• Welcome to Fearless Friday Bulletin Boards. Please login or sign up.

 FF is powered by:        Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Charter-school movement in Arkansas will ravage high-school football

Started by Rey Pygsterio, June 26, 2016, 12:37:47 am

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lionheart88

Quote from: Rey Pygsterio on June 28, 2016, 10:03:42 pm
Well if you are fine with it they will keep taking your money and as a bonus take the money away from all the real public schools.

The problem with the Walton heirs, who by the way mostly did not earn the money, is that they should not be allowed to walk in and take over a school district and state department of education just because they can write a check to the right elected officials who share their faulty notions on education. But that is what is happening in Arkansas right now.
Wait, old man Walton didn't spend all his money?  He left his children an inheritance!?  For shame!

Why are we bothered by a parent leaving his children money?

AirWarren

Quote from: Lionheart88 on June 29, 2016, 12:59:01 am
Wait, old man Walton didn't spend all his money?  He left his children an inheritance!?  For shame!

Why are we bothered by a parent leaving his children money?

That's the liberal mentality. Just evil that a man worked his tail off to earn a fortune so his children will have the ability to be well off and take the company.

Jimbo Morphis

Quote from: AirWarren on June 28, 2016, 06:22:44 pm
Blaming charter schools is the liberal's way of masking the true facts.


Education starts at HOME. These inner city schools are chock full of kids that have no home life or encouragement to succeed and overcome. How do you change that? At home. It's not the private schools fault. It's not the walton's fault. It's not the charters fault. It's society and how kids are brought up or lack there of. That in itself, is a a bigger problem than a wealthy family putting up money to give educational opportunity outside of "public schools".
not just inner city my friend. everywhere. schools have become babysitters.

AirWarren

Yeah, it's getting bad.

But for this particular arguments sake, LRSD, and the "charter epidemic", inner city was my aimed target.

Beaver Fever

That is one of the loopholes charter schools get is they don't have to hire certified teachers.  Say you have a biology positition open you can hire someone who worked in a lab.  They have the knowledge, just not the training in classroom management.  Classroom management these days is more important then knowledge of subjects

AirWarren

Quote from: Beaver Fever on June 29, 2016, 08:36:40 am
That is one of the loopholes charter schools get is they don't have to hire certified teachers.  Say you have a biology positition open you can hire someone who worked in a lab.  They have the knowledge, just not the training in classroom management.  Classroom management these days is more important then knowledge of subjects


That is correct. And it all falls on the parent to do their research to make sure the teachers are certified in their respected degrees.

sevenof400

Quote from: Fred Bird on June 28, 2016, 10:34:16 pm
Max Brantley's opinion isn't worth anymore than the toilet paper I just wiped my butt with

Gee thanks for that visual Fred....

sevenof400

Quote from: Beaver Fever on June 29, 2016, 08:36:40 am
That is one of the loopholes charter schools get is they don't have to hire certified teachers.  Say you have a biology positition open you can hire someone who worked in a lab.  They have the knowledge, just not the training in classroom management.  Classroom management these days is more important then knowledge of subjects

In a word - no. 

I'm not saying classroom management is unimportant but content knowledge is FAR more important when teaching.  You can't meaningfully teach what you don't know - or barely know - and that's the problem in teacher degree programs these days.  Listening to teacher education programs at your nearby university or college, you'd think classroom management is some higher level language requiring the burning of incense to comprehend.  It isn't - its common sense and can be taught within the bounds of one college course.  In the end, I'd rather have a teacher with a pure science degree and one or two classroom management courses as opposed to a science teacher with an education degree and about one half as many science courses under their belt.   

OB11

Quote from: sevenof400 on June 29, 2016, 10:26:57 am
In a word - no. 

I'm not saying classroom management is unimportant but content knowledge is FAR more important when teaching.  You can't meaningfully teach what you don't know - or barely know - and that's the problem in teacher degree programs these days.  Listening to teacher education programs at your nearby university or college, you'd think classroom management is some higher level language requiring the burning of incense to comprehend.  It isn't - its common sense and can be taught within the bounds of one college course.  In the end, I'd rather have a teacher with a pure science degree and one or two classroom management courses as opposed to a science teacher with an education degree and about one half as many science courses under their belt.

I agree 100% with everything you said. 

