Secretary of Education nominee Betsy DeVos and Detroit's schools

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

It may not be what we want, but it is no surprise that a person born with a golden spoon who wishes to dismantle public schools was named.

Dismantling public schools as well as privatizing and sending tax dollars to religious institutions will be the agenda.

[Bobl]

Dismantling public schools as well as privatizing and sending tax dollars to religious institutions will be the agenda.

Yes, and it will be fun to sit back and watch when some high profile Islamic groups sign up for the cash cow, complements of President Trump.

[EastsideAl]

Dismantling public schools as well as privatizing and sending tax dollars to religious institutions will be the agenda.

It's no secret that her "privatizing" agenda, like that of the rest of the political/religious establishment in western Michigan, is in service of extracting taxpayer funding for Christian institutions and schools. What they really want is to make an end run around the 1st Amendment. Any potential improvement to the education of "urban" children would merely be a side effect of their main aim.

[Wesley Mouch]

It's no secret that her "privatizing" agenda, like that of the rest of the political/religious establishment in western Michigan, is in service of extracting taxpayer funding for Christian institutions and schools. What they really want is to make an end run around the 1st Amendment. Any potential improvement to the education of "urban" children would merely be a side effect of their main aim.

You really think that Ms. DeVos doesn't care about education, simply because he ideas don't line up with yours?

I don't know if Charters and public funding of religious schools are the solution, but I know that the monopolistic public education and monopolistic union-industrial complex isn't the answer.

Even if she has a 'privatizing' agenda, so what? Why not give it a try. There's an argument that in aggregate, charters do no better than public education -- but that also suggests that they do no worse.

[EastsideAl]

You really think that Ms. DeVos doesn't care about education, simply because he ideas don't line up with yours?

I don't know if Charters and public funding of religious schools are the solution, but I know that the monopolistic public education and monopolistic union-industrial complex isn't the answer.

Even if she has a 'privatizing' agenda, so what? Why not give it a try. There's an argument that in aggregate, charters do no better than public education -- but that also suggests that they do no worse.

I don't think she gives a damn about educating urban children, particularly the darker-hued ones. Her whole educational career has been in service of extracting public money to fund parochial religious institutions. Especially the type of protestant 'Chrisitian academies' [[in her case, particularly for little white Calvinist children) that have long been used as a dodge around integrated public schools. And in seeking ways around that pesky First Amendment to do it.

[Towne Cluber]

I don't think she gives a damn about educating urban children, particularly the darker-hued ones. Her whole educational career has been in service of extracting public money to fund parochial religious institutions. Especially the type of protestant 'Chrisitian academies' [[in her case, particularly for little white Calvinist children) that have long been used as a dodge around integrated public schools. And in seeking ways around that pesky First Amendment to do it.

In that case, you might be quite surprised to learn of the private feelings of a prominent Detroiter [["darker-hued" as you said) that is quite involved in educating urban children...

Here's a hint: "I've got mine" and "If they don't like it they can move out of the city/state"...

[Wesley Mouch]

I don't think she gives a damn about educating urban children, particularly the darker-hued ones. Her whole educational career has been in service of extracting public money to fund parochial religious institutions. Especially the type of protestant 'Chrisitian academies' [[in her case, particularly for little white Calvinist children) that have long been used as a dodge around integrated public schools. And in seeking ways around that pesky First Amendment to do it.

If they don't agree with you, call them racists.

If there's a single reason Trump won, its that thinking. For years, the black community wanted respect. Why wouldn't the white community want respect too? Instead they get attacks on their motives.

[EastsideAl]

If they don't agree with you, call them racists.

If there's a single reason Trump won, its that thinking. For years, the black community wanted respect. Why wouldn't the white community want respect too? Instead they get attacks on their motives.

I'm not offended [[in case you were worried), But you did allude to my favorite bizarro trope of the Tumpists: we were so hurt at being called racist that we decided to vote for one [[and whatever he does, it's all your fault calling us that).

[erikd]

You really think that Ms. DeVos doesn't care about education, simply because he ideas don't line up with yours?

I don't know if Charters and public funding of religious schools are the solution, but I know that the monopolistic public education and monopolistic union-industrial complex isn't the answer.

Even if she has a 'privatizing' agenda, so what? Why not give it a try. There's an argument that in aggregate, charters do no better than public education -- but that also suggests that they do no worse.

We HAVE given the privatization/charter school agenda a try, and it hasn't worked. Just to be clear, I am not opposed to privatization or charter schools, and I had hopes that the charter school experiment would yield improved outcomes, but they just haven't.

Instead of continuing to expand this failed experiment, it would be better for us to look at the schools that have found ways to create academic improvements under similar circumstances, and then try to replicate their successes. There are examples of public and private schools overcoming these challenges in America and abroad, so we should be looking at these successful examples to figure out what they did to overcome the odds, and then utilize those strategies.

The most effective strategies for turning around substandard schools may involve more privatization or less privatization, but we should be striving for the best outcomes, and not blindly supporting a dogmatic approach.

