IRequirePants t1_j9idqmd wrote
Reply to comment by actualtext in Parents fume over Governor Hochul’s charter school expansion proposal | amNewYork by barweis
> the exact same union standards
No. Rubber rooms are not useful.
IsayNigel t1_j9lveyn wrote
Rubber rooms have been a non issue for years you really need to get another talking point. Schools can barely find staff as it is, how do you think it’s going to work with no unions?
IRequirePants t1_j9lzby4 wrote
> Rubber rooms have been a non issue for years you really need to get another talking point.
Because deBlasio and Adams started reassigning them to teaching roles:
> Schools can barely find staff as it is, how do you think it’s going to work with no unions?
Huh? Seems to be working fine in charter schools.
[deleted] t1_j9mwu5i wrote
[deleted]
IRequirePants t1_j9mzy9w wrote
First off, it 100% depends on the specific charter school. It is not a monolith. And I can just easily point to the public school failures in NYC. At least if a student is learning a test, they are learning.
For many students, the alternative is a public school where they will learn nothing at all.
[deleted] t1_j9n0k6m wrote
[deleted]
IRequirePants t1_j9n1m9e wrote
> Thats the hottest worst take I have ever see
Because you have no concept of what the alternative is.
> Theres a huge movement going on in elite subrubab districts (of which I am part) to do LESS testing.
That movement is actually the dumbest things in education. For example, the UC system did a study on the SAT. They found it gave underrepresented students more opportunities and were a better indicator for college GPA than high school GPA.
No need to address the rest of your comment. Too many standardized tests is obviously bad, but having a core group of standardized tests (APs, SATs, Regents), is important for measuring student aptitude. Again, I point to this UC report.
Even if all they are learning is the test, they are learning something. The alternative is learning nothing at all for many of these kids.
[deleted] t1_j9n1xgd wrote
[deleted]
IRequirePants t1_j9n2c58 wrote
> The SAT didn’t help them, they were born with wealth and other advantages.
So you understand the issue. The SAT didn't help them, because they already have other advantages. Not every student is like that, especially in the NYC public school system.
The UC report shows SAT scores allowed more underrepresented groups of more diverse backgrounds into the system. And did so better than something more subjective, like high school GPA.
There is also this focus on the Ivies or other top schools that suburban districts have. For kids in urban charter schools, that is not the choice nor the focus.
IsayNigel t1_j9n5icd wrote
Really? The turnover rate in charters is higher than that of the DOE, their pay is worse, and so are their benefits. Where are you getting this information from?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments