being a school board member IS a PART TIME job,,,and should be renumerated as such. All that said, the most asuredly needs to be a mechanisim whereby the state can step in when a school system becomes a runaway train as we have seen happen in Clayton County. We simply can not afford to sit and watch a whole school sytem get “thrown under the bus” by a group of self-important idiots as happened there ever again.

By Tony

December 5, 2008 11:07 AM | Link to this

The state should have some authority in extreme cases to intervene with local school districts. This authority should be very limited and should be clearly spelled out in any law enacted to allow such an intervention.

Regarding limitations of who can and cannot serve on a board of education, I think local elections should decide. For a law to be enacted that limited who could or could not run for a school board seat would likely be unconstitutional. Specifically eliminating educators from school boards would be extremely detrimental.

In Georgia, most school board members are paid a small amount on a per diem basis. In our county it is about $100 per meeting. This rate of pay is very appropriate. I don’t think any board member is getting rich by any stretch of the imagination. Especially sense our board meets twice a month with a rare third meeting.

In Florida, school board members enjoy much higher pay. In my parents county, the board members are paid about $28,000 per year. That’s about $1,000 per meeting.

Local communities are best equipped to make the decisions for their schools. Only very rare circumstances have precipitated the considerations that are in discussion. We should not let one district’s failure cause all other districts to have in-sane rules put in effect.

By Ernest

December 5, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

Interesting comments thus far! As Jeff suggests, school board members should not be ‘singled out’ for not being paid. If this is done, it should be across the board for ALL elected officials. I don’t agree with this as I agree with what momtoAlex&Max says, only those with the financial means could serve in office. Each county should decide how to ‘compensate’ those that wish to serve. We have ‘term limits’ already built in every 4 years with elections. It is incumbent of the citizens to use their vote to determine their representatives.

Being a school board member should be seen as a part time ‘service’. Unfortunately some get elected and begin to ‘micromanage’ which causes some of the problems we have seen around the state. Again, it is up to the citizens to make sure they elect the right people for office. We should not legislate that responsibility away.

By JBR

December 5, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

Name one State function that the government runs both effectively and efficiently and I would consider the proposal.

By Ed

December 5, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

Perhaps we should just privatize schooling altogether and remove it from government (and the tax roles). People might think a little differently about having 3,4,5 kids if they actually had to pay for their schooling.

Of course, good ol’ Sonny wants to make it so senior citizens don’t have to pay school taxes since they’ve “already” paid for their children’s schooling. Gee, that makes loads of sense. A senior who had 5 kids can stop paying, while a childless person still has to pay.

Ah, Sony Logic. But, at least we have “Go Fish”.

By bizezgrrrl

December 5, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

Why are Georgia’s schools among the worst in the nation?

I know this if off topic, but it seems there are some well informed bloggers,and I am interested in your opinions.

Do the 46 states ranked better than us require teachers to be better prepared or educated? Are taxes higher so funding is better? What’s the deal? What do we need to change? Would state control help?

We’ll be paying for a third child to go to private school next year and the costs are killing our family, yet the public school alternative is simply not an option.

By David S

December 5, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

Please explain what is meant by local control. There will never be local control as long as there is a Department of Education writing regulations for local school districts. You focus on the state impact on schools while more regulations, etc. come from the feds than the state.

The Dept. of Education sucks up billions in wasted tax money, educates NO ONE, and burdens the local schools with ridiculous regulations like No Child Left Behind. Remember that one? Think that beast came from the state legislature? You bash any candidate that wants to get rid of the DOE as being “anti-education” or “anti-children” and all they are trying to do is help bring local control back to the states and the school districts.

You all need to stop being so scizophrenic and realize that getting rid of federal and state educational bureaucracy is the ONLY way to restore local control.

By David S

December 5, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

bizezgrrrl,

Georgia’s government run schools are among the worst in the nation, but all government schools are inferior compared to private and homeschool alternatives. Strong voting blocks of teachers who oppose any efforts at reform may be one factor, but even if they ranked in the top ten they would still be inferior.

Ask any government teacher and they will almost all blame the same factors. And they are right.

They are too much administration, too little parental involvement, and I will add, too little accountability for poor teacher performance (that’s the one they oppose most of all).