But I will add this...when you have a class of 30 kids with no home training and a lack of respect for authority,  classroom management becomes huge.  If you can't manage those kids and their behavior, the content you know becomes irrelevant.  Some students just simply don't want to learn.  And by the time they realize that is the wrong attitude to have (if they ever come to that realization) it will be too late.  It does all start at home.  In the 45 minutes I have your child in class, I can't be mom, dad, grandma, grandpa, counselor, therapist, and teach them what I've been hired to teach them. 

AirWarren

Yup. But you have the anti charter crowd out there not blaming the real problem. The parents. It's the rich folks, waltons, private schools, charter schools, benton, Bryant, Cabot, etc fault for the failure of the LRSD.

The LRSD has imploded on its own way before those issues that are easy to blame even existed.

GuvHog

Quote from: AirWarren on June 28, 2016, 09:46:38 pm
Max Brantley. Haha. Talk about garbage journalism.

Glad to see I'm not the only one that believes that. Max Brantley is just plain BAD NEWS.

GuvHog

Quote from: OliverBoy11 on June 29, 2016, 11:30:04 am
I agree 100% with everything you said. 

But I will add this...when you have a class of 30 kids with no home training and a lack of respect for authority,  classroom management becomes huge.  If you can't manage those kids and their behavior, the content you know becomes irrelevant.  Some students just simply don't want to learn.  And by the time they realize that is the wrong attitude to have (if they ever come to that realization) it will be too late.  It does all start at home.  In the 45 minutes I have your child in class, I can't be mom, dad, grandma, grandpa, counselor, therapist, and teach them what I've been hired to teach them. 

If a good teacher who genuinely cares about the students is given the freedom to discipline the students as He/she deems necessary, the students would be a whole lot better behaved and respect authority much better than they currently do. Unfortunately all teachers hands are tied thanks to silly government regulations to the point that they have very little to no control of the classrooms.

AirWarren

Quote from: GuvHog on June 29, 2016, 03:33:34 pm
Glad to see I'm not the only one that believes that. Max Brantley is just plain BAD NEWS.

Anyone that reads the Arkansas times is garbage.

GuvHog

Quote from: AirWarren on June 29, 2016, 03:50:56 pm
Anyone that reads the Arkansas times is garbage.

Believe it or not, it actually used to be a decent publication until Max Brantley got his hands on it. What they have been trying to do is turn it in to what the Old Arkansas Gazette was before it's merger with the Arkansas Democrat and it's an utter failure.

AirWarren

They have turned it into a liberal cess pool of lies and garbage.

sevenof400

Quote from: AirWarren on June 30, 2016, 04:58:38 pm
They have turned it into a liberal cess pool of lies and garbage.

A bit redundant there aren't you AW?

Jimbo Morphis


AirWarren

Quote from: sevenof400 on June 30, 2016, 08:25:08 pm
A bit redundant there aren't you AW?

Nope.

As predicted. I did a little searching on the charter school tit bag cess pool. The OP was right on que. Scroll the comments.

He was joining the rest is the rah rah rah max Brantley garbage toadies.

Blame the charters. It's all their fault. Funny the LRSD has been failing for more than 30 years now...well before the inception of charters.

http://m.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2016/06/28/walton-foundation-pours-250-million-more-into-charter-schools-including-little-rock

SUGARTOWN

Quote from: AirWarren on June 29, 2016, 06:41:58 am
That's the liberal mentality. Just evil that a man worked his tail off to earn a fortune so his children will have the ability to be well off and take the company.

Wait, I thought liberals like Bernie WANTED to give money to people who didn't earn or deserve it. I'm confused. Lol

beach bum

No matter where you are the cream always rises to the top.... Work hard, be a good person, set your personal goals, and things will fall into place no matter what school you go to. It works the same for jobs. Success means something different to each person. Go for what makes you happy.

AirWarren

My dad always says. Let the bums live off the system. One less person to worry about taking my work. I'm still going to keep earning my living and money. 

Lions84

Down here in Texas we seen a mixed bag out of the Charter schools. Some help students others have not. Bottom line down here is we don't have enough money as it is with out funding Charters out of the same pot.

Rayburn

The false narrative from Branley and the like is that charter schools are designed to get white kids away from black kids. It's just not true. The one in Chenal Valley does, but only because it's in the middle of a white neighborhood. The other one referenced in the Brantley story above, the on Louisiana, does not. It's at least 60/40 black. From the eyeball test, the one in Jacksonville, which I work right next to, is about 80/20 black.

