Forums - Politics Discussion - Betsy DeVos confirmed as Education secretary after Pence breaks 50-50 tie.

Thuglas said:

Public schools are absolutely garbage in most low income cities in America. The religious schools (and Charter schools in some states) perform better than Public school. How can you posibly be against giving more oportunity for children to get better education? I grew up in Detroit and it became so apparent why it is so hard for people to escape poverty. The biggest problem were the public schools I attended. Kids in every classroom were out of control and the teachers didn't care at all.  This isn't the case for charter schools in inner cities (she advocated for charter schools too). Charter school demand has been on the rise yet their has been fight back against creating more of them.

Democrat leaders seem to be adamently against allowing young kids a chance to escape the broken public school system as of late. They are fighting against DeVos plan for school choice and public education officials have shot down the creation of more charter schools in New York in the past claiming "it doesn't meet our education standards" despite them out perfoming public schools in the same area. We need more charter schools in inner cities! Nothing wrong with religuous schools either since they have proven they know how to teach kids. If the parents are okay with sending kids to a Catholic school then help them do so. If we want to help poor comunities then it starts at education. how many more decades of failing public schools do we need before we try something new?

Well, aside from the fact that federal data show that the charter schools Mrs DeVos helped fund in Michigan (while defunding the private schools) not only rank near the bottom on national standardized testing, but also performed worse than their public school counterparts,
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/betsy-devos-michigan-school-experiment-232399
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/12/08/a-sobering-look-at-what-betsy-devos-did-to-education-in-michigan-and-what-she-might-do-as-secretary-of-education/?utm_term=.eae191d04dc3

, refer to the video I posted in the OP where Al Franken explains that the vouchers usually don't cover most of the costs for private schooling. So what ends up happening is that the vouchers acs as additional support for families who could already afford to pay for private schooling, while the families who originally couldn't, still can't.

On top of that, there's the religious element to this that is very debatable, and the separation of churche and state. SHe described her goal as "To advance God's kingdom."
But more importantly is how ridiculously unqualified Mrs DeVos is for the position. If this was someone with a background that had prepared them for this position then the debate would have a very different tone.



Around the Network
irstupid said:
axumblade said:

Education is already screwed up. Most schools have cut the Arts programs significantly. I've also heard there have been some schools that have cut a lot of funding for science programs as well. I can only imagine how bad it will get

I always love when people complain like this.

"OMG school has been getting shittier and shittier and are ranking and grades have been dropping steadily for years compared to world wide. How dare they put someone new into power that isn't going to do the same thing we have been doing"

I have no idea who this lady is or what she stands for, but how about we let her do something before we cry about the sky falling. I've been hearing for years how our school system is going to shit. Thus doesn't that mean that our prior Education Secretarys have been shit?

 

edit: also arts programs get cut for lack of funding, not because of some agenda. If you care so much for them, make a donation to the school of your choosing and stipulate it be used for the arts. My colleges call me all the time for donations. High Schools don't, but I guarantee they are not against donations.

Thank you for invalidating this and future posts by openly admitting that you will take a stand without any knowledge on the topic at hand.



sabvre42 said:

I don't like trump, and I don't necessarily care for her; but she is pushing for funding charter schools -- and that is the BEST thing we could do to our public education system!

Since I literally had to explain to a hard core liberal last week what a charter school is (he started freaking out about how dare she "help the rich more by funding charter schools", I'll start by letting everyone here know what a charter school ACTUALLY is:
A charter school is a publicly funded school that is ran independently... but with state oversight (meaning having to adhere to standards as well as separation of church and state).

When you say that, you make it sound like charter schools have the same accountability laws as public schools, but they do not. Fraud and conflicts of interest for example (pretty relevant in the Trump administration where the president made a fake college) are a problem. A federal audit this year noted that Michigan’s charter-school law doesn’t include rules regarding conflicts of interest, among other issues.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/betsy-devos-michigan-school-experiment-232399

And in fact, Mrs DeVos refused to say that she would hold private schools accountable to the same standards as public schools, during her congressional interview.

I want to repeat one last time: Charter schools are FREE.

While that may have been the case for your family, vouchers usually don't cover the whole cost for private schools. What more commonly ends up happening is that they act as additional support for families who could already afford to pay for private school.

In a country where you don't even have tuition free college, you can't seriously expect that all kids will have access to fully funded private schooling.
And for those who can't, they'll be stuck in a defunded, worse, public school. That's not fair.
I mostly grew up in Sweden, and we do have tuition free college. I could pick any school I wanted, anywhere in the country. That's equally fair for every student. Not the system Mrs DeVos has devoted herself to.