The causes of these are simple, consistent with any free market analysis of any business and easy to fix.

First, there is too much administration because there are too many federal and state regulations that must be complied with. Compliance takes people. First to implement policies and second to fill out the obligatory paperwork. I have spoken with school superintendants in other states and they all agree that the federal dept. of education and the federal government in general are the primary source of their misery. Their huge staffs (most making $100K + are all just to comply with regs. End the DOE and get the feds out of the picture (please tell me where in the constitution they get the authority anyway) and that problem is solved. Easier said than done - see my earlier post about voter scizophrenia.

Then we have parental involvement and teacher accoutability. Why should a parent be involved. They have no real say as to where their child will go to school (income really dictates it, and school district lines are constantly changing), their money is taken from them in the property tax bill and they cannot get it back, and they cannot change schools if the school does not meet THEIR needs (yes, NCLB works if the schools fail their own tests…but). If parents paid for their child’s education, they would care about the school, the success of their child, AND teacher accountability. If all schools were private (no, I am not negating either charity or scholarships), parents would care, teachers would of course be held accountable, and the school would work to cater to its customers (the parents, not the government bureaucrats as today).

Businesses might even be more willing to assist parents with costs since they too will know that educated children will finally be the result, and their remedial education costs of new hires will be reduced.

Plenty of great books on how a private marketplace in education would address all of today’s issues and then some.

Utopia? No, but are we claiming that what we have is?

By Cranberry

December 5, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this

I don’t believe you could make elected positions like school board members unpaid. These jobs, and they are JOBS, are full-time, if you treat them right, and only independently wealthy people could fill them, if they’re unpaid. Then you’ve got a board who that doesn’t necessarily see things from the majority’s (i.e. working/middle-class)point of view. These are some of the most honorable, hard-working positions in the workforce, and you have to recognize that by paying these people.

By Mike

December 5, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this

Local boards don’t have control now. If a board member goes against a superintendent now all the superintendent has to do is call SACS/CASI and tell the Elgart police and they will threaten to take away accreditation. We know what happens then. How have we let an outside agency and by outside I mean outside of our “state and local control” determine what is right for our children. Why do we give these accreditation agencies so much power over the will of the voters. Write that story AJC!

By Jeff

December 5, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this

cranberry:

Actually, the only full time job at that level is Superintendent.

The BOE is the publicly elected check on the Superintendent’s actions - iow, they have sole final approval authority.

By TheBlogger

December 5, 2008 2:06 PM | Link to this

David S You are an idiot. Yes, I said it.

You said that all public schools are inferior to all private schools. Not true at all and I challenege you to find any valid source to support that claim.

There are many, many superior public schools that out perform many, many private schools.

And, in GA, there are many public high schools ranked per newsweek as the best in the nation. Many are located in the Atlanta area (if you bother to look them up).

Stop with the false propaganda and outright lies.

By Tony

December 5, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this

TheBlogger - you are correct. There is no research to support the claim that privates or charters are better.

Also, local boards of education actually maintain considerable autonomy even when considering state/federal rules and regulations.

To to one who claims DOE rules created No Child Left Behind - This is federal legislation from congress. It is the law of the land for any state that accepts money from the federal government for education. If the state rejects the funding from Washington DC, they are exempt from the legislation. Georgia implemented its own version under Roy Barnes leadership called A+ Reform Act. Both laws call for testing children and reporting the results.

By Tony

December 5, 2008 3:01 PM | Link to this

Mike - your claim about SACS/CASI is far-fetched and the agency only intervenes under the most extreme circumstances. The use of independent accreditation agencies helps to keep politics in check with good educational practice. There must be legitimate grounds for a complaint to be filed with SACS.

By TW

December 5, 2008 3:19 PM | Link to this

It matters very little. Georgians have made it clear in elections that they don’t want to pay for good education, that schooling is not a priority.

Stupid is as stupid does.

By jim d

December 5, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

“The general consensus among local school boards is that many of the recommendations usurp local power”

NOW THERE’S A SURPRISE!! NOT.

I will venture a guess here that the leader of the pack feeling this way was the largest sytem in the state with Napoalvin at the helm.