The other contradictory claim is that on one hand, charter schools don't outperform public schools, while also claiming charter schools siphon the best students from public schools. If they were deliberately siphoning the best students, they would be outperforming public schools. It has to be one or the other. It can't be both.

It is true that charter schools take good athletes out of the public schools. I work closely with lots of educators in central Arkansas. I know Jacksonville High would have been much better in several sports, especially football and boys' basketball, had the kids at Lighthouse gone to JHS. But I also know that the athletes who went to Lighthouse (and they were all black) did so because their parents felt the learning environment and opportunities were greater for their kids.

So RP is correct in saying they hurt public school athletics. They absolutely do. And I regret to demise of hometown sports.  But the public system has not been successful. I don't blame most of the educators themselves, but rather the system they have to work in.

Now that Jacksonville has its own district, it seems that there will, at least initially, be a little bit of a resurgence towards the public school because people are going to give the city a chance to prove it can do better than PCCSD. I hope the new district can flourish and remove the need for a charter school, but right now there's no question, there is a need in many, many places. It is unfortunate that profit motive is involved creating these schools, but the need is there nonetheless.

Grizzlyfan

There are a few parents making school decisions for their kids based SOLELY on athletics.  But not all that many.  Those that do stand out like a sore thumb, especially in basketball.  To a lesser extent football.

AirWarren

Quote from: Rayburn on July 28, 2016, 09:14:45 am
The false narrative from Branley and the like is that charter schools are designed to get white kids away from black kids. It's just not true. The one in Chenal Valley does, but only because it's in the middle of a white neighborhood. The other one referenced in the Brantley story above, the on Louisiana, does not. It's at least 60/40 black. From the eyeball test, the one in Jacksonville, which I work right next to, is about 80/20 black.

The other contradictory claim is that on one hand, charter schools don't outperform public schools, while also claiming charter schools siphon the best students from public schools. If they were deliberately siphoning the best students, they would be outperforming public schools. It has to be one or the other. It can't be both.

It is true that charter schools take good athletes out of the public schools. I work closely with lots of educators in central Arkansas. I know Jacksonville High would have been much better in several sports, especially football and boys' basketball, had the kids at Lighthouse gone to JHS. But I also know that the athletes who went to Lighthouse (and they were all black) did so because their parents felt the learning environment and opportunities were greater for their kids.

So RP is correct in saying they hurt public school athletics. They absolutely do. And I regret to demise of hometown sports.  But the public system has not been successful. I don't blame most of the educators themselves, but rather the system they have to work in.

Now that Jacksonville has its own district, it seems that there will, at least initially, be a little bit of a resurgence towards the public school because people are going to give the city a chance to prove it can do better than PCCSD. I hope the new district can flourish and remove the need for a charter school, but right now there's no question, there is a need in many, many places. It is unfortunate that profit motive is involved creating these schools, but the need is there nonetheless.


Max Brantley is a pot stirring baffoon. Garbage.

xcat

Charters in Florida and Louisiana have not "ravaged" HS ball. Why would Arkansas be different?

AirWarren


Chief_Osceolaâ„¢

Quote from: AirWarren on July 28, 2016, 05:53:41 pm
Max Brantley is a pot stirring baffoon. Garbage.

He's as bad as that Kuntzman twerp that alleged he got PTSD from firing an AR-15.  Both are cut from the same cloth.

bleudog

Quote from: xcat on August 18, 2016, 06:53:09 am
Charters in Florida and Louisiana have not "ravaged" HS ball. Why would Arkansas be different?

FWIW, the Louisiana equivalent of the AAA addressed the levelness of the playing field by voting to go to a select and non-select playoff format.  That started with football a year or so ago and has now expanded to more sports going forward.  Select schools are defined as private, charter and parochial.  Non-selects are traditional district tied public schools.

http://www.katc.com/story/31091773/lhsaa-ratifies-expansion-of-split-playoffs

Here's one that I found kind of interesting since you mentioned Florida.  A private school in Shreveport had its multi-star quarterback recruited away for his senior year by a Florida private "academy."

http://usatodayhss.com/2015/img-academy-finds-their-new-qb-elite-11-mvp-shea-patterson