[Honky Tonk]

We HAVE given the privatization/charter school agenda a try, and it hasn't worked. Just to be clear, I am not opposed to privatization or charter schools, and I had hopes that the charter school experiment would yield improved outcomes, but they just haven't.

Instead of continuing to expand this failed experiment, it would be better for us to look at the schools that have found ways to create academic improvements under similar circumstances, and then try to replicate their successes. There are examples of public and private schools overcoming these challenges in America and abroad, so we should be looking at these successful examples to figure out what they did to overcome the odds, and then utilize those strategies.

The most effective strategies for turning around substandard schools may involve more privatization or less privatization, but we should be striving for the best outcomes, and not blindly supporting a dogmatic approach.

Exactly, +5...

[Wesley Mouch]

We HAVE given the privatization/charter school agenda a try, and it hasn't worked. Just to be clear, I am not opposed to privatization or charter schools, and I had hopes that the charter school experiment would yield improved outcomes, but they just haven't.

Instead of continuing to expand this failed experiment, it would be better for us to look at the schools that have found ways to create academic improvements under similar circumstances, and then try to replicate their successes. There are examples of public and private schools overcoming these challenges in America and abroad, so we should be looking at these successful examples to figure out what they did to overcome the odds, and then utilize those strategies.

The most effective strategies for turning around substandard schools may involve more privatization or less privatization, but we should be striving for the best outcomes, and not blindly supporting a dogmatic approach.

Why do you think charters are a 'dogmatic' approach?

As to 'replicating [[academic improvement's) success'... what is the obstacle?

Perhaps we're talking past each other. By Charters, I do not necessarily mean only for-profit schools, but the ability of non-monopoly educational options. Thus, Charters seem like the right vehicle to 'strive for best outcomes'. Otherwise, it seems like we're striving for the status-quo.

It has always surprised me that liberals on education are conservative -- preferring the publicly managed education monopoly over allowing alternatives of varying degrees of privatization. I just can't see how killing charters helps children -- even if some or most are failures, I value experimentation.

[ct_alum]

Why do you think charters are a 'dogmatic' approach?

As to 'replicating [[academic improvement's) success'... what is the obstacle?

Perhaps we're talking past each other. By Charters, I do not necessarily mean only for-profit schools, but the ability of non-monopoly educational options. Thus, Charters seem like the right vehicle to 'strive for best outcomes'. Otherwise, it seems like we're striving for the status-quo.

It has always surprised me that liberals on education are conservative -- preferring the publicly managed education monopoly over allowing alternatives of varying degrees of privatization. I just can't see how killing charters helps children -- even if some or most are failures, I value experimentation.

Yes, Wesley, you value experimentation as long as it is with somebody else's kids; if they are poor & black all the better, correct?

[G-DDT]

Interesting theory about Wesley, Jimaz. Of all the genuine folks from Detroit who SHOULD be sounding off on DY [[but sadly are not-like the many I see at the Jazzfest whose opinions I feel really count), we get someone who just happens to be "one of the most cyber-apt conservative persons in all of poor Hamtramck". Hmmmm?

Come to think of it, I would like to make the long overdue request that anyone who feels they need to get on a Detroit forum site to sound off their politics [[be they conservative OR liberal) should start engaging in forums that give us a little insight to where they are coming from. There should be NO PROBLEM in getting on certain threads like-oh....say this one: http://www.detroityes.com/mb/showthr...ht=high+schooland tell us a bit about your experiences from Detroit [[this goes for you GMan).

This is a long time coming and I'm PISSED OFF!!

I'm sick of folks who were genuine Detroiters [[mostly women) and tell genuine stories about things that they saw go down in their own neighborhoods only to get a deluge of contention from the same sockpuppet yahoos who descend on them and cause them to give up. I'm sick and tired of seeing a lack of true engagement with things really pertaining to Detroit. No one sites stories from Detroit news sources like they used to [[just search past threads and you will see the stark difference).

Instead you got threads addressing dry clinical and statistical crud about development, financing, infrastructures, and roads. These seem like the very things only developers and investors from Chicago or other cities look into when they want to "reconstruct Detroit in their own vision". They are also the things any outsider can look up on Forbes or Google maps or elsewhere. So all the things that make Detroit great: community, culture, events that transpire, personal accounts seem to take a remote and suppressed back seat to this.

As much as I may not agree with guys like Hermod, Danny, or Johnny5, at least I have a better intimation with them if there is some confirmation that they are a Detroiter [[or former Detroiter) like myself.

Even if you are just someone who visited our city for an extended period of time [[say a month) and feel some intimation with Detroit. Fine. Yet, don't be some ASSHOLE [[yeah, I said it-I'm that mad-and have been for some time) from another city who visits once for a game, wrinkles their nose at us, and says to themselves "well, you know what?-they got a forum. I know what would make that sh*thole city better. I'm going to join their forum and start injecting consrevo-anti-union, pro-corporate, anti-homeless, anti-police abuse protest, anti-activist, don't-get-PC-on-me-and-call-me-a-racist rhetoric every chance I get".

