Published: Thursday, Oct. 11 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
I love it!two staunch liberal groups going after each other -
Hollywood and the teachers unions.Not surprised to see the hypocary
of the left, voter ID laws supress minority votes, but ID is MANDATORY when you
want your kid to succeed but the union obviously doesn't.
If you think this movie is anywhere close to realistic, visit your local school.
Watch how hard teachers work. Then follow the money behind the movie to those
privateers who want panicked parents to trigger schools into the hands of even
less accountable, for-profit corporations who depend on even more poorly paid
and poorly prepared, and highly expendable teachers. These corporations drive
per-student spending down even further, with the goal of making as much profit
as possible; whose charter schools have paper school boards dominated by
private, not public interests; whose charter schools mostly avoid accepting or
retaining those special students who need the most help, 17% of whose charter
schools perform better than their similar traditional public schools, and 37% of
whose charter schools perform worse.With traditional public schools
you get administrators who are accountable to the school boards you elect. With
charter schools you get administrators whose goal is to funnel money from your
taxes to private owners.Parents who pull the trigger will find it to
be their last act of local influence.Again--visit your local school.
See the truth for yourselves.
Re: ". . . a remedial course in civics for unionized teachers."Something that has been needed for years -- even here in red-tinged Utah.A few years back, when Utah teachers violated the law by going out on
strike, some union members attempted to use some of the same tactics described
in the article -- threats against kids to deal with complaining parents. Others
used hackneyed trade-union sophistry to justify it.UEA/NEA is a
gritty little trade union, seeking influence completely out of proportion to its
representation in society, primarily to benefit itself -- NOT students,
education, or even teachers.It should be recognized as such, and
dealt with in policy matters in the same arms-length fashion as one would deal
with corrupt bosses in any other trade union.That is to say, it
should be recognized that NEA/UEA is after exactly the same end as any other
corrupt trade union -- benefit to itself, the Socialist International, its
bosses, and its less skilled, less motivated members, but NOT education.
I saw a movie once that showed how a car can be equipped to travel through time.
The words 'based on a true story' don't lend much more creedence
to truth in a film than the idea that we'd like to see a delorean fly.
I'm not sure why we despise education and teachers so much here; I think it
has something to do with knowledge being dangerous and anathema to the
political/religious environment that tries to stay superimposed over our society
So now the conservatives seem to expect everyone to lap up as "factual"
a Hollywood movie.I honestly don't know what the truth is or
isn't in the supposedly "true story" that supposedly inspired this
movie.But by the time scriptwriters get finished with the facts in
almost any movie or TV show, the reality is nowhere near factual.Yes, there are problems in education. But they are certainly not going to be
helped by any movie like this.Hutterite has it right in his post
Ha ha ha, and we all know that everything in movies is true. Thanks
for the laugh today. There's no way this letter writer is serious, right?
What kind of fantasy world do you have to live in to actually believe that the
majority of Americans who consistently support charter schools "despise
education and teachers so much"!? In any other context that would be
offensive; here it's just sad, since that kind of cheap shot is apparently
the best argument this individual could come up with against charter schools.John CC's argument isn't much better, but at least it's
an argument instead of an empty insult. I'm not a strong supporter of
charter schools because of a Hollywood movie. I support charter schools - and
my kids attend them - because they consistently perform better than traditional
district schools. Study after study after study confirms this. His figures are
simply wrong, and probably describe a rare, localized exception to the national
trend somewhere.And John seems to misunderstand that Charters are
PUBLIC schools...no eeevil corporations are siphoning off "profits"
(from where!? charters are free!) He might be referring to PRIVATE schools,
which perform better than both district AND charter schools, which is why
vouchers will happen one day, if there's any justice. Those eeeeevil
corporations...how dare they upstage the unions!
I blame Murphy Brown, this all started with her.
Has the letter writer ever considered the possibility that film can be a medium
for propaganda? Many people want to believe anything that reinforces their
prejudices and they reject anything that goes against their pre-set opinions.
It's just the nature of things. So if the letter writer sees a piece that
confirms his views about teachers unions, then that must be "the
truth".Perhaps the letter writer should stop seeing political
advertisements from his partisan perspective and try to get behind the message
and understand what is being said. It's difficult, particularly when
he's been taught since he was a child to believe the acknowledged authority
influencing his life.Maturity comes when we can make judgements on
our own based on rationality and wisdom. This is where a little street smarts
goes a long way.