Oldbadger

I am a proponent of charter schools.  How it impacts the public schools in athletics is not important to me.  I say this as a grandparent who played football in public schools, have kids who played football (and other sports) in public schools, and grandkids who are currently playing football in public schools. The important thing is education.  Those charter schools you are talking about who aren't quite performing to state standards are serving kids who, previously, may have been scoring less than the 25th percentile on the standardized tests.  They are now, perhaps, scoring on the 40th or 50th percentile because they were able to get away from the substandard schools in the LRSD. This may make their school still look as if it isn't being productive, but on an individual basis, it is. Charter schools are still public schools.  They have guidelines to follow just as the public schools do.  However, they can request exemptions from some guidelines in order to facilitate better instruction for a certain subgroup of pupils.  They may be different at each school. The main difference is that they have a "charter" to follow that is approved by the State Educational Department.  If they don't live up to it, they can be closed.  Public schools can't be closed, so they just drone on and on, doing the same thing that isn't working and producing students who can't read or write.  I am of the opinion that all schools in the state should be charter schools.  Therefore, if they aren't successful, then close them.  Athletics are important.  Maybe siphoning money and students will make a schools football team less successful, but, how many of those kids are going to play at the next level anyway?  Success in life is what's important.  Athletics (football) can help in that respect by teaching hard work, team work and sacrifice.  Those things can be learned without a perennial winning team.  So bring on the Charter schools.  Let's start being concerned about those students who will never play a sport.  A lot of today's current social problems can be alleviated by a better education for all.

Chief_Osceolaâ„¢

Quote from: Oldbadger on August 26, 2016, 12:25:21 pm
I am a proponent of charter schools.  How it impacts the public schools in athletics is not important to me.  I say this as a grandparent who played football in public schools, have kids who played football (and other sports) in public schools, and grandkids who are currently playing football in public schools. The important thing is education.  Those charter schools you are talking about who aren't quite performing to state standards are serving kids who, previously, may have been scoring less than the 25th percentile on the standardized tests.  They are now, perhaps, scoring on the 40th or 50th percentile because they were able to get away from the substandard schools in the LRSD. This may make their school still look as if it isn't being productive, but on an individual basis, it is. Charter schools are still public schools.  They have guidelines to follow just as the public schools do.  However, they can request exemptions from some guidelines in order to facilitate better instruction for a certain subgroup of pupils.  They may be different at each school. The main difference is that they have a "charter" to follow that is approved by the State Educational Department.  If they don't live up to it, they can be closed.  Public schools can't be closed, so they just drone on and on, doing the same thing that isn't working and producing students who can't read or write.  I am of the opinion that all schools in the state should be charter schools.  Therefore, if they aren't successful, then close them.  Athletics are important.  Maybe siphoning money and students will make a schools football team less successful, but, how many of those kids are going to play at the next level anyway?  Success in life is what's important.  Athletics (football) can help in that respect by teaching hard work, team work and sacrifice.  Those things can be learned without a perennial winning team.  So bring on the Charter schools.  Let's start being concerned about those students who will never play a sport.  A lot of today's current social problems can be alleviated by a better education for all.



Amen.

AirWarren

Quote from: Oldbadger on August 26, 2016, 12:25:21 pm
I am a proponent of charter schools.  How it impacts the public schools in athletics is not important to me.  I say this as a grandparent who played football in public schools, have kids who played football (and other sports) in public schools, and grandkids who are currently playing football in public schools. The important thing is education.  Those charter schools you are talking about who aren't quite performing to state standards are serving kids who, previously, may have been scoring less than the 25th percentile on the standardized tests.  They are now, perhaps, scoring on the 40th or 50th percentile because they were able to get away from the substandard schools in the LRSD. This may make their school still look as if it isn't being productive, but on an individual basis, it is. Charter schools are still public schools.  They have guidelines to follow just as the public schools do.  However, they can request exemptions from some guidelines in order to facilitate better instruction for a certain subgroup of pupils.  They may be different at each school. The main difference is that they have a "charter" to follow that is approved by the State Educational Department.  If they don't live up to it, they can be closed.  Public schools can't be closed, so they just drone on and on, doing the same thing that isn't working and producing students who can't read or write.  I am of the opinion that all schools in the state should be charter schools.  Therefore, if they aren't successful, then close them.  Athletics are important.  Maybe siphoning money and students will make a schools football team less successful, but, how many of those kids are going to play at the next level anyway?  Success in life is what's important.  Athletics (football) can help in that respect by teaching hard work, team work and sacrifice.  Those things can be learned without a perennial winning team.  So bring on the Charter schools.  Let's start being concerned about those students who will never play a sport.  A lot of today's current social problems can be alleviated by a better education for all.

