Yes, AN, we’ll have to agree to disagree. “Waiting for Superman” is a propaganda piece put out by the privatization movement. It featured Michelle Rhee as some sort of education reform idol, when she has done nothing more (even less, IMO) for students than what tens of thousands of dedicated, unionized teachers do year after year…yet they get no bully pulpit because they are not narcissistic “reformers” who are being backed by powerful financial interests.
You need to do more research regarding privatization and Rhee’s supposed “success.”
[quote=CA renter]
How much lobbying does the privatization movement do? I can assure you it is spending far more money that teachers’ unions.
[/quote]
Not sure about lobbying but prop 30 in 2012 (the sales tax increase for school funding) had 67.1 in yes funding and 53.4 million in no funding with most of that no funding coming from Charles Munger and a fair amount of yes funding from labor groups and surprisingly corporate interests. You can see the detail here. http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_30,_Sales_and_Income_Tax_Increase_(2012)
Munger’s sister (Molly Munger) was behind the competing proposition 38 that failed in that election.
[quote=AN]Why do you have to replace experienced teachers w/ new teachers? Why can’t you replace them with other experienced teachers?
[/quote]
Because of the way the teacher pension system works. If you have an ounce of a brain in you head there’s no way you’re going to give up the potential pension once you’ve made it 5-10 years into the system. You’re way to vested at that point. If they had 401Ks that were their money and could go with them you’d probably see more teachers moving around. Some goods ones would probably leave to the private sector but I’d rather have a new enthusiastic teacher than one that realizes they don’t really want to do this anymore.
