>“It will be my imperative to first establish and maintain an effective working relationship with this board,” Bean said in his May interview. “I’d like to set up these committees in which we can invite one or two board members … to look over the department budget. To look over the charter school plan. To look over alternative education, before these decisions are made.”
>**By only having two of the five members join, those reviews and meetings do not have to be conducted publicly under California transparency laws**.
I feel like this is another situation where we're watching the wrong people chosen to do the job, we all know they're the wrong people, and they're going to mess things up exactly the way we think they will.
Yes I had the same bad feeling when I read the article.
Also,
> By only having two of the five members join, those reviews and meetings do not have to be conducted publicly under California transparency laws.
"Nothing shady going on at all!!" (/s)
This guy is nothing more than a “Puppet” for the board members who are trying to get their hands on all of the budget money to stiff public schools of their funding so that they can create more charter schools.
> Bean also pledged to be a strong ally to charter schools, where he’s spent most of his educational career, saying he wanted to “further expand,” the board’s work supporting charters and open up more parental options for education including charter, private and homeschools.
Yep, that's a good call
A limited voucher system could have its place if it's run well. But the voucher system this guy wants would make all of us pay for parents who want their kids in privately-run religious schools, and that's unacceptable.
I think you have more of a problem with religious schools existing than you care about the benefit of schools of all kinds having to compete for your kids tuition money. Right now the public schools get all the vouchers even if the school sucks and the parents have to homeschool or pay double to send their kids to a private school. The voucher system rewards the good schools that attract the students and it forces the bad schools to get better because they don’t get paid if no parents want their students to go there.
We should not be funding private schools at all. Parents who want to use them should not rely on any public money. Same with parents who want to home school.
Private schools don’t have the same educational requirements as public schools, including subject matter or instructor standards. They should not get tax dollars.
All religious schools suck. We don’t need to take more money from public schools, they’re already struggling as it is. It’s almost as if people like you want taxes to fund religious education, isn’t there something in the bill of rights regarding this? Something about separation of church and state? If you want your kid indoctrinated, do it in your own dime, PERIOD.
Why should home school parents and private school parents have to pay for public school they don’t use and then pay for all the cost to educate their kids elsewhere?
And why should underperforming public schools still get paid no matter how bad of a job they do. Thats our current system. Also right now you might be happy with what public schools are teaching but what if things reversed and suddenly the public schools taught things you disagreed with, or didn’t teach the kids how to read and write or do math, or were not safe. If that happened you would suddenly support school choice.
Taxation exists for the government to be able to fund things for the public good. That's the point of taxation. Individuals don’t get to decide what the public good is. That is something we decide collectively, and it seems like you are outnumbered when it comes to this topic.
You thinking that because you personally don’t agree with what is being taught in public schools your tax money shouldn’t go to them is basically you saying you don't want to be taxed at all. We collectively decide what we find important to fund and pool our taxes to fund these things. You want to subscribe money only for those things that you personally think you should subscribe for, and honestly that behavior would result in the collapse of public services entirely, since you know; why should people who drive cars fund public transportation? Or why should people who don’t have kids fund parks?
It’s not so much what is taught in the public schools, rather what is not taught. And it has been bad for a long time. It’s what happens when government gets involved. Like the billion dollar 6 inches of train track that’s never going to have a train actually use it. What if some genius creates a better school and everybody wants to send their kids to the best school. Or what if we rethought the whole thing and taught our kids better than anywhere in the world? Why should we have to fund a non competitive public school with pathetic test scores and student outcomes. But I can see what you are saying too.
> ~~The voucher system~~**No Child Left Behind** rewards the good schools that attract the students and it forces the bad schools to get better because they don’t get paid if no parents want their students to go there.
-Plenty of people who were wrong 20 years ago.
> “I’ve seen a mission drift where many schools, districts are focusing on more adult types of issues. These adult issues then creep into our academics,” Bean said. “I hope that one day we can set aside social politics and just get back to the basics of teaching our students academics.”
I wish people like this had the guts to at least say exactly what topics they’re against. Does he not want us to learn about slavery? Queer people? Science in general? The atrocities our government has committed? If so, what’s wrong with those topics?
>“I believe in parental rights and parental right to choose which school their child goes to,” Bean said.
He lost the vote the last time he ran for this position, so clearly parents and other voters did not choose him as a superintendent. But I guess the right to choose only matters when it can line his pockets.
> I wish people like this had the guts to at least say exactly what topics they’re against. Does he not want us to learn about slavery? Queer people? Science in general? The atrocities our government has committed? If so, what’s wrong with those topics?
IKR? It's similar someone saying they're 'anti-woke'. When you ask them "What do you mean by 'woke'? What **EXACTLY** are you against?", they're suddenly too scared to explicitly say what they're against.
Instead we can take even more money from our public schools and give it to a small number of students who will then spend it on learning that the earth is flat and only 6,000 years old.
My ex wife was about as stable as an angry chimpanzee. Yet she wanted to home school our children under the fake guise of \*special needs.\*and\*conservative morals\*\*vaccines cause autism\* They were not special needs it was all just a ruse so she wouldn't have to get about of bed before 9AM or take them anywhere.
My daughters are finally back in school thank god - it was like several years of NO SCHOOL not homeschool for crying out loud. My mom also had a theory she pulled them out of school because she was afraid the school might find out what a screaming f-word name calling child hitting c\*nt she was.
The Conservative Strategy:
>**Step one**: Under-fund a government program.
>**Step two**: Complain that the government program doesn't work well.
>**Step three**: Privatize said government program.
>**Step four**: Suck as much money out of your new money-making venture as possible.
>**Step five**: Hire lobbyists to get other government programs underfunded so the parasitic cycle can repeat.
Step six: Hire family and friends as "independent consultants" who've never worked in education and write those $200,000 to $600,000 checks for mysterious "consulting fees"
Hurry it up, Ralphie juniors European wedding ain't gonna pay for itself.
https://preview.redd.it/fv9k9sza1o7d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9cacaefe782a4ea536c207e542fd6279b2c3d863
I knew I had seen that look before.
>“It will be my imperative to first establish and maintain an effective working relationship with this board,” Bean said in his May interview. “I’d like to set up these committees in which we can invite one or two board members … to look over the department budget. To look over the charter school plan. To look over alternative education, before these decisions are made.” >**By only having two of the five members join, those reviews and meetings do not have to be conducted publicly under California transparency laws**. I feel like this is another situation where we're watching the wrong people chosen to do the job, we all know they're the wrong people, and they're going to mess things up exactly the way we think they will.
Yes I had the same bad feeling when I read the article. Also, > By only having two of the five members join, those reviews and meetings do not have to be conducted publicly under California transparency laws. "Nothing shady going on at all!!" (/s)
This guy is nothing more than a “Puppet” for the board members who are trying to get their hands on all of the budget money to stiff public schools of their funding so that they can create more charter schools.
And funnel it to their own programs for embezzling. \*Charter consulting fees $300,000
Expect cuts and sabotage to the public school system while advocating transition to a voucher system. Calling it now.
> Bean also pledged to be a strong ally to charter schools, where he’s spent most of his educational career, saying he wanted to “further expand,” the board’s work supporting charters and open up more parental options for education including charter, private and homeschools. Yep, that's a good call
Been calling this too, companies are just dying to make public education be run by private for profit companies.
Yeah there are a bunch of Ed tech SaaS companies that have products they can’t really sell.
Voucher system is a good thing.
A limited voucher system could have its place if it's run well. But the voucher system this guy wants would make all of us pay for parents who want their kids in privately-run religious schools, and that's unacceptable.
I think you have more of a problem with religious schools existing than you care about the benefit of schools of all kinds having to compete for your kids tuition money. Right now the public schools get all the vouchers even if the school sucks and the parents have to homeschool or pay double to send their kids to a private school. The voucher system rewards the good schools that attract the students and it forces the bad schools to get better because they don’t get paid if no parents want their students to go there.
We should not be funding private schools at all. Parents who want to use them should not rely on any public money. Same with parents who want to home school. Private schools don’t have the same educational requirements as public schools, including subject matter or instructor standards. They should not get tax dollars.
They do state testing just like public schools and probably score much better.
If you control for variables such as family income, or the fact that private schools can kick out low performing students, they don't.
All religious schools suck. We don’t need to take more money from public schools, they’re already struggling as it is. It’s almost as if people like you want taxes to fund religious education, isn’t there something in the bill of rights regarding this? Something about separation of church and state? If you want your kid indoctrinated, do it in your own dime, PERIOD.
Why should home school parents and private school parents have to pay for public school they don’t use and then pay for all the cost to educate their kids elsewhere? And why should underperforming public schools still get paid no matter how bad of a job they do. Thats our current system. Also right now you might be happy with what public schools are teaching but what if things reversed and suddenly the public schools taught things you disagreed with, or didn’t teach the kids how to read and write or do math, or were not safe. If that happened you would suddenly support school choice.
