June 22, 2005

Metro Test Scores Up

Right under the headline in the Tennessean's story on Metro's test scores early results, you see this..."With budget at issue, district crunches numbers early to make case for more money."

All I have to say is this...According to the "more money for schools advocates," they didn't get the money they wanted during the last budget round. In fact, they say that they got "cut." However, their test scores have gone up. If that's the case, then they are proving themselves wrong by providing better results without getting more money.

Hey, I'm just saying.

Comments:

Please Note! Failure to abide by the following may result in your comments being edited or deleted: Remain on topic. Foul language and/or personal attacks are not permitted. Excessive links (more than three per thread) must be approved first. If you do include a link in your comment, make sure it is a short link (go to tinyurl.com if it is too long). Try to keep comments to 125 words or less. Thank you.

More maybe you should give Pedro Garcia (whom I don't necessarily care for) and the school district props for working more with less.

Posted by: S-townMike at June 22, 2005 09:14 AM

... and imagine what they might do with more ...

Posted by: S-townMike at June 22, 2005 09:15 AM

More with less...exactly.

Of course, they do spend more per student than the national average (and way more than the state average), so imagine what they might do with better management.

Posted by: B at June 22, 2005 09:26 AM

Boy, you seem so allergic to school administration that you cannot even give props to them for better test scores. It's almost like you're giving credit for the TCAP progress to the people who slashed the budget, despite the fact that logically, credit should go to educators. That's quite a calisthenic position, since calisthenics require stretching.

Posted by: S-townMike at June 22, 2005 09:35 AM

lol

Here you go: Congratulations to the teachers who were able to prove that you could do more with less.

Quoting myself from a few posts back, when dealing with these budget issues, "I'm not talking about the teachers here...they are the ones who are right where the rubber meets the road. I'm talking about the leadership and bureaucracy of the school system that bogs down the entire machine."

Teachers good...bureaucracy bad.

Posted by: B at June 22, 2005 09:46 AM

If only we lived in a Manichean world of black-white dualisms. Some of us remain gray-shaded realists. Not all teachers are good and test scores went up in spite of them; and bureaucracy is a necessary evil that needs to be watched, not feared.

Why is it that we have no problems throwing ungodly sums of money at corporate CEOs and their bureaucracies when their performance shows improvement (and even when it doesn't), but we run into all kinds of issues with giving our local boards and administrations a little more money for their improvements? Would that be "private industry good ... government industry bad?"

Posted by: S-townMike at June 22, 2005 10:19 AM

You're letting your true shades of liberalism show, Mike. :)

If you are not a shareholder of a corporation, what business is it of yours (or mine) how a private business spends money? It's not.

However, we are all "shareholders" in the government, so it's pretty much the business of everyone who pay taxes how their money is being spent.

And sure...the bureaucracy is a necessity...of sorts...but I have said that it needs an overhaul. If it's broken, don't throw more money at it...fix it.

Posted by: B at June 22, 2005 10:41 AM

Was it $400 million that Exxon reportedly made last year in profits? And yet, they tell the consumer that high gas prices are necessary because of supply issues. Consumers don't have a stake in what private companies pay their CEOs, especially when they do not have a choice? Until a car that runs on water or Pepsi is produced, consumers have no choice but to pay what gas companies charge to pay their CEOs and bureaucracies ridiculous sums of money. Consumers are thusly compelled to pay to transport themselves to work, just like they are compelled to pay taxes to support government revenues. I'm all for reforming government bureaucracy. Why don't you call for reforming private bureaucracy?

Posted by: S-townMike at June 22, 2005 11:34 AM

lol

That's quite a calisthenic position, since calisthenics require stretching.

Posted by: B at June 22, 2005 11:37 AM

When you stop lol, could you please answer the question? Or do you just always assume that consumers have choices beyond whether to pay $2.01 a gallon and $2.03 a gallon and that companies are free to do to people whatever they choose without any sense of responsibility?

(I obviously spend way too much time on this website sit here and be laughed at).

Posted by: S-townMike at June 22, 2005 12:09 PM

When I make a post about gas prices and energy policy please feel free to post these comments there.

Posted by: B at June 22, 2005 12:13 PM

"However, we are all "shareholders" in the government, so it's pretty much the business of everyone who pay taxes how their money is being spent."

I have been trying for years to make the goverment stop making me pay for things i don't use and have not stake in.

Posted by: cube at June 22, 2005 02:05 PM