Corporate Sponsorship in Public Schools

[LittleFuzzy]

Because that study already compares public schools to charter schools...

I mean, here we have a study "Is A better than B?" and you want to ask "Is B better than A?" I don't really see any meaningful difference.

If it makes you happier you could tell yourself I'm questioning the efficacy of their composited virtual students and casting baseless aspersions on the study's repeatability. Then you could go on to insult my education, compare me to Lewk, and otherwise engage in your dance of supposed moral superiority.

[agamemnus]

Its an impossible experiment because one could always say "well if the kid had gone to school he would have done just as well." One can always turn around and claim that. Note - I get the idea that the parents who home school their kids may just be better parents and that is why the kid is successful. After all my position is that home schooling is a viable option. If it was a superior option I would assume superior parents would pick it over public schools then just plain ole regular parents.

You can never be sure, but you can be fairly confident in your results if you narrowed the public (or private) school parent range to be closer to the demographics of the home-school parents.

[Dreadnaught]

Maybe I'm cynical, but about C).. well, I can see it happen that when schools get more money from corporate sources, the government will cut their funding (it's paid from property taxes right? What politician doesn't want to decrease the taxes when he wants more popularity), claiming 'they can get the money elsewhere', leaving the school in a worse place if a big sponsor drops out (and in pretty much the same place as they were during the sponsor deal, so no big advantage there). It's definitely leverage, but with a good contract and common sense it should be possible toavoid big problems there. One issue may be that in bad economic time, sponsors drop out quickly. That really affected cultural projects around here when the crisis hit - a lot of sponsors withdrew their support because they ran out of money, leaving those cultural projects vulnerable (they tend to draw ~1/3 of their budget from corporate sponsors).

I agree, while in theory it sounds nice for schools to have extra revenue streams, there are a whole host of possible unintended consequences, including the one you describe.

School funding should be disciplined, but it should also be regular and reasonably dependable. Sponsorship isn't -- behind every advertising entity is a sales force working hard to keep the money flowing. Schools just aren't going to have that, and probably shouldn't be devoting resources to it. Because after all, advertising-supported companies do fail.

On the other issue being discussed, I do think vouchers are a very creative way to efficiently allocate school funding and give parents/children better choices for schools.

[Aimless]

Because that study already compares public schools to charter schools...

I mean, here we have a study "Is A better than B?" and you want to ask "Is B better than A?" I don't really see any meaningful difference.

This analogy may make Fuzzy's point (as I understand it) more clear:

If we have a study that shows that poop is tastier than chocolate, everyone will have something to say about it. If we have a study that shows that chocolate is tastier than poop, no-one will have much to say about it because it's assumed to be self-evident.

Of course I may be missing his point entirely >_<

[Aimless]

I wonder how you guys will deal with this problem:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0214080530.htm

Negative Implications Of No Child Left Behind: As Graduation Rates Go Down, School Ratings Go Up

ScienceDaily (Feb. 16, 2008) — A new study by researchers at Rice University and the University of Texas-Austin finds that Texas' public school accountability system, the model for the national No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), directly contributes to lower graduation rates. Each year Texas public high schools lose at least 135,000 youth prior to graduation -- a disproportionate number of whom are African-American, Latino and English-as-a-second-language (ESL) students.

By analyzing data from more than 271,000 students, the study found that 60 percent of African-American students, 75 percent of Latino students and 80 percent of ESL students did not graduate within five years. The researchers found an overall graduation rate of only 33 percent.

"High-stakes, test-based accountability doesn't lead to school improvement or equitable educational possibilities," said Linda McSpadden McNeil, director of the Center for Education at Rice University. "It leads to avoidable losses of students. Inherently the system creates a dilemma for principals: comply or educate. Unfortunately we found that compliance means losing students."

The study shows as schools came under the accountability system, which uses student test scores to rate schools and reward or discipline principals, massive numbers of students left the school system. The exit of low-achieving students created the appearance of rising test scores and of a narrowing of the achievement gap between white and minority students, thus increasing the schools' ratings.

This study has serious implications for the nation's schools under the NCLB law. It finds that the higher the stakes and the longer such an accountability system governs schools, the more school personnel view students not as children to educate but as potential liabilities or assets for their school's performance indicators, their own careers or their school's funding.

The study shows a strong relationship between the increasing number of dropouts and school's rising accountability ratings, finding that:

Losses of low-achieving students help raise school ratings under the accountability system.
The accountability system allows principals to hold back students who are deemed at risk of reducing the school's scores; many students retained this way end up dropping out.
The test scores grouped by race single out the low-achieving students in these subgroups as potential liabilities to the school ratings, increasing incentives for school administrators to allow those students to quietly exit the system.
The accountability system's zero tolerance rules for attendance and behavior, which put youth into the court system for minor offenses and absences, alienate students and increase the likelihood they will drop out.
The discrepancy between the official dropout rates, in the 2 to 3 percent range, and the actual rates can be attributed to the state's method of counting, which does not include students who drop out of school for reasons such as pregnancy or incarceration or declare intent to take the GED sometime in the future.

The study analyzes student-level data of 271,000 students in one of Texas' large urban districts over a seven-year period. It also includes analysis of the policy and its implementation, extensive observations in high schools in that district and interviews with students, teachers, administrators and students who left school without graduating.

The study has been published in the peer-reviewed policy journal "Educational Policy Analysis Archives" and is the first research to track the impact of high-stakes accountability on students, employing individual student-level data over a multi-year period. The study can be viewed at http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v16n3/.

[Ominous Gamer]

Schools pushing out students to reach higher scores, which means better funding. Another Hallmark moment created by the NCLBA!

Who didn't see that one coming?

[Khendraja'aro]

C. There is less one on one instruction. Even teachers know this, which is why class size is a big issue in education.

Actually, class size has been shown not to be a reliable indicator for class performance.

Sorry, Lewk. It's a common misperception, one I myself was surprised to discover.

If it makes you happier you could tell yourself I'm questioning the efficacy of their composited virtual students and casting baseless aspersions on the study's repeatability. Then you could go on to insult my education, compare me to Lewk, and otherwise engage in your dance of supposed moral superiority.

You still don't quite see the problem. An "A is like B" comparison will also yield "B is like A". Which means that turning the study around will not yield any meaningful results.

[Loki]

I wonder how you guys will deal with this problem:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0214080530.htm

That one's easily solved. Every student that drops out gets a 0% on every exam, which counts against the school's average. That should provide the proper incentive for schools to make sure that even the least dedicated students remain.

[Nessus]

That one's easily solved. Every student that drops out gets a 0% on every exam, which counts against the school's average. That should provide the proper incentive for schools to make sure that even the least dedicated students remain.

You mean, fudge and cheat so only the real failures manage dropping out? Fraudulent behaviour on part of the school staff has been one of the most cited criticism I've seen of the NCLBA, though I admit I have not purposefully read up on the subject.

[LittleFuzzy]

You still don't quite see the problem. An "A is like B" comparison will also yield "B is like A". Which means that turning the study around will not yield any meaningful results.

It should. As a logic problem it will. But I'm not actually talking about a logic problem, am I? The first hurdle looks to be that there will probably be significantly fewer VCR matches if the study were turned aroundk, which makes doing the reverse comparison difficult.

[Dreadnaught]

I wonder how you guys will deal with this problem:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0214080530.htm

That one's easily solved. Every student that drops out gets a 0% on every exam, which counts against the school's average. That should provide the proper incentive for schools to make sure that even the least dedicated students remain.

You mean, fudge and cheat so only the real failures manage dropping out? Fraudulent behaviour on part of the school staff has been one of the most cited criticism I've seen of the NCLBA, though I admit I have not purposefully read up on the subject.

I've begun to suspect there is no actual solution to this besides creating a system where teachers like what they do, legitimately want their jobs and get rewarded for being good at their jobs in ways that are sometimes intangible (much like in the real world).

[Aimless]

I've begun to suspect there is no actual solution to this besides creating a system where teachers like what they do, legitimately want their jobs and get rewarded for being good at their jobs in ways that are sometimes intangible (much like in the real world).

