While folks may agree or disagree with, lets be honest, religious schools being funded via school tax dollars, regardless of what I believe, I'd rather my tax dollars educate a child in a religion that is not my own (or no religion at all) than have my tax dollars go to a failing school district. I get that some people might have stronger options on the matter, but thats just how I see it.roger wyoming II wrote:I could possibly consider vouchers for private schools that voluntarily comply with state standards and regulations, but not for those that want public money and teach children that dinosaurs lived with humans or will kick you out if you have two mommys. Also, too, grifters grift so when public money is involved without accountability I can see a lot of abuse with shady private schools opening. Establishing more quality, accountable charters with strong institutional involvement (e.g. Wash U with KIPP) seems the better way to go.
Why would they care? They get to set up shop for several years, rake in the cash, and then perhaps eventually close. This was a common feature of charters until the state finally required some form of accountability. Same is happening in other states where there is no scrutiny. Grifters grift. And that isn't even taking into account systems like Imagine Academy or "here's the latest idea schools" to garner attraction such as online schools, etc. with no real documentation that their model works. Transfers to other districts and accountable charters would be more than adequate to address the issue w/o dismantling the American Public Education System imo.jem79c wrote: As for shady/money grab for-profit schools, who would send their kids there when there are ample other options to choose from? These schools would quickly be run out of business through competition, even without accountable standards.
I think 20 or so for a metro area is alright but for a county that's too many. I did just a bit of checking and I found Indianapolis/Marion County: 9; Atlanta/Fulton: 2; Denver/Denver: 3. I'm sure if you look at places like Pittsburgh/Allegheny County that also suffer from burgsville-itis they'd have more similar number to ours, but again I think consolidation is the way to go.debaliviere wrote:How many districts do comparable metro areas have? I've never really thought of STL as having an excessive number of school districts. Sure, there are some smaller ones (like Brentwood, for instance) that could be merged with larger ones (like Webster or MRH), but it seems like many of the districts serve fairly large areas.can't recall the exact number but I think that there are around 20 districts in the county. That's crazy.
Wow, I had no idea. It would be interesting to come up with a list of potential consoldiation candidates.I think 20 or so for a metro area is alright but for a county that's too many. I did just a bit of checking and I found Indianapolis/Marion County: 9; Atlanta/Fulton: 2; Denver/Denver: 3. I'm sure if you look at places like Pittsburgh/Allegheny County that also suffer from burgsville-itis they'd have more similar number to ours, but again I think consolidation is the way to go.
Looks like this has become significant. I think it's a combination of families who have moved and who were already living in the district but were going to private schools. My guess a majority is the latter because there wasn't much time to figure out and decide to move. Much more on th whole topic in the article.quincunx wrote:I heard on the radio that people are moving into the unaccredited districts in order to send their kid anywhere. I'll be curious to see how big of a phenomenon this becomes.
https://www.stlbeacon.org/#!/content/33 ... ing_100113State Sen. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, told Nicastro that such a situation, or having students who live in the unaccredited districts but have not attended school there also sign up to transfer, has been a big drain on Normandy and Riverview Gardens.
Spurgeon said he had 238 students sign up to transfer who had never been in his district’s schools.
Yes, the school district sucks (and probably won't get significantly better anytime soon), but there are individual schools in the City that perform at a high level. My oldest started at Mallinckrodt this year and so far I am very pleased. If she stays on her track, she'll go to McKinley for middle school and Metro for high school (a couple of the highest performing schools in the state). I also like that if for some reason I sour on Mallinckrodt, there are several other tuition-free alternatives in the City. In that regard, staying in the City is better because you have more options.bdoyle wrote:I personally am hoping the city schools fail and lose accreditation. I have young children that will be going to school in a few years... if we don't have an option to choose which school they go to then we'll regrettably move to the suburbs.
I'm not looking forward to it by any means... we love the city... but sending my kids to a school district that has been a complete failure for 5 decades and putting their future in jeopardy is not an option.
From what I have read it looks like the educational bureaucrats in these failed districts are going to try and do everything in their power to force these kids to go to their failed schools where they won't learn anything. Apparently keeping their own job is more important than the kids they are suppose to serve.