Gimme a break Laura, would you want to freely surrender control of roughly 1.8 Billion $$ a year?? are you aware of how much graft and corruption can take plaace before anyone even notices?

By Jennifer

December 5, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this

There was a public school (system?) in metro Boston that was taken over, I believe, by Boston University. This was some years ago and I don’t recall the details. Does anyone on this blog know the story and the outcome? Was B.U. acting for the State?

It would be interesting to see what has happened in other states, and to compare their models to what Georgia proposes. I would do the research on this myself and post a more educated summary, but I’m buried under today and hoping someone out there knows more about this than I (and is willing to share!).

By jim d

December 5, 2008 3:35 PM | Link to this

jennifer,

I seem to reacall something in the mid 80’s where BC offered to run the schools but wasn’t aware that it actually ever happened. But I could be wrong there, as memory fades these days.

By jim d

December 5, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

oops my bad—told you long term was fading right?

Chelsea Schools were taken over by Boston University in 1989.

as for if it helped ???????

By jim d

December 5, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

Jen,

Here ya go.

By Larry

December 5, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

The commission is completely wrong to support allowing the state BOE, an appointed board, to take over routine responsibilities of a local elected board. That this usurps the power of local voters isn’t an opinion, it is a statement of fact.

Some of you incorrectly assume all school systems operate the same as your local system. If you need a learning experience, try this: Pick a Gwinnett County Public Schools board member and follow him/her to every meeting and board related event for three months. Post again, stating if you still think this is a part-time position that you personally could fulfill for 500 bucks a month.

I understand the concern that high pay for BOE members may attract those only interested in money, but some of you need to realize that significant time demands for little compensation is a self-imposed aristocracy.

David S – the reason private schools appear to perform better than public schools is because private schools can – and do – use academic requirements for admission. Considering this fact (which you clearly did not) it’s arithmetically impossible for situation to appear otherwise, isn’t it?

By jim d

December 5, 2008 3:57 PM | Link to this

Jen,

here’s another school. Rosemont Elementary/Middle School in the Baltimore City Public School System was on the state’s “take-over” list in 1998 when Coppin State University took over the school’s management and administrative supervision. Rosemont now is off the list and has about 80 percent of its students performing at or above grade level.

seems the universities can get the job done.

Interesting.

By jim d

December 5, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this

Larry,

“if you still think this is a part-time position that you personally could fulfill for 500 bucks a month.”

Thats’s exactly why we have such a wonderful group running our school system!

By Mike

December 5, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

Tony, Shows how little you know about the process. SACS/CASI controls education in this sate through the Georgia Superintendents association and the Georgia School Board association. (GSBA). Don’t kid yourself ask yourself why superintendents pay has skyrocketed since they became appointed not elected. Attend a GSBA training and listen to the “lawyers” from Gainesville tell new board members how they should tow the line or risk losing accreditation. Local control is gone and as long as we hold ourselves hostage to organizations that represent the interests of those in power nothing will change.

By Jennifer

December 5, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this

Thanks, jimd. A little bit for me to read in the coming weekend. Let’s see what I can learn. But yes, it is quite interesting that universities are the ones to step in.

By Paul Jones

December 5, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

One of the major issues is that we did away with the “balance” that existed between an elected superintendent and an elected board. With boards hiring superintendents, local boards have run amok. Restore the elected superintendency, and there will be less need for the state to step in.

By Lee

December 5, 2008 9:36 PM | Link to this

Here is a GSB report on local BOE [compensation])http://www.gsba.com/downloads/newsroom/Quick%20Facts/BrdEnrollment&CompensationAlpha.pdf) Note that the vast majority of BOE members only receive a small monthly fee or per diem. There are only about 8 or so systems that pay $12-16k per year.

§ 20-2-51. (c) No person employed by a local board of education shall be eligible to serve as a member of that board of education. Ie, active teachers are already prohibited by law from serving on the board of the system that they work.

As far as Clayton schools are concerned, I say when the voters get fed up, they will do something about it. Let them wallow in their own mess.

By David S

December 5, 2008 9:39 PM | Link to this

Larry,

Private schools have requirements for admission, yes. But so what?