And how do achieve that in a system that is so obsessed with grades and with standardised testing?

[Dreadnaught]

Many of the test requirements being mentioned in the article are less than a decade old. I think it's not too hard to get people to stop focusing on tests they don't want to take.

But undoubtedly I'm talking about a very theoretical and big shift in how we educate, one that would probably require different pay structures, dismantling/neutering teacher's unions and trying out different educational techniques.

[Nessus]

Good luck getting any of that through the Pubbies as long as Bamarama is in office, they'd object to an "America best at everything ever" bill if Obama was behind it.

[Dreadnaught]

Obama's rhetoric about education (and some of his actions) have actually been closer than you would think to many Republican's views on these issues. But not quite as hard-nosed, and ultimately not a major issue on his agenda. Democrats have gotten in the way of his one main education legislative priority (AKA race to the top).

[agamemnus]

Obama's rhetoric about education (and some of his actions) have actually been closer than you would think to many Republican's views on these issues. But not quite as hard-nosed, and ultimately not a major issue on his agenda. Democrats have gotten in the way of his one main education legislative priority (AKA race to the top).

It's refreshing; however, but he'd look like a complete idiot if he did otherwise. The data to support his educational reform is mostly there, unlike his stimulus and health care plans (except with respect to historical data from other countries and time periods..). If he had done something in the opposite direction of what actual hard data showed, that would drop his ratings faster than you could say "obama" 3 times fast... (it's not that hard, I think)

[Dreadnaught]

He's bucking his party with some of his rhetoric on this issue, so he should get credit where due.

Then again, he did recently support a "stimulus" bailout of teachers who were in unsustainable state contracts so I guess two sides to the coin.

[Lewkowski]

Fraudulent behaviour on part of the school staff has been one of the most cited criticism I've seen of the NCLBA, though I admit I have not purposefully read up on the subject.

If nothing else it shows how corrupt the educational unions are.

But seriously like with everything you need to have someone watching what schools are doing to make sure you can punish cheating and corruption.

[Nessus]

You're mixing up cause and effect, and could you please use the quote function.

[Lewkowski]

Eh? Either someone is corrupt or they are not. Putting them in a situation that could reward corruption doesn't make one corrupt it just reveals it.

[Nessus]

What?

[Aimless]

He's saying that the fraudulent behaviour you referred to isn't a fault of NCLB but rather a fault of those teachers that cheat. Not sure what to say about that. Some teachers cheat, some are pressured into cheating, and some "cheat" by doing exactly what they're required to do--teach to the tests, no more.

[GGT]

Lewk said "educational unions are corrupt"....

[Khendraja'aro]

Right, it's because the unions force their members to cheat? What?

[Nessus]

He's saying that the fraudulent behaviour you referred to isn't a fault of NCLB but rather a fault of those teachers that cheat. Not sure what to say about that. Some teachers cheat, some are pressured into cheating, and some "cheat" by doing exactly what they're required to do--teach to the tests, no more.

Given how the discussion has been revolving around incentives for teachers to do this and that, it seems somewhat simplistic to ignore the results of NCLB.

[Wraith]

Right, it's because the unions force their members to cheat? What?

The unions do play a role in protecting its members from any repercussions from cheating...

[Khendraja'aro]

The unions do play a role in protecting its members from any repercussions from cheating...

Which still does not make them the prime motivation for cheating.

[Ominous Gamer]

If we are still referring to reply 125, its not technically cheating. Its the schools being rewarded for no longer being a safety net for the public. Schools used to focus on enrollment, actively keeping children in schools before they screwed up their lives permanently. Thanks to the NCLBA (the irony of the name is amazing here), the schools risk scoring lower, and thus losing funding, by keeping these children in the system so that they can at least get a complete and basic education. If the school only focuses on the top scores, and lets the least motivated fall through the cracks, the numbers look better. Better test numbers means better funding.

Its the fundamental reason why the NCLBA is flawed. It restricts schools to only focusing on the very narrow set of items (or children) that would result in a higher overall test score.

[Dreadnaught]

Mixing up unions, education and money into one ball...

PBA Scuttles Payments to Officers

Union's Challenge Costs More Than 800 of Its Members College-Loan Reimbursements; Program Broke Bargaining Rules
AUGUST 16, 2010

By TAMER EL-GHOBASHY

A 2008 college-loan-reimbursement program used to help induce more than 800 officers to join the New York Police Department has been struck down at the behest of the union that represents them.

The city's Board of Collective Bargaining earlier this year ordered the department and the New York City Police Foundation to end the program, which paid the outstanding college loans of the officers in the January and July 2008 classes when the department's starting pay for cadets was $25,100. It has since been raised to $42,000.

"We can't ignore a court order, but who could be against something like this?" said Valerie Salembier, the chairwoman of the Police Foundation, a private group that raised the money for the program. "In the end, who suffers? Young officers in the NYPD."

But the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, which filed a complaint to stop the program, argued the College Loan Reimbursement Program was not negotiated under collective bargaining and extended a benefit to a limited number of police officers and that it undermined ongoing contract negotiations at the time.

"The PBA recognizes the benefit of higher education for police officers and has for years been seeking the same educational-incentive pay enjoyed by most big-city police departments," said Patrick Lynch, president of the 23,000 member police union.

The NYPD said the program was initiated and administered by a nonprofit group using private funds and was not subject to collective bargaining. But the board—made up of city, labor and independent members—concluded that the NYPD in effect created and controlled the program and was therefore in violation of a law that requires city agencies to bargain collectively with employee unions on matters of pay and benefits.

In total, the Police Foundation collected $5.2 million for the initiative for the two 2008 police academy classes, a time when the department saw significant drops in recruitment levels, mainly due to the contract that paid rookies $25,100 in their first six months of service.

Ms. Salembier, who is also publisher of Harper's Bazaar, said the loan-reimbursement program was conceived by the foundation in response to recruitment concerns voiced by the police department.

According to the police foundation, $2.6 million was paid to lending institutions on behalf of police officers who graduated from the academy in July 2008 and December 2008. Each officer from the first class saw two payments totaling $4,246.16 paid toward their college debt while graduates of the second class had one payment of $2,123.

The intention of the program was to continue making annual payments totaling $15,000 for each qualifying officer from the two 2008 classes. Ms. Salembier said the NYPD vetted potential candidates while her organization administered the payments.

The collective-bargaining board, through a lengthy discovery process, concluded that the NYPD ran the program and the police foundation had little role except in providing the funds.

"It certainly is a disappointing decision to say the least," said top NYPD spokesman, Paul Browne. "The donors, through the police foundation, found a way to ameliorate the particularly low starting salary at the time, when it was particularly difficult to recruit and retain officers."

Lee Adler, an expert on public-sector collective bargaining at the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations, said the fight over the program underscores the traditionally contentious relationship between the city and the PBA.

"It was a tangible benefit that was being offered to these young officers," he said. "They could have probably worked something out without much problem, but that hasn't been the case between the NYPD and the PBA. There is years of distrust there."

PBA spokesman Al O'Leary conceded that the union's position on the program can appear "counterintuitive" but said any educational benefit offered by the NYPD has to be formalized by a contract and extend to all members of the force.

The current police contract, agreed to in negotiations between the city and the PBA in August 2008, brought starting salaries up to nearly $42,000, which rapidly addressed the growing concern over the recruitment and retention of new police officers.

According to the NYPD, between May 2008 and August 2008, the department received 17,715 new applications compared with 22,841 in the same period in 2009, after the new contract was announced.

Ms. Salembier said the remaining funds that were raised for loan assistance will be put toward other established programs the police foundation runs, including one which pays the living expenses of NYPD personnel stationed overseas.

"This police force is the finest in the world," she said. "I will never be discouraged because the needs of the NYPD come first, and my job is to raise money to support the department."

Write to Tamer El-Ghobashy at tamer.el-ghobashy@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...252700568.html

[Khendraja'aro]

Which is relevant to corporate advertising in schools exactly how? Or are we going off on a completely irrelevant tangent?

I mean, I could also post some articles about unions, schools or corporations if you want?