On top of that, there's the religious element to this that is very debatable, and the separation of churche and state.
But more importantly is how ridiculously unqualified Mrs DeVos is for the position. If this was someone with a background that had prepared them for this position then the debate would have a very different tone.



Hiku said:
irstupid said:

I have no idea who this lady is or what she stands for, but how about we let her do something before we cry about the sky falling. I've been hearing for years how our school system is going to shit. Thus doesn't that mean that our prior Education Secretarys have been shit?

In the video I attached (edited in afterwards) Al Franken summarizes a lot facts about Mrs DeVos and why she is a danger to the American education system, if you want to familiarize yourself with her.
The prior Education Secratary (and probably all of them) had a background that prepared them for the job.If a pilot crashes a plane, that is not an argument for putting a toddler in the cockpit, and saying "let's see how it goes before we raise objections."
Franken described her congressional interview as "one of the most embarassing performances by a nominee in the history of the united states senate."

Really? Have me watch a video by Al Franken for info on a republican person? Ha, that has got to be the worst source in the world.

Insidb said:
irstupid said:

I always love when people complain like this.

"OMG school has been getting shittier and shittier and are ranking and grades have been dropping steadily for years compared to world wide. How dare they put someone new into power that isn't going to do the same thing we have been doing"

I have no idea who this lady is or what she stands for, but how about we let her do something before we cry about the sky falling. I've been hearing for years how our school system is going to shit. Thus doesn't that mean that our prior Education Secretarys have been shit?

 

edit: also arts programs get cut for lack of funding, not because of some agenda. If you care so much for them, make a donation to the school of your choosing and stipulate it be used for the arts. My colleges call me all the time for donations. High Schools don't, but I guarantee they are not against donations.

Thank you for invalidating this and future posts by openly admitting that you will take a stand without any knowledge on the topic at hand.

Can you please tell me about the previous Secretary of Education without looking up anything about him/her.

I bet you can't. I bet all of your current knowledge on this new one is purely from the MSM who is making it their top priority to put her in the worst possible light possible. 

A quick wikipedia search and only reading the first paragraph I find this.   DeVos has been an advocate of the Detroit charter school system and she is a member of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education. She has served as chairwoman of the board of Alliance for School Choice and Acton Institute and heads the All Children Matter PAC.

So clearly that no experience thing was a lie. She has experience in school related things. But I guess not everyone can be as experience or qualified as Hillary Clinton. You know what I say about experience and qualification? I say grow up and have a real job. Heck maybe even be in charge of hiring people at some point. You will find out very quickly that what is on a resume or how someone interview goes does not mean jack shit. Heck don't even be in charge of interviews. Just look around at yoru work. Unless your job is some huge turnaround job or low skilled, no employer hires someone they don't think is qualified or will be good. Yet how many morons and incompentent people, or lazy or ect are there at work. Do you ever wonder how the F they got hired? They were clearly QUALIFIED and possilby had EXPERIENCE.

But you will never know until they start working. 



Hiku said:
Thuglas said:

Public schools are absolutely garbage in most low income cities in America. The religious schools (and Charter schools in some states) perform better than Public school. How can you posibly be against giving more oportunity for children to get better education? I grew up in Detroit and it became so apparent why it is so hard for people to escape poverty. The biggest problem were the public schools I attended. Kids in every classroom were out of control and the teachers didn't care at all.  This isn't the case for charter schools in inner cities (she advocated for charter schools too). Charter school demand has been on the rise yet their has been fight back against creating more of them.

Democrat leaders seem to be adamently against allowing young kids a chance to escape the broken public school system as of late. They are fighting against DeVos plan for school choice and public education officials have shot down the creation of more charter schools in New York in the past claiming "it doesn't meet our education standards" despite them out perfoming public schools in the same area. We need more charter schools in inner cities! Nothing wrong with religuous schools either since they have proven they know how to teach kids. If the parents are okay with sending kids to a Catholic school then help them do so. If we want to help poor comunities then it starts at education. how many more decades of failing public schools do we need before we try something new?

Well, aside from the fact that federal data show that the charter schools Mrs DeVos helped fund in Michigan (while defunding the private schools) not only rank near the bottom on national standardized testing, but also performed worse than their public school counterparts,
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/betsy-devos-michigan-school-experiment-232399
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/12/08/a-sobering-look-at-what-betsy-devos-did-to-education-in-michigan-and-what-she-might-do-as-secretary-of-education/?utm_term=.eae191d04dc3

, refer to the video I posted in the OP where Al Franken explains that the vouchers usually don't cover most of the costs for private schooling. So what ends up happening is that the vouchers acs as additional support for families who could already afford to pay for private schooling, while the families who originally couldn't, still can't.

