VicMan

The statement was not addressing whether a school district would support vouchers (of course it wouldn't) - it's about how to deal with parents who do not participate in education and students with a lack of interest in education; what I said is that charter schools, magnet schools, and vouchers typically do not attract those students and parents.

Saavedra decided to call off the plan http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/20...ie_worthing.php

I would wait until Obama forges a solid political record, if he does so.

Alright, the Fall 2009 elementary boundaries have been approved: http://www.springisd.org/docs2/ccrd/Map%2008.pdf Also when the time is right new schools should be built to accommodate territory zoned to schools on the other side of the freeway so that kids do not need to be bussed across the freeway.

Also: This Chronicle story proves that students being proactive can lead to changes in the administration. In 1989 two students at Austin High School in the East End decided to start a walkout to protest scheduling issues and a lack of textbooks: http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1989_660169 HISD ended up firing the principal. Also, Musicman and I talked in PM about solving school problems. I asked him for permission to reproduce some of his PM posts. I think it would be interesting to talk about how to solve in particular low parental involvement and low student interest in school - Vouchers and alternative public schools do not attract these students. The main story I read about that ended with the teacher quitting school. I see this as a gargantuan problem and I don't see how to largely solve it. I do not believe that vouchers will solve this problem, so this is the reason why I am against vouchers in this instance. In the cases of districts with severe problems like North Forest the population is declining as the people who want to get out are leaving. (HCBU has talked about this) This page: http://www.rjgeib.com/biography/inner-city...s/innerblu.html is a Los Angeles schoolteacher's story about poor performing schools in Los Angeles - I think this is an enlightening read

In that case, the school district *could* have higher performing middle schools that aren't overwhelmed by the lack of preparedness in students if it encouraged students to learn English at a quicker rate. And as a consequence the high schools would have better prepared students. Speaking about low income schools, a man who taught in Berendo Middle School in California wrote this webpage documenting his years at Berendo Middle School in Los Angeles in the 1990s: http://www.rjgeib.com/biography/inner-city...s/innerblu.html

Spanish TAKS ends at Grade 6. http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessm...t/overview.html The middle schools may want kids to learn as much English as possible before they go into Grade 7, when TAKS is only offered in English. In addition Texas "Bilingual" programs are only in elementary school. If students do not receive enough preparation prior to middle school, the middle schools will feel overwhelmed. Is this happening in the East End?

1. Let's say there is a small-to-medium sized district - District A. If the parents generally do not like what the district is teaching and decide to go to charter schools, then there would be a district-wide decrease. I believe this is what is happening with North Forest ISD. 2. If you are referring to the way English-and-Spanish bilingual programs are taught, would you say the underlying problem is with the parents, the district, or both? What incentive should the state deploy to ensure that the children are taught English at a reasonably quick rate? What incentive should the middle schools use for feeder elementary schools which prepare children with English-language knowledge? As a reference about bilingual education, I found a listing of Texas laws related to it: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/biling/tec5164.html - while all of the links to the specific codes are dead, one can use web.archive.org to access old pages.

1. Yes, I agree the district needs to change its management style so that children get adequate pressure to do well in school. Realistically I do not know how likely the district (which one?) will act in a timely manner to change its policies. Will a drop in enrollment convince the district to quickly change its policies? 2. One function of a school is to socialize a student, so, yes, it is appropriate to induce the child to learn English at a reasonably quick rate, and parents ought to promote this process.

1. Yes, it's very wacko. A state charter or an inter-district transfer would be the solution in this case. If the district does not have many state charters, more should start within the district's boundaries. 2. The public magnets that teach multiple languages (i.e. English, French, and Chinese) to native English speakers and schools who cater to immigrants who are learning English need completely different approaches to the education. It is a problem when immigrant children who need to learn English are not progressing quickly enough. It is great when the native speaker of English also learns French and Chinese at the same time.

Not grading a spelling test to avoid injuring a child's feelings will lead to further problems down the road. In real life performance matters. Schools need to make this clear to children. Some of the questions that are relevant to this: Is this a policy of the teacher? The school? The district? - What kinds of transfers does the district allow? What state charters are near your coworker? In cases where the entire district is rotten (i.e. North Forest ISD) state charters and inter-district transfers (Houston ISD now allows for people out-of-district to attend for free if they get in) help. Europe has a similar land area to the U.S., but it has various official languages throughout various countries. I can see why Europeans learn more languages. However I agree that it would be great for American schools to begin teaching multiple languages. In big city school districts some magnets already do this.

Alright. Here I will explain a bit more about why I am against school vouchers in Texas. 1. There is already a system of school choice in place that is for free both within the school districts and outside of the school districts (state charters) 2. As private schools are not governed by the Texas Education Agency, I would imagine many want nothing to do with the state government 3. I do not want my tax money to go towards religious institutions (in the religious institution cases) In public policy one has to weigh costs vs. benefits with every decision. An attempt to legalize vouchers in Texas will take more legal funds, more state resources, and the intellectual and emotional resources of various state representatives. Yes, I am aware that vouchers for private schools are constitutional as per U.S. law, but that does not mean that they ought to be created in Texas. However I am in favor of private school scholarships from companies. In Philadelphia a group of companies created their own private school scholarship system that is funded by private funds. See http://www.csfphiladelphia.org/html/csf_aboutUs_mission.html as an example

More than four years later, there is one here: This is surely a classic advertisement!