Liberals, Max Brantley, and the Arkansas times readers just scattered like maggots in hot ashes.


Kudos to you sir! Most parents recognize their kid WONT BE A D1 academic recipient. That's only a select few. If you are seriously concerned about ones education, you don't send your kid to a school based on that. Especially a poor performing school.

Let's take a look at one LRSD school. 7a Little Rock central. The whole argument behind charters it is destroying the academic and athletic premise behind  LRSD/PCSSD schools yet it's one of the BEST academic schools in little rock in a terrible location of little rock. Hasn't affected them. Mills, hall, McClellen, etc have been failing a long time. Way before the inception of charter schools. So what's their excuse? Oh wait, the white "progressive liberals" want to blame saline county, Cabot, charters, and private schools. Not the parents who are the real ones responsible for teaching the importance of school, good grades, and earning a college degree. Not to mention respecting adults and staying off the streets.
And it's hard as heck to get into one too. Kids go years and years on a waiting list wanting to get in.

xcat

Quote from: bleudog on August 24, 2016, 02:32:00 pm
FWIW, the Louisiana equivalent of the AAA addressed the levelness of the playing field by voting to go to a select and non-select playoff format.  That started with football a year or so ago and has now expanded to more sports going forward.  Select schools are defined as private, charter and parochial.  Non-selects are traditional district tied public schools.

http://www.katc.com/story/31091773/lhsaa-ratifies-expansion-of-split-playoffs

Here's one that I found kind of interesting since you mentioned Florida.  A private school in Shreveport had its multi-star quarterback recruited away for his senior year by a Florida private "academy."

http://usatodayhss.com/2015/img-academy-finds-their-new-qb-elite-11-mvp-shea-patterson


eh...
so you are attempting to equate IMG with charter schools... and Louisiana's split with charters?

That's quite a stretch and completely erroneous, so I must assume you suffer from a severe lack of intelligence or you are trying to throw a red herring out there in order to mislead those who don't know how to click a hyperlink. IMG recruits all over the USA, and is NOT a charter school. They are a privately held athletics marketing corporation.

The split in Louisiana is 100% about John Curtis winning football championships - and nothing to do with charters.

So here are some actually up-to-date hyperlinks for you:

This one outlines pretty much anything you might want to know about charters in Louisiana, including demographics about locations, enrollment numbers, and racial make-up of Louisiana's charter schools.

http://lacharterschools.org/about-charter-schools/

This next one is for the LHSAA which shows the classifications of football teams in LA. As you look through the select divisions, you'll find that there are FOUR charter schools, a couple of which - University Lab & Southern Lab - are pretty good.

http://www.lhsaa.org/sports/sports-directory/fall/football





nuttinbuthogs

Quote from: Longfellow on June 26, 2016, 11:27:01 am
Test scores are a terrible way to compare schools. Standardized tests don't account for the individual needs of each student. It doesn't make sense to have every student, regardless of intelligence or learning disability, take the same test

But it makes sense to have 25 to 30 students in a classroom where they have several levels of individual needs and the teacher cannot possibly address them all.

nuttinbuthogs

Schools go downhill when the value of an education looses its importance and the discipline level inside the school building goes to pot.  Any parent worth his salt will head his kid in another direction if he can. Getting a good education can be plenty challenging without having to struggle with a bunch of unruly students who disrupt the process.

Oldbadger


nuttinbuthogs

You always hear about our "failing schools", it's not just the fault of classroom teacher like we hear and the politician like to portray.  Unfortunately, nobody wants to say the problem is unruly parents with unruly kids.  Might not get their vote come next election.  Educators are the backbone of this country in a lot of ways and over the years have grown to be treated terribly. Can you say "scapegoat"?

OB11

Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on August 30, 2016, 10:42:36 am
You always hear about our "failing schools", it's not just the fault of classroom teacher like we hear and the politician like to portray.  Unfortunately, nobody wants to say the problem is unruly parents with unruly kids.  Might not get their vote come next election.  Educators are the backbone of this country in a lot of ways and over the years have grown to be treated terribly. Can you say "scapegoat"?