On top of that, there's the religious element to this that is very debatable, and the separation of churche and state.
But more importantly is how ridiculously unqualified Mrs DeVos is for the position. If this was someone with a background that had prepared them for this position then the debate would have a very different tone.

It's DeVos's religious background that worries me the most. No, it's not going to lead to creationism in public schools, but I don't have confidence in her maintaining impartiality towards all types of schools.



Around the Network
irstupid said:

Really? Have me watch a video by Al Franken for info on a republican person? Ha, that has got to be the worst source in the world.

Yes, really. Especially when she and her family has donated hundreds of thousands to the the republican party. Who else do you expect to thoroughly talk about her at length like this? The republicans in her pocket? That's not a jab at republicans in general, like you just did against Al Franken, because some of the democrats take corporate money as well. But in this particular case her family has donated hundreds of thousands to the GOP, which is the only reason she is standing there today.

When the things he says are backed up by facts and evidence, or can easily be checked by a simple google search, does it matter who it comes from? No. I'm not telling you to adhere to his opinion, but to listen to the facts, and then form your own. Such as the extremely basic questions he gave her, and the answers she failed to give him because she didn't understand the most basic of concepts, during her congressional hearing. That hearing is on Youtube, you can easily check it yourself. That Frnken is the one who recites what happened there, which you can easily check with your own eyes and years, is irrelevant.

Instead of automatically being opposed to listening to something because it comes from someone with a different political spectrum, gather information from as many sources as you can. I named that video out of convenience because he had gathered a pile of data on her and presented it in one place.
If you can think of a better source, by all means let us know. But don't stay uninformed on this matter, as it is a very important one.



Hiku said:
irstupid said:

Really? Have me watch a video by Al Franken for info on a republican person? Ha, that has got to be the worst source in the world.

Yes, really. Especially when she has donated hundreds of thousands to the the republican party over the years. Who else do you expect to thoroughly talk about her at length like this? The republicans in her pocket? That's not a jab at republicans in general, like you just did against Al Franken, because some of the democrats take corporate money as well. But in this particular case her family has donated hundreds of thousands to the GOP, which is the only reason she is standing there today.

When the things he says are backed up by facts and evidence, or can easily be checked by a simple google search, does it matter who it comes from? No. I'm not telling you to adhere to his opinion, but to listen to the facts, and then form your own. Such as the extremely basic questions he gave her, and the answers she failed to give him because she didn't understand the most basic of concepts, during her congressional hearing. That hearing is on Youtube, you can easily check it yourself. That Frnken is the one who recites what happened there, which you can easily check with your own eyes and years, is irrelevant.

Instead of automatically being opposed to listening to something because it comes from someone with a different political spectrum, gather information from as many sources as you can. I simply named that video because he had gathered a pile of data on her and presented it in one go.

Listening to Al Franken is the equivelent of listening to Rush Limbaugh. I don't care how many facts they spew out, they are also leaving out a ton of facts that do not fit their agenda. 

And as I said in the post you quoted, you didn't quote the other part. In regards to her "hearing" its like a job interview. How many people aced job interviews or had impecable resumes yet completely suck at the job, or end up being theives, or lazy or ect. Then there are people who barely get the job yet are the best employees. Job resumes and interviews are not a good qualifier of a person. I'll wait to judge someone till they are on the job. 

Heck, its the main reason why I wish colleges woudl change. Screw the first two years of basically generals and toss the people into their major classes instantly. Then the next two years be apprentaces at a place. You know hands on, practical stuff where they actually get to see how you work. Teachers have a student teachign semester. Doctors have internships. But most other careers you just show up with you GPA, BS charity work you only did for resume, and then your interviewing skills. Things that in no way determine how good of an employee you'll be. 



irstupid said:

Listening to Al Franken is the equivelent of listening to Rush Limbaugh. I don't care how many facts they spew out, they are also leaving out a ton of facts that do not fit their agenda. 

Then you can compliment those facts with the supposed facts they leave out.
Point still stands that it's not better to remain uninformed. And he did compile a lot of info into one single video.
If you know of anyone who did a better job at that, then by all means let us know. Until then, coming from someone who has followed this case very closely from multiple sources, whether they are left, right, independant, mainstream or underground, his speech remains the most informative for relevant information on her compiled in a single place.



More budget in education did not yield in better schools or smarter students to start with, instead of giving the money taken away from school to another set of schools, use the money to fix the fucking homeless situation in the country first, fucktarded ass politicians.



dahuman said:

More budget in education did not yield in better schools or smarter students to start with, instead of giving the money taken away from school to another set of schools, use the money to fix the fucking homeless situation in the country first, fucktarded ass politicians.

Half of education budget is spent on private contractors.

A good way to reduce homelessness is to give citizens tools to combat it. Like, education.