If a school is any good, it will be able to educate every child it admits.

The reality is that in today’s market, where 95% of parents chose to let the government educate their children for them, private schools are few and far between. Their limited numbers allow them to be especially exclusive and in most cases grossly overpriced. In a free market, if everyone either educated their child at home or chose among the hundreds of thousands of small to large private school options, you would see value priced as well as expensive choices. There would likely still be admission requirements, but parents would know these up fromt and would put the energy that they SHOULD be putting into making sure their child was prepared when the time came for enrollment. By that same token there would also be schools who would specialize in children with learning problems, troublemakers, and the like. Once there is a profit motive, the market will deliver.

One cannot just attribute better performance to admission standards without realizing that those very standards forced the parents of these children to make sure that they were achieved. With no requirements now, most parents do nothing to teach their children in preparation for school, expecting that all to be done for them. After all, that’s why we pay taxes right?

I was speaking at 9 months and reading at 3 because my parents spent the time with flashcards, books, and the like to make sure that I began learing as soon as I could (which is basically right after birth). There was no question that I was going to be at or ahead of the rest of my peers when I started school. And they didn’t stop, just because I was in a good school (Montessori).

The stories of success, even with the worst students are numerous, but ignored by the mainstream media. It is all about local control at the school level, where the rubber hits the road. Even a local school board is too much bureaucracy to be able to adapt to the needs of each individual student.

I will not take back amy of my previous assertions. Every private school or homeschool situation is superior to any government school because they are about freedom and parental control. They are funded by voluntary payment and not coercive taxation (theft) and every parent has the option of excercising their power as the consumer of taking their money and walking if they are dissatisfied.

Yes, you will find some government schools that perform well and some private schools that perform poorly. But you should not have to make enough money to live in the right house and pray that the school lines don’t change, just to get a good education. The private option or even better homeschooling, would provide likely dozens of options within miles of everyone’s home that, without burdensome regulations, would deliver exactly what parents want - or they would fail.

You will never see a government school fail for crummy performance. You will just see them beg for more money to “fix” the problems.

By Sam

December 5, 2008 11:09 PM | Link to this

The recommendation to not pay school board members merely attempts to help clear the way for corporations to put their salaried heads on school boards. After all, only corporate heads know how to to run corporate boards thus they automatically known how school boards should be run, right?

By Tony

December 6, 2008 12:18 AM | Link to this

Mike, I do attend those meetings and I am not deceived.

By catlady

December 6, 2008 7:30 AM | Link to this

I think nepotism between school board members and school board employees should be immediately outlawed. One or the other has to give up their position.

Our little county is rife with nepotism and the effects of the old Scottish clan system. Add to that spouses given jobs they do not have the qualifications to perform so that the other spouse will stay (like coaches, asst. principals). The (usually) wife is not the best candidate for the job but because the county wants to hire the husband, the wife is promised a cushy job.

Our board has been nothing but a know-nothing rubber stamp for years, both when we had elected school supt and since then.

We did better when we had a teacher on the board but of course he usually voted against the hare-brained schemes, he asked the hard questions, etc. So they got SACS CASI involved to get him out so they could go back to their GOB ways. Funny thing is that many of the other board members do just exactly what he was charged with to SACS/CASI. B ut since they don’t stir the waters and question expenses, for example, no one has brought them up on charges.

Then, in my area, we have the problem of administrators and teachers who have store-bought degrees. They went to No Name U and did the minimal work, paid the money, and got their degree. Some of them are great people, and a few are good teachers, but some are way out of their league. Yet, because of who they are, they still get hired.

Should the state have more control? No, we have seen example after example that the state DOE is no more able to adequately provide leadership than any local group. Look at the GPS/CRCT mess as only one small example.

Yet I cringe at the idea of no oversight by someone. In many south GA counties they would go back to crumbling schools for the black kids, if they could. In my county, they would find even more ways to deny appropriate services to the Latino kids.

I’d love someone from somewhere to step in and end this RTI crap that systematically denies help to suspected sp ed kids. Our county has implemented its most extreme measure so we have kids with 70 IQs year after year getting no services, and managing to effect the education of their non-handicapped classmates.