So, what gives folks? Time to start showing some transparency where you are coming from, here.

[erikd]

Why do you think charters are a 'dogmatic' approach?

As to 'replicating [[academic improvement's) success'... what is the obstacle?

Perhaps we're talking past each other. By Charters, I do not necessarily mean only for-profit schools, but the ability of non-monopoly educational options. Thus, Charters seem like the right vehicle to 'strive for best outcomes'. Otherwise, it seems like we're striving for the status-quo.

It has always surprised me that liberals on education are conservative -- preferring the publicly managed education monopoly over allowing alternatives of varying degrees of privatization. I just can't see how killing charters helps children -- even if some or most are failures, I value experimentation.

Why do I think that charters are a 'dogmatic' approach?

I don't think that charters are a dogmatic approach. I think that people who continue to push for more charter schools, despite the fact that they have not resulted in improved outcomes, are taking a dogmatic approach.

As I said: "The most effective strategies for turning around substandard schools may involve more privatization or less privatization, but we should be striving for the best outcomes, and not blindly supporting a dogmatic approach."

I support school strategies that are effective, be they public, private, charter, whatever.

When I talk about a dogmatic approach, I am talking about this mindset:

"By Charters, I do not necessarily mean only for-profit schools, but the ability of non-monopoly educational options. Thus, Charters seem like the right vehicle to 'strive for best outcomes'. Otherwise, it seems like we're striving for the status-quo."

Maybe I am misinterpreting your statement, but it sure sounds like a dogmatic mindset against public schools [[monopoly educational options), and dogmatic support for continued expansion of charter schools [[even though they haven't resulted in improved outcomes).

If charters haven't made things better, how can you say that "Charters seem like the right vehicle to 'strive for best outcomes'. Otherwise, it seems like we're striving for the status-quo." That sure sounds like a dogmatic approach...

[Wesley Mouch]

...snip...Maybe I am misinterpreting your statement, but it sure sounds like a dogmatic mindset against public schools [[monopoly educational options), and dogmatic support for continued expansion of charter schools [[even though they haven't resulted in improved outcomes).

If charters haven't made things better, how can you say that "Charters seem like the right vehicle to 'strive for best outcomes'. Otherwise, it seems like we're striving for the status-quo." That sure sounds like a dogmatic approach...

Yes, I have a dogmatic belief that only by experimentation can you get results. I believe that monopolies are harmful. Be they corporation, union, or educational. I believe it with religious fervor. I find arguments against competition to be mostly self-serving. I dogmatically distrust self-serving arguments that somehow, the status quo needs protection.

As to De Vos, Trump is certainly unconventional. So little surprise he's nominating someone who is unconventional in education circles. We'll see how it goes. Maybe she'll shake a few things up -- and that might be good.

[Bham1982]

You really think that Ms. DeVos doesn't care about education, simply because he ideas don't line up with yours?

I don't think she cares about public education; given she has spent much of her adult life trying to destroy public schools.

Don't really care whether she cares about "education" in general, as that isn't the role of the Ed Secretary.

Even if she has a 'privatizing' agenda, so what? Why not give it a try.

Michigan has been "giving it a try" for 15-20 years, with disastrous results. We've gone from one of the best state public education systems to one of the worst. We have some of the most liberal charter school laws in the nation, and the vast majority of MI charters are low-performing for-profit schemes.

There's an argument that in aggregate, charters do no better than public education -- but that also suggests that they do no worse.

No. Research indicates that charters do worse than traditional public schools. In fact Detroit charters do significantly worse even than DPS, which is kinda impressive in its abject failure. When DPS is kicking your ass in terms of academics I think it's fair to say you've failed.

[jt1]

No. Research indicates that charters do worse than traditional public schools. In fact Detroit charters do significantly worse even than DPS, which is kinda impressive in its abject failure. When DPS is kicking your ass in terms of academics I think it's fair to say you've failed.

What is even more impressive is that charters are not required to take in special ed students, ESL students or any other kids that they deem 'undesirable' or that could impact their testing.

Simply put, they are doing just as bad while picking and choosing their students. Comparing just peer groups they are doing significantly worse.

**Full disclaimer: I think the world would be better off if Dick and Betsy DeVos were found at the bottom of Lake Michigan**

[G-DDT]

**Full disclaimer: I think the world would be better off if Dick and Betsy DeVos were found at the bottom of Lake Michigan**

Whoa!

Thank you for your candid honesty. I'd never go that far. Yet, I would like them very much removed out of the picture by many degrees separation.

Good thing there is a difference between what thought, word, and action.

[detroittrader]

Whoa!

Thank you for your candid honesty. I'd never go that far. Yet, I would like them very much removed out of the picture by many degrees separation.

Good thing there is a difference between what thought, word, and action.

They deserve a swamp, lets keep our lake's clean:

http://www.advocate.com/politics/201...e-gods-kingdom