6,100 Teachers To Be Laid Off, Good for Tea Party

no notadmin, you're entire attitude toward anyone over 40 is so nasty i can't believe it.

many people are having horrible times making ends meet. your little incessant rant about the elders is nothing compared to those people who today are about to lose their unemployment.

your entire history of posting here has shown only self-interest, from the cry to cut off benefits for the older, to yesterday's odd demand that vouchers should be available for all.

nasty but delightful?

ar is up to 13000 posts now.

AR - nice how you're able to pay for private school because you got an undeserved rent roll back from market to stabilized, and you don't pay any real estate taxes. Seems to me that many other newy orkers are subsidizing your daughter's private school education.

> you're out of your absolutely f'ng mind if you think the average american ever considers demographics.

the point is that it was there, it's not rocket science, yet somebody has to spoonfeed them on the issue. what's the education needed to get it? i'd say high school is enough and even less (demographic pyramid and super basic math). it takes intellectual honesty though.

Americans don't engage in precautionary savings and they should. other societies that are poorer get it done, so don't give me a complacency stand point here. complacency is part of the problem, overconsupmtion and catching up with the jones also is to blame... bla bla bla... the point is that attitude was and is not optimal for them nor for the country.

murray888, otherwise known as ph41, i started paying for private school long before i got that "undeserved" rent roll back, sweets.

how could others be subsidizing the kid's education, when i'm paying 100% and have been forever, even when i owned in chelsea?

dumb. very, very stupid.

> notadmin, i like how you want free education because you've chosen low rent in harlem.

my kiddo is going to public school in the neighborhood. i was one of the few in my class of 35 from a very bad school who got wherever ivy league i applied to, kiddo will as well do just fine, amazing brain cause of luck. that's my point: not everything is about your own kid. you are obligated to make things better for other kids too.

right now, really, i don't even expect you to get it. you don't attrack trolls, you just create them by your addiction to fallacies ad hominem. thinking is tougher, but more respectful and also a good investment on your part long-term (IQ wise).

aboutready also known as 10011

so, not admin, you deny your comment the other night about how everyone should get vouchers? really?

i really haven't expected you to "get it" for a while. the incessant diatribe against anyone over 30 has become both insensitive and tasteless.

> so, not admin, you deny your comment the other night about how everyone should get vouchers? really?

what? universal vouchers are a good idea, free choice of schools too. you can read, come on! do it.

insensitive and tasteless, but amusing?

you can think critically, come on do it!

> insensitive and tasteless, but amusing?

precisely. and so self-serving to the point of assuming that we all are as well. as if somehow being self-serving isn't a choice, but a compulsory trait one is born with. this is regarding her unhappy comment: "i like how you want free education because you've chosen low rent in harlem". when in fact my kid will go to the public school just a few blocks from our house. cannot make this stuff up.

Congratulations, notadmin, on sending your kid to (your local zoned?) public school. I look forward to hearing how great the teachers are, and hope they are. If not, please report back on just how the bad teachers are bad, and how many of them there are.

Do you have a kid, by the way?

> Do you have a kid, by the way?

yes, the kid exists, he is not imaginary and it's the zoned school. many of my friends send their kids there and are very happy. looking forward to it. know that might have to step in at some point on math and science if it's as bad as the one my husband and i received as a child but was able to make up for it. think that socially is better for him to be friends with normal people. that was great for both of us.

the rich and aspirational that go to expensive private schools are not my cup of tea and missing a course on french literature is no big deal. well, this is very personal, sorry french professors, he can make up for that later if he wants to.

That all makes sense ... good for you.

Is this Huey Newton elementary school, or some similar name? I know someone who was "Principal for a Day" there and was very impressed. Well, his wife was mostly ... I don't remember what his take was exactly.

> I look forward to hearing how great the teachers are, and hope they are. If not, please report back on just how the bad teachers are bad, and how many of them there are.

i'll keep you posted. the classes in that school are not big right now (well, for me 35-40 was kind of normal, so go figure). my favorite educ system is Finland's and they are 19 average, but the reliance is on teacher's training rather than class sizes.

i had a few excellent teachers and a few really bad (to the point of having the physics teacher ask me to give the classes myself, in order to "prepare me"). funny, same experience at stanford and columbia.

rich and aspirational? do you have any idea how many kids at some of the private schools receive large amounts of financial aid? and we were hardly rich when our kid first started, not even close.

NYC school kids receive more public money per student than a senior receives in social security. you should be grateful for those who are not partaking of the public largesse, it leaves more for you.

i personally support most choices, public and private, but i myself would hesitate to choose something based on purely preconceived notions. when we were looking at options we looked at both public and private. having gone through a very bad public system i wouldn't inflict that upon my child unless there was absolutely no other option. and having taught i would never voluntarily choose an overcrowded classroom. i do admire those who work to make a local zoned school successful, and if you are able to be a part of that process more power to you.

and, of course, there's always that pesky middle school issue. which was one of the main factors in our choosing private, although at the time it was a stretch financially.

aboutready
4 minutes ago
ignore this person
report abuse and, of course, there's always that pesky middle school issue.

There's always a complaint with you. Now middle schools are pesky.

Have you already started drinking this morning?

aboutready
24 minutes ago
ignore this person
report abuse ... i myself would hesitate to choose something based on purely preconceived notions.

Good for you. So enlightened. Never choose something based on purely preconceived notions like the rest of us.

Well this thread became strange. Normally when one thinks of teacher layoffs the issue is the public school system and not private schools. The private school system is run quite differently than that of the public schools. Schools are selected based on parent preference for performance, class size etc.

Frankly I find the discussion about mis-placed.

Frankly i find most of your discussions misplaced.

Obviously the budgetary constraints will affect the public schools going forward, how dramatically and how and where we have yet to see. The private school issue came up initially in reference to class size, and what effect it might have.

"yes wbottom and ahart - more of the same is exactly what we need. it has worked flawlessly, let's not mess with it. as for those disadvantaged kids who are the victims of subpar educations - let's face it -they are probably doomed to failure anyway. I mean, the odds against them are so high anyway, I'd much spend our finite money on protecting the inferior teachers."

not more of the same--not privatized/looted---and certainly not less money

spending on education is the best way by leaps and bounds to invest in our country, and each of our children as individual human beings-- the alleged "excessive", "inefficient" spending on education has nothing whatsoever to do with the economic troubles and "finite" money we must address

go elsewhere (wow, a pun gift) to find money to fix the troubles caused by wall street, warring, consumerism and all the rest

> rich and aspirational? do you have any idea how many kids at some of the private schools receive large amounts of financial aid? and we were hardly rich when our kid first started, not even close.

sure, i consider you aspirational not rich. that social group is just not desirable to me. if say only 20% pay (and 80% get full financial aid) it'd be a better representation. but then it'll be the school where the rich and willing to pay are the stupid, kind of like in some graduate schools.

when it comes to social settings, if he goes to a good university it'll be already pretty elitist, but based more on merit, which I prefer. what's the need to start restricting it from the get go?

aspirational? to what? i'm about the least aspirational person i know, i aspire to buy a rent stabilized apartment in PCV.

the need to start restricting it from the get go is that the public middle schools in this city are largely a joke and a zoo. when i considered my options i simply didn't have the heart to attempt to make it entirely through the system using public, and it is damned difficult to get into the few decent public schools at middle school, and it's also damned difficult to get into private school for middle school.

if you feel comfortable slogging through the system to find an appropriate middle school, good for you.

btw, it is hardly one "social group." once again you are overgeneralizing. it is highly diverse (both economically and racially), and increasingly so as the kids get older. i like and dislike people at the school from all walks of life, it's not really correlated to whether or not they have money.

Wbottom

spending on education is the best way by leaps and bounds to invest in our country

no - spending means nothing if it is not spent effectively. we've been increasing public school spending in this city and nation for 40 yrs with, for the most part, ever declining student performance. we've had declining student/teacher ratio's for 40yrs, again with nothing to show for it. because just throwing money at a problem doesn't make it better. you need to spend it in ways that make the most difference. and one thing we know for sure - hiring more and more teachers in the current system is certainly not the most effective way to improve student performance. its great for the union heads - more teachers = more dues. its great for the politicians - more dues = more campaign "donations". but its not great for the kids.

> no - spending means nothing if it is not spent effectively.

Exactly. Finland spends less than USA and yet, they are consistently top 3 in the world thanks to their no-nonsense policies when it comes to preparing teachers, respecting teaching as a career and helping those in class that get stuck right away. It's a country proud of their public educ system, with the least performance variation within schools in different districts. USA is the polar opposite but I do see improvement in NYC.

It is faulty to equate the amount of government spending on education with quality of education. Increased spending is more likely a giveaway to unions, not an investment in a better educational system.

> btw, it is hardly one "social group." once again you are overgeneralizing.

uf, read above regarding demographics. same idea, group is one thing, individuals don't need to comform to the group behavior 100%. gets kind of tiring. to be honest, i kind of pity your husband sometimes.

> Increased spending is more likely a giveaway to unions, not an investment in a better educational system.

exactly. it can be detrimental when it rewards people that just show up, regardless of performance. eventually teachers will end up being evaluated across the board imho, but they are going to put up a big fight. it's happening in many countries, as human capital becomes the main driver for future growth, education becomes the priority and among the top public expense. funny teachers themselves evaluate people daily.

to be honest. it's amazing what people justify in the name of "being honest"

IMHO, one of the most overused acronyms going.

This "bad teacher" thing is just routine GOP strawmanning, like the huge non-existent voter fraud that requires all kinds of undemocratic hurdles be thrown up to prevent registration and deter voting. Show me the money.

There is no "just show up". If there are bad teachers, I have yet to hear of any solid evidence (like involved parents unhappy with the parents ... the parents who are pissed off that the free baby-sitting service that is the school system closes on too many days, yes ... the parents who want to think their kid didn't start the fight, yes ... the parents who think it's the teacher's fault if kid doesn't (try to) do its homework, yes.

Stop presenting what are specific hypotheticals that need to be "fixed" to fix the big problems.

aboutready 13111 posts

spend better...yes...spend less...no...privatize...no...provide compelling career parameters for those who commit to teaching...yes

notadmin--you have seriously reduced the chances that you child will have access to the level and quality of education you did, based on choices for your child that you have made--you seem to denigrate the value and quality of your own education, which is fine, but your child may ultimately feel differently and wish that you had prioritized that he/she have access to what you did, such that he/she be able to assess said value his/herself

you may think that, even without your education, your child will be a better person having gone to the schools you have choosen---i hope he/she agrees, down the road, when it is your his/her judgement to make and life to live

alan is actually trying to argue that there is no such thing as bad teachers. As if those who become teachers magically transform beyond any human weakness. And he thinks anyone takes him seriously??

exactly AH - there isn't a single bad teacher in NYC. The Mets should have made whoever is in charge of hiring teachers their new GM, and they would win the WS every year.

typical dismissive crap--what are your criteria for firing and giving raises to "performing" teachers?

the point is that it is a very tricky concept--and that improving the quality of teaching is an admirable ambition, but not so easy to effect

now about your criteria??

I'm not saying there is no such thing as bad teachers, obviously, but that no systemic overhaul is needed because they are few and far between, and weeded out effectively in the current system ... mostly prior to achieving tenure. Three years is a long time to "fake it 'til you make it". I have yet to see any evidence that, whatever problems there are in the results, the fault lies in any substantial number of bad teachers.

But this is, as has been pointed out, all just a way of promoting privatization -- corporate-run, resource-sucking, kickback-giving -- of the schools on a systemic level.

It's no coincidence that both the charter-school movement and the private-school scholarship programs (e.g. Prep for Prep) are massively subsidized by Wall Street and other corporate characters, and not bake sales.

wbottom - what are your criteria for your belief that more teachers = better? how do you measure that? when choosing a school for your child, what criteria do you use? if private school A offered you two options: pay tuition of $25k/yr and have a teacher ratio of 15:1, or pay $35k/yr and have a ratio of 12:1, which would you do? How would you decide? Oh, and btw, that extra $10k/yr would have to come straight from your necessities budget - i.e. housing, food, clothing, healthcare, insurance.

Either Americans are really stupid or the education system is broken.
"A Marist poll finds that 26 percent of Americans don’t know whom the United States declared its independence from.
The 26 percent includes 6 percent that are unsure that the United States fought any war of independence at all. Other respondents gave a range of countries that included France, China, Mexico, Spain and Japan, according to the pollsters at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, N.Y."

Only you elitists think that kind of egghead college-boy information is important. Does knowing whom the United States declared its independence from help me fix my car? Milk my cow? Buy a 98" flatscreen teevee with a home-equity loan? No.

hahahaha alanhart is voting for Palin in 2012,

anyone with a half a brain can work hard for the few years it takes to get tenure - its what happens after that which matters. as you so charmingly point out, alan, this wasn't as great of an issue 40yrs ago b/c most teachers were young single women who left the field when they got married. As things have changed, and it is a lifetime career, we need to change the criteria so that we reward the good teachers, and replace the bad ones

Charter schools and prep for prep are sponsored by wall street, etc. to salve their guilty consciouses. the sparing attempts (like Edison) at running for profit public schools have been failures. this isn't about privatization - it is about reforming the school system so that we produce better students, who can compete in an ever more competitive world.

25% of the population is illegal. So it fits.

the money i spend on ed for my kids may end up being money i need for subsistence when im old and sick--not now but.... there for the grace of fate go I

and i considered many factors when i chose schools for my children--and class size at the privates i considered was uniformly small, as is nearly always the case where there is money; so it really wasnt at all part of the process

im not bitching about firing useless union leeches the system is allegedly riddled with--im not saying that teachers are overpaid--im saying the system is starved for money and resource--and fewer teachers and less money spent is a complete joke to me
i used to be stunned going from parents' day at one child's private to parents' day at the other's public school--the private had av eqpmt of the type you see in gsaks conf rms in every classroom--the public was worried about ceilings with asbestos tiles falling in on classes!! astounding

english teachers responsible for teaching 150 HS students at public vs 40 at private--imagine for each lousy 5 page paper assigned, correcting 750 pages of student writing with meaningful proofing and commentary--how bout with 15-20 page papers, which were assigned--and there's no overtime paid for any of this--bless the teachers my kid had who were able to stay positive and invested despite the absurd deprivation of resources--and this was a well-funded school of extremely bright kids with few or no serious behavior issues--

and true that alan re p for p and charters getting funded by the proponents of privatization--and then rigging things to show superior results

the system is not starved for resources. they are not allocated in an efficient manner. the world produces plenty of food, yet some people are starving. why? in both cases b/c bureaucracies in charge of distribution are self-serving.

hey...strap an enron or oxford or aig or boa or blackwater or...executive suite to the system and it'll fly good

Hey wbottom Did you know the Nobel laureate paul krugman was a paid advisor to enron?

and phil gramm's wife was on the board--wtf does that have to do with this thread

So you knew. Very good.

So what percentage send their kids to private school for the better education, and how many for elitist reasons?

> notadmin--you have seriously reduced the chances that you child will have access to the level and quality of education you did, based on choices for your child that you have made--you seem to denigrate the value and quality of your own education, which is fine, but your child may ultimately feel differently and wish that you had prioritized that he/she have access to what you did, such that he/she be able to assess said value his/herself

academics is not 100% of what they get at school. i will have to get my hands dirty compensating for some key areas and i'm more than happy to do it. do you know how many Americans from top schools I've met at Stanford that simply don't have a clue about very basic geography and history? most of them! wouldn't be surprised if i have to make up for those 2 in both private and public schools.

this is not a rant, as i don't have the need to delegate 100% of academics to any formal schooling. for ex, math at my high-school was close to a disaster, but i compensated going to the math olympiads. it's doable. imho quality of academics is the explanation parents give to others about opting for private school, but controlling their social environment so that they rub elbows with like-minded individuals plays a big part. which in my opinion is a disfavor to the kid. not a plus.

> So what percentage send their kids to private school for the better education, and how many for elitist reasons?

exactly! imho putting the kiddo in that environment feels like punishing him, not a favor. school is not the place to network.

i mean, the school your kid goes to.

ah, but you generalize so, notadmin--and your house is made of glass for those as intolerant as you

my children have made wonderful friends and rubbed elbows with nice, decent people at the schools they have attended, both public and private--and they have rubbed elbows with some they havent enjoyed...in both

and a good education is "doable" in a vacuum even for the exceptional, bright kids with the most invested parents. but a good education is "done" in schools with passionate teachers and resources. and academics are anything but all that is engaged by children in school. due to complete lack of resources for arts, sports, math teams, debate teams, clubs etc and teach to the test to chase what few funds are available, many public schools ignore if not stifle creative thinking.

to say that private schools are about "controlling their social environment so that they rub elbows with like-minded individuals" is an awful generalization, which expresses that you are defensive about your coices for your child

again, tho, if your child turns out not to be exceptional and performs at the mean of the resource-starved underperforming school you have chosen based on your principles; you may have regrets, and he/she may have very different principles and resent not having access to the education you had--

people with good values and people with bad values occupy all walks of life

You can't generalize with private school. Some parents do it because they genuine want a better education for their kids, some do it in hopes the kids make connections helpful later in life, some parents are elitist, and some of the parents are freaked out thinking their kids will turn to dope if they go to public school.

Some parents can do private but feel diversity is important and intentionally go the public school route. Others move to the best neighborhoods, and volunteer their time and money to make the school experience the best it can be.

You can really learn a lot about parents by their choice in schools.

Read you fool..my point was clearly that you can't generalize re parents who choose private or public schools.

"You can really learn a lot about parents by their choice in schools"

Sums your perspective nicely, red baiter

> to say that private schools are about "controlling their social environment so that they rub elbows with like-minded individuals" is an awful generalization, which expresses that you are defensive about your coices for your child

just that i'm smart enough to understand that's part of the reason. and i don't find it wise. that's all.

In general, I agree with you, Wbottom. I would refine as follows - a good education is there for the taking at a good private school. But whether it is taken is up to the student (I have many private school classmates who didn't take advantage of all that our school had to offer).

"Some parents can do private but feel diversity is important and intentionally go the public school route."

How many parents who care about diversitty live in a neighborhood with a large minority population? You can't say you support diversity and then go home every night to your all white neighborhood/ building.

wbottom, etc: as far as a system for evaluating teachers - I'll back this one being worked on by Gates' Foundation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/education/04teacher.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=us

Well, it looks like the original 6,100 gigure was way underestimated. Apparently teacher layoffs could hit as high as 21,000.. roughly one-fourth of all NYC teahers.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2011/01/29/2011-01-29_21000_new_teachers_facing_ax_mike_warns_of_possible_1b_cut.html

Except that Carl Palladino lost for Governor, and Mayor Bloomberg is an Independent. Where is the Tea Party?

If the teachers union would accept fair pensions and benefits instead of their current lavish benefits, teacher layoffs could be avoided.

The tesachers' union has always fought for fair pensions and benefits. The would not only accept them, but warmly welcome them.

teachers'

They

When are i-bankers going to accept fair bonuses?

But I-Bankers have COLLEGE DEGREES!!!

Teachers only have... Oh, wait. Nevermind.

jordyn, that's not necessarily true: some i-bankers went to Wharton for their undergraduate studies, and then never went to college at all once they were hired by banks.

Hey, now. Let's not make too much fun of their degrees just because they're from Wharton. Some of them had to take out loans to get those and everything.

Fair enough. As long as we all agree that trade school is no substitute for college.

Educators 4 Excellence

http://www.educators4excellence.org/forms/declaration

Recruits, retains, and supports the highest quality teachers by offering
- A higher starting salary
- Encouragement and opportunity for continued intellectual development
- High level professional development and support
- An evenhanded merit-based pay structure to reward excellent teachers

Restores professionalism to education by
- Evaluating teachers through a holistic and equitable system that incorporates value-added student achievement data as one component of effectiveness
- Reestablishing tenure as a significant professional milestone through use of a comprehensive teacher evaluation system
- Eliminating the practice of "Last In, First Out" for teacher layoffs

Places student achievement first by
- Giving students and parents more opportunity to choose great schools
- Displaying more transparency in both fiscal choices and decision-making processes
- Implementing an effective system of evaluating administrators
- Adopting higher standards for students and teachers
- Opening the education reform conversation to the voices of teachers and parents

Ignoring for the moment the contributions made by investment bankers, I think it fair to say the average banker working for Goldman, Credit Suisse, etc obtained a more difficult college degree than the average public school teacher. The average public school teacher does not have the math and engineering skills of the rocket scientists and bankers hired by Wall Street.

What the wall street crowd does with those skills is an entirely different question.

I did some research and it's possible that some Wharton B.S. students might actually be able to qualify for the NY Teaching Fellows program. If they got a concentration in statistics and did well in calculus, it's possible they could actually qualify to be a teacher.

Sunday, do they give a mylar balloon to the Teacher of the Month?

And do they know that the numeral "4" does not represent the work "for"?

Excellence!

(Funded by billionaires, by the way, not educators, not parents. Maybe by hedge funds that own "universities" like NYU West (D/B/A University of Phoenix and want to expand greatly for god, gold and glory ... or maybe no god and little glory).

A family member teaches. Not a chance in hell of ever balancing a check-book , let alone arranging financing for an M&A deal.

jordyn, you know perfectly well that right-wing interests will not tolerate statistics. They closely resemble facts.

another score for the Criticizonomist. way to go rent stabilizer.

"A family member teaches. Not a chance in hell of ever balancing a check-book , let alone arranging financing for an M&A deal."

Then again, most bankers probably can't do heart surgery, either. Or write computer software. Or are you trying to imply something other than you get good at things if you specialize in them?

alanhart, which part of the organization's stated principles and beliefs do you disagree with?

no, he/she is criticizing. that's what he/she does. along with blaming. no point whatsoever other than to criticize and blame. over and over and over and over again. endlessly. on any subject.

Actully Riversider, lots of people who work on Wall St. are liberal arts majors:

What did you study at Harvard?

I focused on history and government and political philosophy.

And why did Goldman Sachs think that would be good training for investment banking?

Why Goldman thought I'd be good for investment banking is a very fair question. There are a lot of Harvard people at Goldman and they've put a lot of effort into recruiting from the school. They really try to attract liberal arts backgrounds. They say this stuff isn't so complicated, that you'll pick it up as you go along, that it's all about teamwork, that they have training programs. That being said, it would be very hard to get a full-time job there without a previous summer internship.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/04/why_do_harvard_kids_head_to_wa.html

Yes, political philosophy, which we all know is a very hard subject that a 5th grader can learn.

TS: We look for a good work ethic and an interest in learning. Nothing we do is that challenging, but we have a 7-8 week training program to teach you what is most applicable to the position. Most people in i-banking were liberal arts majors. People feel that everything is all the same at Goldman, but really it’s not.

http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/undergrad/bankingforliberalarts.html

Red baiter is simply dumb....

Riversider: lemme tell you, I am good at math. But I cannot spend more than 2 hours with kids who are not mine w/o getting a splitting headache.

i'm good at math, i can balance a checkbook and do financial and estate planning, i was a teacher for a few years, and i am very good with children.

my husband is decent at math, can't (or is unwilling to) balance a checkbook, and is a very successful attorney at a big law firm.

i had a very good friend who landed an analyst job at merrill lynch in the mid-80s who thought she was applying for a marketing job. seriously. she worked in i-banking for 20 or so years. nice woman, not so bright.

Are you still a teacher? Or what do you do now?

Sunday, this is exactly why the union-busting charge for charter schools is being funded by hedge funds and the like ... next stop is for-profit school systems.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110131/FREE/110129855#

New Chelsea school will cater to ages 3 to 18
A new private school opening for the 2012-13 school year is the first of 20 planned around the globe by education entrepreneurs Chris Whittle and Benno Schmidt.

The for-profit school is starting with an initial investment of $75 million, split evenly between private equity funds LLR Partners in Philadelphia and Liberty Partners in New York. Avenues is spending $60 million of that to renovate its New York property, a 10-story, 215,000-square-foot landmark building for which Avenues inked a 48-year lease. Design plans are complete, and renovations will start in February.

The headquarters for the entire company will open in four weeks at 11 E. 26th St.

Mr. Whittle said tuition will be similar to that of other high-end private schools in each city. In New York for example, it will run around $35,000 a year, while in London it will be closer to $45,000.

Next move: divert similar tuition from the public coffers via "vouchers" ... big bucks to be made for private equity funds. And bad egg students can just be tossed back to the public schools.

Bloomberg makes a great point that the tenure rule needs to be revisited. If he's forced to cut teachers due to harsh budget realities the tenure rule would mean the hits only go to new teachers regardless of whether or not the older teachers are performing. The system needs to replace some of the seniority principles with a meritoracy.

that's meritocracy.

No, that's small-timey political persecution and yesmanship.

At least Bloomberg hasn't stayed on for quite 30 years, unlike Mubarak, know what I mean?

alanhart, you made a lot comments, but you still did not explain which part of "Educators 4 Excellence"'s stated principles and beliefs you disagree with.

I'm not going to dignify with a dissection the "stated" principles and beliefs of a propagandist-crafted document from the well-funded agents of huge megabusinesses that seek to undermine basic American institutions like public education.

Although it's sort of fun to imagine pinning it's green skin back and smelling the formaldehyde. Still, no.

alanhart, so are you saying Gates is doing it for the money or that he wants to destroy public education?

"I'm not going to dignify with a dissection the "stated" principles and beliefs of a propagandist-crafted document from the well-funded agents of huge megabusinesses that seek to undermine basic American institutions like public education."

Yes, lets not ruin the discourse on public education with things like goals, logic, strategy, and a desire for success!

Sunday, it's not clear to me what Gates' motives are.

somewhereelse, the current system has things like goals, logic, strategy, and a desire for success! ... so that's not the real issue, is it?

"The tesachers' union has always fought for fair pensions and benefits. The would not only accept them, but warmly welcome them."

Funny, because they seem to be fighting tooth and nail against them...