Then there is the issue of behavior, and its lack of consequences for chronically disruptive and abusive kids. The state and feds, as well as the local system, should be held accountable for ALL students getting a FAPE.

We have 2 small private schools in our county. One take the children of religious zealots, the other has some of those (of another religion) along with the misfits who cannot cut a regular school. Neither are an ideal situation.

In summary, I don’t think my local board does a good job. I don’t think the state does an even fair job, And I don’t think the feds do much of anything helpful except try to keep some groups of kids from being ignored, and the feds have certainly, with the blessing of NCLB, have enriched FOB beyond measure (think of Halliburton for education).

Someone earlier asked why GA students do so poorly compared to nationally. Inputs yield outputs.

Put in: a history of being anti-intellectual, combined with low education parents, low income families, and students who are frequently average or below in native ability (the higher ones have fled to private schools). Mix that with rules and programs that are poorly conceived and poorly administrated, along with some teachers who should not be teaching (the sp/lang pathologist who says, “I had went to the store” for example; the coach’s wife math major who spells horizontal as horizonal, for example). What you will get is substandard outputs in these cases.

All of this is my opinion only, after 35 years in education, and based only on my observations.

By Larry

December 6, 2008 8:56 AM | Link to this

David S - Consider the effect of admission requirements as it relates to an honors orchestra. The Kendall orchestra is comprised of kids from area school orchestras, but unlike the schools, it has a lofty admission requirement; kids must audition for it every year and only the top performers are accepted.

The noticeable performance difference between Kendall and a given high school orchestra is the ability of the kids, not the instructor. The incredibly talented gentleman who leads Kendall IS the instructor of my daughter’s high school orchestra.

This is exactly what admission requirements of a private school do academically; they weed out average and/or under-performers who generally remain in public schools. It’s not as if it’s some big secret, since many applications bluntly state the school is only for above average students.

Ignoring kids’ native abilities is the fatal flaw with NCLB. If all kids responded equally, every student in my kid’s class would score in the top one per cent on all national tests like she does – and they do not.

A friend of mine, an administrator at a small private school, tried to tell me they provided the same services as public schools, so I handed him a few hypothetical students. First was a twelve year old who spoke only Vietnamese. As he silently sunk into the ropes, I hit him with the second student, an eight year old with dyslexia. He threw in the towel before I got to the third student and admitted they couldn’t afford to educate these kids and would not accept them. Public schools don’t have that option.

I can’t imagine what private school you know about that allows any level of parental control or freedom. Private schools adopt their own individual standards to which you will comply or they throw you out. The control belongs exclusively to the school, not to parents or voters.

By Crystal

December 6, 2008 9:53 AM | Link to this

I believe that the State and even the federal government should address local school systems that are failing our children because there is a problem.

I am employed in a failing school system and children are being cheated. The focus of caring for children and addressing what is best for them should not ever be political.

Many of the school board officials have “too much power” and matters that are critical are being overlooked. At risk and learning disabled children are not getting the resources that they need to address the issues that they have, such as learning disabilities and mental illnesses and money is being wasted.

Yet, that is to be expected in Georgia because the culture of the State is that they are above the law and that no one is held accountable when federal laws are being broken. Everyday children’s civil rights are violated and backs are turned when it is mentioned.

So, in many cases, local boards should be dismantled and perhaps, if Board members and even superintendents are not being held accountable or accepting responsibility for the important issues that our children face, maybe they should not be paid. Then, the determination would be made to confirm if the individuals are in these positions to “serve” for the greater good and to improve mankind vs. self-service and financial gain. Especially, when tax money is being wasted and mismanaged.

By mountain mom

December 6, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

Private schools accept only the best and brightest. So when they graduate students who are the best and brightest, what have they actually accomplished?

By Lee

December 6, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this

Mountain Mom, what they have accomplished is to take the “best and brightest” and push them to achieve at their highest level.

Public schools take the best and brightest and place them in the same classroom with the room temperature IQ, the troublemakers, the can’t speak a lick of English, and various assortments of learning disabled students and then teach to the lowest common denominator in order to get the low achievers to a point where they can pass a simple CRCT test.

Public schools COULD do the same thing, but first, they’d have to kill off political correctness.