Education starts at home.  Some parents today look at public schools as a place they can send their kids to learn everything they need to know.  They put all the responsibility on the school instead of taking initiative in their child's learning by working with them at home.  When you send a 5 year old to Kindergarten that has no idea what the alphabet is or how to count because you think it's the schools job to do that, then you've failed as a parent and have done irreparable damage to your child's learning. 

nuttinbuthogs

yes, so true, and you always can blame the school and almost nobody will argue with you.  Its a great point to bring up in an election, "we will fix the schools"  yeah right.  Most politicians use that topic and then forget it except when they need to divert the issue.  I still recall our current President saying teachers should make $100,000.  Anybody seen any of that money in the last 8 years? 
Broke system wasn't broken before they started fixing it. Now its the place to get all the social aid and counseling provided by the government.   Oh, and you may get some education if the school can squeeze it in between standardized testing, surveys, and social services.

Grizzlyfan

Quote from: OB11 on August 30, 2016, 10:58:42 am
Education starts at home.  Some parents today look at public schools as a place they can send their kids to learn everything they need to know.  They put all the responsibility on the school instead of taking initiative in their child's learning by working with them at home.  When you send a 5 year old to Kindergarten that has no idea what the alphabet is or how to count because you think it's the schools job to do that, then you've failed as a parent and have done irreparable damage to your child's learning.
Yes, we've established long ago that parental involvement is one of the foremost indicators of educational success.  Now, there are parents who will never be involved in any meaningful way.  Either because they can't or because they don't want to be.  Now what do schools (ie society) do to stop the downward spiral.

OB11

Quote from: Grizzlyfan on September 01, 2016, 09:15:56 am
Yes, we've established long ago that parental involvement is one of the foremost indicators of educational success.  Now, there are parents who will never be involved in any meaningful way.  Either because they can't or because they don't want to be.  Now what do schools (ie society) do to stop the downward spiral.

Hopefully show young people the importance of family and taking initiative in their own education.  Is that happening everywhere?  No.  But educators (especially coaches of young men) need to emphasize the importance of family and responsibility not only to yourself but to your fellow classmates and teammates. 

I know that sounds like a fantasy world and that won't ever be the case everywhere.  But we've got to set an example for young people to follow and not just push them through the system. 

Oldbadger

It IS best if a child has parents (or guardians) who take an active role in a child's education, supporting the school, teacher and student.  But, if only ONE thing were done that would change society, that thing would be that a child just had a stable home life with a father and mother.  The parents would not have to take ANY interest in school.  We would see a great change in the schools and success of students.  Many kids today have a single parent home, usually the mother, who has to work at several jobs to pay the bills and feed the kids.  No one home to give the kids structure or guidance.  They are on their own. This is a recipe for disaster. And that is what we have today.  So many kids have to make their own decisions, and most of the time they are not good ones.  Once they start downhill, it would take a miracle to stop it.  Until parents learn to stay together and help raise their kids like in the 40's and 50's this isn't going to get better.  Not the schools fault, or the teachers; but the parents for not providing a stable home life for their children.

Grizzlyfan

Quote from: OB11 on September 01, 2016, 10:15:41 am
Hopefully show young people the importance of family and taking initiative in their own education.  Is that happening everywhere?  No.  But educators (especially coaches of young men) need to emphasize the importance of family and responsibility not only to yourself but to your fellow classmates and teammates. 

I know that sounds like a fantasy world and that won't ever be the case everywhere.  But we've got to set an example for young people to follow and not just push them through the system.
You bet.  That's why so many poor kids see the sports teams as families they don't have at home.  But ultimately the kids on the sports team are just a blip on the radar compared to all the kids falling through the cracks.

nuttinbuthogs

If you have kids they are your responsibility, not the schools.  You work and you have to raise the kid.  Nobody said its easy but too many just don't put much effort into it.  You cannot let your kid run free and wild.  You have to give up your free time to monitor the child.  It's the way it is.  Trying to blame it on the school is a joke.  Those people have families of their own to raise.  Teaching is a job just like any other.

hogbert


Lions84

Quote from: AirWarren on June 29, 2016, 11:34:09 am
Yup. But you have the anti charter crowd out there not blaming the real problem. The parents. It's the rich folks, waltons, private schools, charter schools, benton, Bryant, Cabot, etc fault for the failure of the LRSD.

The LRSD has imploded on its own way before those issues that are easy to blame even existed.

Yes It was going down fast in the late 1980's  Henry Woods destroyed LRSD.

Fox 16 Arkansas Fox 24 Arkansas