By Concerned

March 11, 2009 8:48 AM | Link to this

To focus on the political labels is to miss the point. Focus on what is needed to make sure that the educational system is not a zero sum game, that both low and middle income students thrive. That is the measure of whether Fordham is a valuable player in the Dayton educational landscape—has it made a major real world contribution?

By Oldprof

March 2, 2009 9:04 AM | Link to this

kRick (is that really you, Rick, with a typo?)—yes, a homeschooler won. There are outliers in every population. I worked my way to a PhD despite graduating from one of the worst public school systems in the nation. But the true measure is: given similar backgrounds, which group succeeds best? Good homeschoolers are, AFAIK, just as good as a good public school (and most public schools are good; it’s only the urban and impoverished districts that have ingrained problems). But you have to balance this homeschooler with the kids who are homeschooled by the RLDS polygamous families in Utah and Texas—and the few who are homeschooled because their parents are abusive and don’t want to risk its detection by a teacher. I find your “sex perverts” comment quite ignorant in the light of those facts.

By kRick

February 28, 2009 7:32 PM | Link to this

I noticed that a home schooler once again one the local spelling bee. Yet this child did not have thousands of dollars per year spent on his education nor have sex education curricula designed by sex perverts.

By Dave

February 26, 2009 12:16 PM | Link to this

We’re getting sidetracked here, arguing about whether we agree with the conclusions. The criticism from the Colorado group is that the conclusions are not supported by the reports. It especially criticizes The Fordham Foundation (Chester Finn and Michael Petrelli) for greatly overstating the conclusions of these reports, “to bolster its policy recommendations”.

By Mary

February 25, 2009 6:21 AM | Link to this

oldprof, if I had to apply a label to myself, I might be a “neo-liberal” - socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. However, I do not see how anyone can attack the obvious point of the Tom Loveless report. What he says is obvious to me- the brighter students are being dumbed down and underchallenged in classes and an education system constructed to be “politically correct” rather than functional for the good of all. Many gifted students and adults are among the most “liberal” and giving, but there comes a time to learn your stuff in the education system. It seems to me the stereotypical liberal only embraces diversity when it becomes bleeding heart and tries to force everyone into the same mold so that there is no longer diversity. There is also a diversity of talents and abilities that is folly to deny, and should be embraced and nurtured no matter what spectrum they lie on.

By Oldprof

February 24, 2009 10:29 PM | Link to this

Ah, so the only criticisms of the Colorado group are that they are “liberal” or “biased”. Well, the same applies—in spades—to the Fordham Foundation and its advocacy for unproven amateurism in education. If you think John Husted would have supported charter schools if White Hat and other supporters hadn’t filled his campaign coffers, you need to get some eye drops.

By Rick

February 24, 2009 8:27 AM | Link to this

Scott, this group is obviously liberal. The policalization of academia continues apace. Three of the four groups are conservative. While the Brookings Institute was sited, it was for publishing the work of the same author that was published by Fordham. The author’s concern is completely valid: gifted students are shortchanged by our school systems. His theory is that this has been exacerbated by NCLB. On a surface level it makes sense to me.

By Oldprof

February 24, 2009 7:56 AM | Link to this

I’ve been commenting here for years now that Fordham and Buckeye Institute “research findings” were easily recognized as flawed propaganda by anyone with a decent graduate education. Nice to be confirmed. NOW will DDN quit gifting Terry Ryan with editorial page space?

By School Supporter

February 23, 2009 10:21 PM | Link to this

The group appears to be a single professor compensated for his work by a teachers-union anti-think tank: Kevin Welner, Professor and Director Education and the Public Interest Center University of Colorado at Boulder (303) 492-8370 kevin.welner@gmail.com

By bobby

February 23, 2009 8:37 PM | Link to this

Scott, One of the fellows of this group is William Ayers of the University of Illinois@ Chicago.Haven’t we heard that name before?

By Mary

February 23, 2009 6:29 PM | Link to this

So, what are the qualifications of the Colorado group that rates them? Are they any better?