I just don’t see that happening…

By Larry

December 6, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

ITHINKTHE ClaytoncountyschoolneedtotakenewLookat howitcanimproveteachingstudenttheteachtheyhaved’onotcareaboutstudentatallin1991STATEOFGA.WAS46THINCOUNTYANDNOWIS49THCOUNTYASOFRIGHTIthinkthestateofGA.SHOULDSPENDMONEYONBETTERTEACHTODEALWITHPROBLEMTHEYFACEWITH

By TSM

December 6, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

What a refreshing change that most of the comments are intelligent and well thought out. We do not all agree but a worthwhile dialog on a serious issue. Local school boards have run their course. There are no qualifications to run for school board. While local input is an important component, we must move towards a state wide management of schools. Georgia is falling further behind and future challenges of a world economy and a world society will only make our education failures worst. We need qualified people with no political and religious agendas leading our education system and preparing our children for the future.

By D

December 6, 2008 6:43 PM | Link to this

The first thing that needs to be addressed is how exactly how are we determining that Georgia has “lousy public schools?” Are we looking at SAT? SAT is not a decent way to measure a school’s actual performance. It is not a good test for measuring knowledge, but as it’s name suggests aptitude, what mental ability does a student have? That’s not something that is not really taught at any school. There are too many factors that go into that. If you look at ACT, which is a closer measure to what is actually taught in schools, Georgia test takers actually rank much better overall. When you look and say, hey, what is going on in North Dakota, why are they always ranked at the top of SAT scores, look at who is being tested there — only the top 5% of students take the test there whereas we, in Georgia, push nearly every student to take it, going so far as to use taxpayer money to administer PSAT to freshmen and sophomores across the state — a test that does not count for anything until the student is a junior when they can use those results to apply for a national merit scholarship. Our whole system is set up to fail students with no intention of going to college. Why are we pushing this on everyone? Heck, I know of tradesmen making a lot more money than I do with a master’s degree. I think we need to take a realistic look at what we are teaching our students. Do all students need to know calculus or trigonometry? No. Why are we not preparing the ones that will use that for that and teaching true consumer math to students who will use that more every day to make wise choices? We should use our state BOE to set minimum standards of what needs to be taught, but let the actual choices of how and what specific courses to the local BOEs. Let the state BOE subsidise, if necessary, courses for high achievers in poorer districts where a majority of students may not be wanting to go to college so that no child is truly left behind if that is what is necessary, but let us stop cramming college down every child’s throat from the time they are in kindergarten so they can grow up to be what they are truly destined to be.

By Keith Helms

December 6, 2008 6:43 PM | Link to this

Other than the requirements for the judicial branch of our government, The Board of Education is the other branch that needs to have requirements for elected and appointed members. I would be in favor of requiring local members to have a college degree in education administration or be an educator with 20 years experience. Open election of board members is the root cause of the problem in Clayton County. On the other hand, look what the open election of mayors has done to Macon, Georgia and Lithonia, Georgia. Some people will vote for any liar as long as they are the same party and tell them the lies they want to hear.

By Tom

December 6, 2008 8:05 PM | Link to this

Vouchers! School choice! Fire inept teachers! And, the State SHOULD step in and take over a school system when the local board becomes nothing more that a bunch of morons, ruining not only quality of life and property values in the district, but most importantly, ruining the futures of students.

By D

December 6, 2008 11:50 PM | Link to this

Ok Tom, let’s use some basic economics about vouchers and see how this works…. Lets say the state ever foolishly does impliment a voucher system. What happens? Demand for private education increases which, if you are aware of the basic Law of Demand, as price decreases, quantity demanded increases. There are only so many slots available at private schools throughout this state, so schools will become even more selective about who they choose to admit (and truly unlike a public school, you are fooling yourself if you don’t think private schools pick and choose). Vouchers are the worst possible thing that could happen to education in this state, because then schools that truly need that funding are losing it because the wealthiest of families have all supplimented the voucher to cover the increased cost of private education that the vouchers lead to.

By jim d

December 7, 2008 4:05 AM | Link to this

Ahhh yes D,

“the wealthiest of families have all supplimented the voucher to cover the increased cost of private education that the vouchers lead to.”

That brings us to #5 on the list;

5: Being forced to mix with the less privileged sections of the community

By Had Enough

December 7, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this

First if you want to improve school boards limit elected members to 2 terms.

Don’t allow members to propose spending or construction on projects for THEIR child’s school i.e., see Fulton County BOE.

On the other side - Allow students to rate their teachers in private sessions with consultants and the principal. The students know who are the bad teachers before the administration.

Check out what’s happening in Washington DC the Super is kicking butt. She’s getting rid of the bad teachers, limiting the say so of the unions and putting the children first. Check ABC World News from last Friday.

By Check out the history first

December 7, 2008 6:34 PM | Link to this

It is ludacris to deny educators to serve on the school board of education. For example, physicians serve on the medical board, lawyers serve on the law board, and cosmetologist serve on their board, you get my drift.

Also, the only reason Clayton County lost their accreditation is because Dan Caldwell was fired. He was fired because of nepotisim and wrong doings. That started the white flight to Henry County and Fayette county. Then the blame game started and infighting. All of this was because of the shift from one race to another. Change is hard to accept.

By Check out the history first

December 7, 2008 6:35 PM | Link to this

It is ludacris to deny educators to serve on the school board of education. For example, physicians serve on the medical board, lawyers serve on the law board, and cosmetologist serve on their board, you get my drift.

Also, the only reason Clayton County lost their accreditation is because Dan Caldwell was fired. He was fired because of nepotisim and wrong doings. That started the white flight to Henry County and Fayette county. Then the blame game started and infighting. All of this was because of the shift from one race to another. Change is hard to accept.

By E

December 7, 2008 6:39 PM | Link to this

It is ludacris to deny educators to serve on the school board of education. For example, physicians serve on the medical board, lawyers serve on the law board, and cosmetologist serve on their board, you get my drift.

Also, the only reason Clayton County lost their accreditation is because Dan Caldwell was fired. He was fired because of nepotisim and wrong doings. That started the white flight to Henry County and Fayette county. Then the blame game started and infighting. All of this was because of the shift from one race to another. Change is hard to accept.

By the way, the DC superintendent has taught for 3 years and is leading a major school system. How ludacris is that?

By FacePalm

December 7, 2008 9:28 PM | Link to this

The word is LUDICROUS…

LUDACRIS is a rapper, you morons!

This is why we need a better educational system…seriously, you people make me want to CRY.

Read a book. Just one.

By faye

December 7, 2008 11:49 PM | Link to this

FacePalm - I think it’s just one “moron” - if you read the posts, they’re pretty much the same - and s/he doesn’t state whether or not s/he’s a teacher…let’s hope not.

By MBW

December 8, 2008 6:54 AM | Link to this

Local control is only good if the local people are competent.

By MBW

December 8, 2008 6:57 AM | Link to this

Local control? Just ask the folks in Clayton County how great that is.

By TheBlogger

December 8, 2008 8:34 AM | Link to this

Schools should be under local control. And, IMHO, the federal and state governments should stay out, period.

If the local folks don’t care that their schools are horrible, then so be it. Maybe it is a rural community that only cares about their kids working with them on the farm…. maybe they don’t care to go to college. Why is this a ‘bad thing?’ Why should the state or federal government step in to tell the local folks that they are wrong?

Not every child is college bound and we must stop approaching education as if they are going.

By jim d

December 8, 2008 9:54 AM | Link to this

Blogger,

I’m afraid we agree today. State end federal control would only lead to an intensified edition of our local manifestio’s, with the same results intensified

1: Teaching beliefs and values which are recognized as correct

2: Education should offer prospects of future employment (controlled by the fed)

3: Teaching of “right” attitudes or “character”

4: Providing studies on pre-history

5: Forcing privileged to mix with the less privileged sections of the community

6: Teaching of history so it does not appear as a chronicle which strings events together indiscriminately, but, as in a play, only the important events, those which have a major impact on life, should be portrayed.

7: Transformation of the profession by controlling entry and promotion within it

8: Fining or imprisoning legal guardians for failing to comply with education laws.

RESULTS:teachers complain about the contempt for intellect cultivated and the arrogance displayed toward them by pupils.