I must also add that the "Las Vegas Strip" is actually south of the city proper in an unincorporated area.

The British School of Houston is in the Oak Forest area - at 4211 Watonga Boulevard - You could move to Oak Forest or Garden Oaks. For public school you would be zoned to Waltrip High School or Scarborough High School and to Clifton Middle School or to Black Middle School. - I am not sure how easy admissions are to the British School, but once your kid is admitted, commuting is not as strong of an issue when you live nearby.

Canada could simply upgrade what it has in Uptown Houston to consulate general. That way Canada has two in Texas.

I wonder if HISD plans to do a Lantrip style partial rebuild or if it plans to bulldoze the entire site.

http://www.houstonisd.org/HISDConnectDS/v/...00052147fa6RCRD HISD is going to close eight campuses and replace them with four new campuses. * Atherton and E.O. Smith K-8 will be consolidated at the Atherton site, with a new campus there * Sherman and Crawford will be consolidated at the Sherman site, with a new campus there * Dogan and Scott will be consolidated at the Scott site, with a new campus there * Lockhart and Turner will be consolidated at the Lockhart site, with a new campus there These will be done by Spring 2011 In addition, Hohl will close and its students will be absorbed by Highland Heights ES and other area schools EDIT: As per significance of Art Deco Lockhart, I retitled this Edit: In July 1983 Lockhart Elementary School was located at 3501 Southmore Blvd.

So what would happen to the students who can't get to any of the schools? Do you believe in mandatory attendance? Or do you feel that school should be optional?

Vines, a lot of public magnet programs (but not all) are solely on a lottery basis and not on an application basis, just like this Milwaukee voucher system. Dogma is not winning people over, Vines. My argument is that the voucher system is not sufficiently an improvement over the magnet/charter system, not really that it is a total failure.

Vines, "because being politically correct or doing what is easy to appease the ignorant is not in my nature especially when it comes at greater cost and difficulty for those that contribute and care the most" isn't how to make public policy decisions. If there is no hard evidence that a school voucher arrangement will work better than a charter school/magnet school arrangement, why should I pay more money for legal fees that are not inevitable? Look, Vines, dogma and anecdotes are not going to make that position a good sell. Firm statistical evidence will do it, and the point of that Milwaukee article is the lack of statistical evidence.

Or make sure the millionaires construct their houses so that they can withstand a Cat 4.

Regarding your charter school stuff: 1. It is illegal to exclude by race 2. Tweak the charter school's marketing and/or remove reverse economic barriers Even though the U.S. Supreme Court said it is constitutional for a school district to have vouchers for religious schools, I would not want my tax money going towards religious schools when there is no benefit over using a religious school instead of a magnet or charter school. I must also add that in 2007, 55% of the children zoned to Jones attended other HISD schools. - The highest such percentage was 58% at the Kashmere High School zone. The lowest was 6% at the Westside High School zone. http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive....id=2007_4442145 You said: "why have the charter schools that still allow for political pandering and graft and corruption and exclusion of certain groups often the groups that have parents that care the most and the students that care the most....it scares you to lose complete control of those young minds doesn't it" - This is a matter of making a set of clear boundaries and ensuring that schools adhere to them. Why not simply improve the charter school system so that corruption is easily vanquished? You said: "why not require a state certification for all teachers in the required subjects" - The State of Texas already has certification rules.

Vines, my point is that what these vouchers are doing could be accomplished with charter schools (internal and state) and with district magnets. You know that charter schools are politically divisive and promoting them will add to legal fees incurred by the state and by other parties. We can do the things these schools do with what we have. Why push a politically, legally, and financially expensive proposal when we have a cheap and easy solution nearby? We already have choice schools which get better motivated students and which improve students' lives.

1. "Politics" is less likely to interfere when a school wins the NCLB Blue Ribbon Award (as Carnegie did) and gets a reputation as one of the best high schools in the City of Houston. In MCTC's case it was never as visible as Carnegie is. It may have had good programs, but it just never got the star power Carnegie got. HISD knows that Carnegie is a goose that lays golden eggs. Also the Carnegie PTO can rally board members in various neighborhoods in favor of its cause. 2. You said: "until the VAST majority of schools have the ability to tell parents their child is not wanted there and they will not be accepted there because of their behavior, lack of ability and caring about education, or the parents lack of involvement the vast majority of schools and students will suffer" - The problem with many zoned schools is precisely that they cannot expel children unless the children commit serious violations. Many of the problems in zoned high schools begin in middle school. 3. You said: "as long as HISD and politics is involved this will be IMPOSSIBLE to accomplish." - Politics is defined by Merriam-Webster as "1 a: the art or science of government b: the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy c: the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government" - As HISD is the largest school district in terms of student population in Texas (though gentrification is nibbling away at this designation), politics is inevitable. The thing is to make sure that people act with the children in mind. 4. Why don't you propose more state charters? State charters are not affiliated with local school districts, one. Two, state charters are already allowed. Three, state charters act like de facto magnets.