From: MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman)
Subject: Re: FAQ: The Record Thing
Organization: Wayne State University, C&IT
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:02:30 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.180610.29940@m5.harvard.edu>
borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden) writes:
 
>
>In article <16856B98B.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu> MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:
>>
>>And again this silly claim that spending money is going to help the economy!
>>We know this is ridiculous for a number of reasons. For one, we know that
>>spending doesn't improve education. That's been established by many studies.
>
>Spending money certainly does improve education.  Not spending it randomly -
>it has to be spent well, but there are certain badly needed changes in our
 
Reminds me of Friedman's comment on Clinton's plan to save x billions by
eliminating waste- i.e., it's not a line item. SO if you spend money and
education doesn't improve- as the statistics shown again and again- you just
didn't spend it on the right things.
 
>educational system that require money.  Many school are understaffed, and the
 
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Average class size has fallen continuously in the
post WWII era. We used to have excellent public schools with high achievement
by students and 50+ students in a classroom. Now a class with 30 is
"overcrowded."
 
>teachers are often underpaid.  I met a high school teacher who told me that
*****************************
 
Not in most states, where they are very well paid indeed. We've already
had numbers published here on that. Where are yours?
 
>he has to have all different levels of students in his physics class, because
>the school can only afford to have one physics class.  Now don't tell me that
>this is a situation conducive to effective teaching.  It's a poor situation,
 
It's also a rare exception.
 
>because you'll either have the slower students in over their heads, or you'll
>have the brighter students sitting there bored out of their minds, or both.
>The only way to effectively teach the subject is to have different sections
>for different levels, and to have that you have to pay the teacher to be
>there for more than one class, and to do that you need to SPEND MORE MONEY.
 
You're describing one teacher's story about one classroom and then arguing from
that that we need to increase spending everywhere? Sorry, doesn't hold water.
Schools have been getting more money every year, and scholastic performance
has been falling every year. Those of us who have taught in a university for
more than a few years have seen the incoming students get worse every year.
 
>It's so obvious that a child could understand it - but not a taxpayer, or
>worse yet, a politician.  Then there's the fact that the most qualified
>people are for the most not going into teaching, because they can make much
>more money in industry.  In order to get better teachers in the schools, you
>need to offer teachers better salaries, and in order to do that you need to
>SPEND MORE MONEY ON EDUCATION.  I'm not saying that there aren't reforms
>that are needed, and things on which educational costs could be cut.  But we
>need to address the serious lack of resources from which many of our public
>schools are suffering.  There are basic, obvious problems in our schools that
>can be solved by spending more money.
>
All your arguments are completely without merit, without substance, and
contrary to the data quoted in this forum and elsewhere. Either find some
real numbers or find some new arguments. Sorry about that.
 
>I'm going to try and find an article I read which discussed the Head Start
>program, a very successful program that saves society money and anguish in
>the long term, a program which has yet to be fully funded.  If anyone else
>knows anything about it in the meantime, a post would be welcome.
>
Head Start is one of the very few Great Society programs that was
purported to have measureable positive results. It was not part of the
school systems, but a seperate program designed to being students from
illiterate and "culturally deprived" households up to the same level as
other students when they entered kindergarten. It has nothing to do with
your arguments listed above.
 
>   - Dave Borden
>     borden@m5.harvard.edu
 
   --mike edelman
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3788 talk.politics.misc:43222 alt.politics.clinton:3763 alt.politics.elections:12168