So, the law in California says that if 50% +1 parent doesn't like the way a
school is performing, they can petition to make the state do their job to fix
that school - including turning it into a charter school - which provides no
additional funding or resources to the school and in no way addresses any actual
issues the school is having - it does, however, give parents who, prior to the
signing of the petition were not involved in their children's education,
the opportunity to get involved. (Although, why they weren't involved
before - who knows.....)I do have to question the credibility of the
author. He clearly admits that harassment of the parents was out of line and
that a Judge ordered those harassing the parents to stop - but first he acts
like this harassment is part of the law and supported by progressives and
accuses progressives of hypocritically supporting ID here but not when
voting.This is an unfounded accusation, has nothing to do with the
story, and shows the author's bias. What else is he fabricating,
stretching the truth on, or misrepresenting?Too bad he had to let
his bias ruin the story.
Voice of Reason, I appreciate your desire to get the facts behind the
rhetoric.My statistics on charter school performance come from a
2009 study by the Centre for Research on Education Outcomes (Credo) at Stanford
University.Yes, charter schools are public schools. Their charter
depends on state approval and they are funded by our taxes.Examples
of for-profit promoters of charter schools:1. Glenn Way and Michael
Morley, who passed pro-charter laws as lawmakers. Their wives, who sat (sit) on
ALA's board of trustees, which approved huge contract deals with Charter
School Properties V (no-bid), owned partly by Way, Morley, and fellow
pro-charter lawmaker Jim Ferrin. Morley's construction company, the no-bid
building contractor.2. K12, a national profit-making provider of
educational services, currently under investigation in Florida and subject to a
share-holder lawsuit for allegedly falsifying the certification status of its
teachers. Recently approved to provide Utah with online courses.
Finally someone questions the union monopoly in education. With all of the
Michael Moore and Oliver Stone movies accepted as the truth, not the liberals
are questioning Hollywood. The irony is delicious.
Re: one old man Ogden, UT"So now the conservatives seem to expect
everyone to lap up as "factual" a Hollywood movie."If
this movie supported your point of view you would accept it as gospel truth.
Thank goodness for for girls like Samantha Pawlucy who had the guts to stand up
to her geometry teacher who mocked her for wearing a Mitt Romney T-shirt.Where there's smoke there's fire.
JohnCC - I'm glad you're doing your homework, even if your sources are
somewhat limited. I've been involved in charter schools for years. The
Stanford study is the well-known outlier to the charter-supporting norm in
peer-reviewed research. There are a number of reasons, but the main criticism
is that it lumped together predictably low-performing alternative high schools -
which are overwhelmingly charters - with other magnet charter high schools and
charter K-8 schools. Even the report itself notes that K-8 charters (elem &
middle) do MUCH better than traditional schools, while charter high schools do
worse, never noting that they're including the large number of alternative
charter HS that will always, by definition, do worse than other schools. That
skews the results opposite to prevailing mainstream research, which is that
charters do consistently better across the board. And no wonder, since they are
governed by a highly involved school-specific parent board as opposed to a
distant, detached district board members working their way up the political
ladder that govern dozens of schools. And sweetheart Morley
construction deals are just that - construction deals. Those have been
happening with district schools since time immemorial.
re:VOR" I support charter schools - and my kids attend them - because
they consistently perform better than traditional district schools. Study after
study after study confirms this."Actually, studies of charter
schools show mixed results. The safe assumption might be that some charter
schools may be better than some public schools. But how is a parent to sort
through the differences? You obviously are a strong believer and proponent in
charter schools since your children attend them. I am curious as to what led to
you enrolling your children in a charter school? Did they start out in public
schools? How did you determine, what criteria did you use to evaluate the
Well, Rifle, I'm sure you enjoyed that other factual movie about education.
Surely you remember the one I'm thinking of.I think it was
called "Kindergarten Cop."There are very few "based on a
true story" movies that are anywhere near the truth.It's
important that we all take some time to evaluate the degree of factual
information in any movie or other source before trying to convince anyone else
that it is true or not.That is why we liberals you hate so much are
liberals. We are actually conservatives who are able to think for ourselves and
then refuse to let anyone fool us.
@ Tolstoy 12:06 p.m. Oct. 11She also said we should judge people by
the type of music they listen to.Seriously... both of my parents
were educators and they had issues with Teachers Unions, district bureaucrats
& of course the state legislature.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments