Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools
Are a total mess and a nightmare. But if you live anywhere near here, you'd know that. Of course, if you live elsewhere and support a strong socialist idea of an education system, then you worship and adore the Charlotte-Mecklenburg System (CMS).
A year ago, a LARGE number of parents tried to secede from the school district. They wanted to break the gigantic, massively unresponsive school system up into smaller, more manageable districts. Of course, since the North Carolina General Assembly is Democrat, there was NO way they would succeed because it would require government to shrink.
So instead, in a miserably feeble attempt to appease these parents, the Democrat-controlled school board set up a "task force" to "study" the problem. The results of the "task force" are in. And yes, once again, I could have saved the state millions of dollars on the task force -- because the results were known before the task force even met for the first time.
As usual, the task force was stacked with socialists and big-government liberals who would never dream of reducing, reforming, or improving any aspect of government in any way, shape, or form. Their primary mission, when it concerns government, is how to raise and spend more money without annoying too many people.
The headlines for the task force report are "A call to transform CMS." That's either a complete and total blatant lie, or the person who wrote the headline didn't actually read either the task force report or the article that appears just below that headline.
The task force is "backed by city business leaders." If you're not from around here, I'll help you out with that one -- the city "business leaders" run this city, inside and out. Nothing happens that they don't want to happen. So if it's backed by them, it WILL happen, no matter what anyone else wants. Don't believe me? Look at the new "uptown" arena.
The task force report is full of words like "bold" and "challenging." But in reality, it's just another plan to expand spending and schools. They want to keep the system intact, but "divide it into three or four parts." In other words, they want to EXPAND the bureaucracy that is already so big it cannot respond to anyone!
They want FEWER school board members -- make a system bigger and control it with LESS people. The school board needs LESS power, not more! They're already way out of control without any responsibilities, and this task force wants to give them more power and more money to be controlled by LESS people.
They want no at-large members on the school board, only district members. This would ensure that the district could decide the exact makeup of the board without any questions. They would draw the districts to absolutely ensure a strong majority of center-city Democrats and no representation for Republicans in the outlying suburbs.
See, I told you this was Democrats protecting Democrats.
They want to build smaller high schools -- but don't say where they will build them. One of the biggest criticisms of the current board is that they absolutely refuse to build schools where the children are and instead want to build schools where they want to so that they can force busing and make deals that give them cash from developers.
And of course, one of the primary suggestions of the task force -- "Spend more money on the students who need it most."
What a giant pile of stinking BS. But to read the Observer's story, this is a wondrous brand-new, radical idea. It's not. It's nothing but a total increase in government power and a continued destruction of freedom.
If you're considering moving to the Charlotte area, I truly hope you do not have children -- the school system there is already at the bottom of the toilet -- and this task force just pushed the lever to flush.
Posted by: Ogre at
03:03 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 663 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Ogre why are you so against public education? Despite its unavoidable problems, public schools and state universities are a clear social benefit. Even from an economic point of view, public education must be considered a positive externality. That is it is good for the free market in the long term.
Posted by: Brian at December 14, 2005 06:36 PM (qe/Un)
2
Primarily because the current system of government education has absolutely nothing to do with educating anyone. The sole purpose of those in the administration of school systems is to protect themselves and obtain more money.
State Universities are even worse.
We now have a system that forces students to learn. Why? Because the school system gets more money the more students they have enrolled. It doesn't matter if they actually educate the students, they just have to be enrolled.
I know it's not a popular view right now, but it is true that school is NOT for everyone. What's good for the free market is to allow the free markets to compete and run schools and educate those who want to be educated!
Posted by: Ogre at December 14, 2005 07:03 PM (/k+l4)
3
If you honestly believe that neither students nor society as a whole gains from public education then we are in basic disagreement. I agree school is not for everyone but you must concede that generally people today are better off with an education. We force students to stay in school because they are not mature enough to make that decision. They can drop out at 16 if they so choose. When I was 10 years old and somebody asked me if i wanted to sit in school all day or go play basketball i would have no doubt chosen to go have fun. However, that would have been the absolute wrong choice and i am glad i wasnt in a position to make it. I went to public school for 12 years and spent 1 year at a state college and I know for sure that I am better off and when I graduate society will be better off as well. The willing and able to pay analogy is incorrect. Everybody wants to be educated on some level but not everybody can afford it. Why should only the rich be taught? Education is not in the same category as cars or boats or other luxuries that people buy based on their willingness to pay.