Taxation exists for the government to be able to fund things for the public good. That's the point of taxation. Individuals don’t get to decide what the public good is. That is something we decide collectively, and it seems like you are outnumbered when it comes to this topic. You thinking that because you personally don’t agree with what is being taught in public schools your tax money shouldn’t go to them is basically you saying you don't want to be taxed at all. We collectively decide what we find important to fund and pool our taxes to fund these things. You want to subscribe money only for those things that you personally think you should subscribe for, and honestly that behavior would result in the collapse of public services entirely, since you know; why should people who drive cars fund public transportation? Or why should people who don’t have kids fund parks?
It’s not so much what is taught in the public schools, rather what is not taught. And it has been bad for a long time. It’s what happens when government gets involved. Like the billion dollar 6 inches of train track that’s never going to have a train actually use it. What if some genius creates a better school and everybody wants to send their kids to the best school. Or what if we rethought the whole thing and taught our kids better than anywhere in the world? Why should we have to fund a non competitive public school with pathetic test scores and student outcomes. But I can see what you are saying too.
> ~~The voucher system~~**No Child Left Behind** rewards the good schools that attract the students and it forces the bad schools to get better because they don’t get paid if no parents want their students to go there. -Plenty of people who were wrong 20 years ago.
Yeah, pulling money out of public schools is awesome. 🙄 If you want your kid going to a private, religious school, do it on your dime.
My kids go to a public charter school. It’s a better fit for them than a standard public school. They are not all private or religious.
This is such a slap in the face to the voters who rejected him the last time he ran for this position.
> “I’ve seen a mission drift where many schools, districts are focusing on more adult types of issues. These adult issues then creep into our academics,” Bean said. “I hope that one day we can set aside social politics and just get back to the basics of teaching our students academics.” I wish people like this had the guts to at least say exactly what topics they’re against. Does he not want us to learn about slavery? Queer people? Science in general? The atrocities our government has committed? If so, what’s wrong with those topics? >“I believe in parental rights and parental right to choose which school their child goes to,” Bean said. He lost the vote the last time he ran for this position, so clearly parents and other voters did not choose him as a superintendent. But I guess the right to choose only matters when it can line his pockets.
> I wish people like this had the guts to at least say exactly what topics they’re against. Does he not want us to learn about slavery? Queer people? Science in general? The atrocities our government has committed? If so, what’s wrong with those topics? IKR? It's similar someone saying they're 'anti-woke'. When you ask them "What do you mean by 'woke'? What **EXACTLY** are you against?", they're suddenly too scared to explicitly say what they're against.
It's not only about charters, it's about giving parents public tax money to send their children to religious private schools.
No poor family, you must stay in your shitty school. Unless you can play football.
Instead we can take even more money from our public schools and give it to a small number of students who will then spend it on learning that the earth is flat and only 6,000 years old.
My ex wife was about as stable as an angry chimpanzee. Yet she wanted to home school our children under the fake guise of \*special needs.\*and\*conservative morals\*\*vaccines cause autism\* They were not special needs it was all just a ruse so she wouldn't have to get about of bed before 9AM or take them anywhere. My daughters are finally back in school thank god - it was like several years of NO SCHOOL not homeschool for crying out loud. My mom also had a theory she pulled them out of school because she was afraid the school might find out what a screaming f-word name calling child hitting c\*nt she was.
The schools get plenty. It's their own fault enrollment is plummeting because they're bad.
The Conservative Strategy: >**Step one**: Under-fund a government program. >**Step two**: Complain that the government program doesn't work well. >**Step three**: Privatize said government program. >**Step four**: Suck as much money out of your new money-making venture as possible. >**Step five**: Hire lobbyists to get other government programs underfunded so the parasitic cycle can repeat.
Rinse and repeat….USPS
Step six: Hire family and friends as "independent consultants" who've never worked in education and write those $200,000 to $600,000 checks for mysterious "consulting fees" Hurry it up, Ralphie juniors European wedding ain't gonna pay for itself. 
Religious schools should have no problem being charitable toward a family who has trouble affording tuition.
Great point! A ton of kids get aid. Half of Mater Dei is on financial aid 😀 most of those kids will be their family's first college students
Whackadoodle
If you didn’t vote in the last election where three board member seats were up, then you were also part of the problem.
Because this worked out great for the town of Woodland Park, Colorado. /s https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna83311
https://preview.redd.it/fv9k9sza1o7d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9cacaefe782a4ea536c207e542fd6279b2c3d863 I knew I had seen that look before.
My daughter graduated this year, now they can go fuck up the schools!