Posted by: Brian at December 14, 2005 08:54 PM (qe/Un)
4
Up here in New Jersey we have over 600 different school districts. Every town has one (sometimes two if the secondary schools are regional and the elementary are not). The cost of education funded by local property taxes has grown such that regionalization and the loss of local input is seriously being considered. Proponents envision the consolidation of services as a savings but forget the layers of beaurocracy that would insulate the local parent from the leadership of the schools.
Posted by: joated at December 14, 2005 11:15 PM (M7kiy)
5
Brian -- I never said education of the public was a bad thing -- but the current system of monopolistic government education masquerading as "public" education is total crap.
It has absolutely nothing to do with rich vs. poor. In Charlotte, the "poor" get upwards of $10,000 per student spent on "public" education. Those that are better off get LESS spent on them.
I reiterate -- the current system has quite literally NOTHING to do with educating students and zero interest in any sort of education of anyone. The current system in place is ONLY interested in cash money.
And Joated, I hope you stay away from consolidation. ANY sort of government consolidation is a very, very bad thing. It takes control away from the people and gives more and more control, power, and money to government -- which is always a bad thing.
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 12:51 AM (uSCkp)
6
Ogre, when is the last time you were in school? I was educated, my brothers were educated, my friends were educated. If public education is such a damn cash cow than why did i have 30 kids in my classes in high school and why is my dorm room falling apart around me. Who is pocketing all of this money? As far as rich v poor, you must agree that if all education was private than the lower class would have a very hard time affording school.
Posted by: Brian at December 15, 2005 01:16 AM (qe/Un)
7
The state of our public education system in Palm Beach County is faltering every day. It truly is scary. I always swore I would keep my kids in public schools, as I went to them, yet my kids are in private. I always swore my kids would go to public high school... yet last month, I was so appalled by things I'm seeing in our newspaper about our school district, that I am for the first time considering private high school as well.
It pisses me off.
And our school district is something like the 5th largest in the nation. It is so big, and unable to think outside the box, that when Wilma hit, the schools north of Southern Blvd (Iknow you know the area) were fine, but those south were seriously damaged, So... ALL the schools in PBC stayed CLOSED until those south of Southern could open. 2 weeks of education EVERYONE lost because our district is so big.
It's a sad state of affairs down here too.
Posted by: Bou at December 15, 2005 03:58 AM (iHxT3)
8
Where is the money, Brian? CMS is on a "search" for a new superintendent. His salary will be at LEAST $350,000.00. And that's not counting benefits, automatic retirement, cash accounts, company car, etc. The money is wasted by the administration.
In Charlotte, they also waste billions on buildings. Instead of making one blueprint and just building every school that way, they spend literally millions for every new school on architects to make the school unique. Doing so also makes the buildings massively expensive.
And no, if all education was privately-RUN, then the rich and poor alike could afford it. Tax credits would allow everyone the exact same opportunity.
For some reason the nationwide trend recently was to join all school districts in larger districts. Everywhere it's happened (Palm Beach, Charlotte) it's made a mess of the schools. I wonder why they think smaller classrooms are good (there's zero evidence it is), but smaller districts are not (with much evidence they are).
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 10:15 AM (uSCkp)
9
I don't get this 'smaller classroom' push either. It's a nice to have, but I went to school with 28 kids in a class.
My kids go to a small Catholic school that has between 26-30 kids in a class. I wish it were smaller as it is A LOT of work for the teachers in the lower grades (the difference between 24 1st graders and 28 is a lot), BUT that said the class is very organized and poor behavior cannot be tolerated. My kids are doing fine there, overall.
Posted by: Bou at December 15, 2005 12:44 PM (iHxT3)
10
The smaller classroom myth (sounds like a book title, maybe I should write that) is just a way to get more money. There's zero evidence that having a smaller class size increases learning, especially from 40 students to 30 students.
Posted by: Ogre at December 15, 2005 12:57 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
25kb generated in CPU 0.0137, elapsed 0.0889 seconds.
87 queries taking 0.0806 seconds, 190 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
