[Aces4]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

What students do they NOT take?

Are you accusing the charter schools of selective admission or discrimination? That is illegal - gather the evidence and prove it.

You gather the evidence they don't discriminate. A quick online search regarding discrimination in charter school admissions may assist you in seeing the light.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Aces4

You gather the evidence they don't discriminate. A quick online search regarding discrimination in charter school admissions may assist you in seeing the light.

Prove a negative? Yeah, right. That ain't the way it works; there is no wrongdoing unless someone can provide evidence of wrongdoing and emphatic assertions are not proof.

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Prove a negative? Yeah, right. That ain't the way it works; there is no wrongdoing unless someone can provide evidence of wrongdoing and emphatic assertions are not proof.

If you lack the energy to perform the research, I can’t help you. I’m not about to start providing links to all the assessments.

If you truly believe most charter schools do not discriminate, that is your prerogative. Nothing like turning a blind eye…

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Prove a negative? Yeah, right. That ain't the way it works; there is no wrongdoing unless someone can provide evidence of wrongdoing and emphatic assertions are not proof.

Try “charter schools sued for discrimination” for your beginning search. And these are only the people who have the time or resources for lawsuits.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Aces4

Try “charter schools sued for discrimination” for your beginning search. And these are only the people who have the time or resources for lawsuits.

And you can try "Driver arrested in the Villages" or "Villager arrested for drugs." While you will get many hits, that doesn't describe the majority of the Villagers.

Do I believe every single charter school acts appropriately? Not even the tooth fairy can convince me of that. But I do not believe it is legal for charter schools to discriminate and I don't believe that all charter schools break that law.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

So what?????? Why should any school hold back the best and the brightest to cater to the lowest common denominator????? Do we really need to "mainstream" behavior problems and autism into the same classroom and track as students that are motivated to learn and excel???

Here is an example from 25 years ago in Central NY: A mother successfully sued the school district to "mainstream" her daughter into a regular classroom. The problem was that the "student" was so developmentally disabled that she was non-verbal, no bladder or bowel control, unable to even feed herself, and was breathing through a trach that required suctioning every 3-4 minutes by the full time nurse that accompanied her, also paid for by the district. Why?? So "Mom" did not need to babysit her daughter or pay for help during school hours. And of course there was absolutely no potential for this unfortunate girl to learn anything.

Believe me, the other parents were outraged, their kids were in the lowest performing classroom in the district, and many kids did not want to go to school because of the stench. The teacher had the highest absentee rate in the district as well.

So I don't care how "enlightened" people feel about "mainstreaming" problem children---it is a BAD IDEA. There are plenty of special programs for such kids

What a non-response to my post. Did I say anything about mainstreaming? Did I advocate for having a student in a classroom who is disruptive. I did not so don't put words in my mouth. What I said, since you didn't read carefully, is that Charter Schools are cherry picking students and leaving the difficult students to the real public schools. Then members of a certain party love to point out how Charter Schools do such a better job of having well behaved classrooms and higher graduation rates.

Well of course they do when you won't admit problem students. West Point has better behavior than Florida State and a better graduation rate.

Then we get bombarded with comments about how we should stop paying teachers as the product they produce is no good. We should cut funding for public schools because Charters do it cheaper. We should vote against school funding in districts that depend on it. All part of an intentional or unintentional plan to destroy one of the bedrocks of America, a free education.

And to answer your question. I do not support the mainstreaming of students who do not demonstrably benefit from it and whose mainstreaming interferes with the ability of the other students to learn. We should go back to Special Ed programs, SBD classes, etc. where very well paid teachers, speech therapists, OT, PT etc, who are equipped by training and inclination to teach these more challenging students work their magic. And we should require all school systems to provide these programs and not leave it to the local taxpayer to approve.

Lastly your example of a specific child being mainstreamed fails the smell test. At least your assertion that she was mainstreamed so her mother didn't have to babysit. If that child were in a special class and not mainstreamed mom would have had no "babysitting" responsibility either. So don't accuse her of things that did not motivate her, if your story is even real.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by blueash

What a non-response to my post. Did I say anything about mainstreaming? Did I advocate for having a student in a classroom who is disruptive. I did not so don't put words in my mouth. What I said, since you didn't read carefully, is that Charter Schools are cherry picking students and leaving the difficult students to the real public schools. Then members of a certain party love to point out how Charter Schools do such a better job of having well behaved classrooms and higher graduation rates.

Well of course they do when you won't admit problem students. West Point has better behavior than Florida State and a better graduation rate.

Then we get bombarded with comments about how we should stop paying teachers as the product they produce is no good. We should cut funding for public schools because Charters do it cheaper. We should vote against school funding in districts that depend on it. All part of an intentional or unintentional plan to destroy one of the bedrocks of America, a free education.

And to answer your question. I do not support the mainstreaming of students who do not demonstrably benefit from it and whose mainstreaming interferes with the ability of the other students to learn. We should go back to Special Ed programs, SBD classes, etc. where very well paid teachers, speech therapists, OT, PT etc, who are equipped by training and inclination to teach these more challenging students work their magic. And we should require all school systems to provide these programs and not leave it to the local taxpayer to approve.

Lastly your example of a specific child being mainstreamed fails the smell test. At least your assertion that she was mainstreamed so her mother didn't have to babysit. If that child were in a special class and not mainstreamed mom would have had no "babysitting" responsibility either. So don't accuse her of things that did not motivate her, if your story is even real.

First of all, I was not responding solely to you, but to the thread in general.

Secondly, please check your olfactory sense. That was an absolutely 100% true story. This unfortunate child was not a candidate for ANY type of classroom, "special ed" or other. She was incapable of learning anything, and by my description you already knew that. The choice was she stayed at home or abuse the legal system into turning a classroom into a babysitter. Mom admitted that she did not want to stay at home with her daughter or pay for caretakers, and some idiot judge agreed with her. I did not assign motive to her actions, SHE DID. I was there, YOU were not. Don't EVER imply that I prevaricate.

But on another note, check out the thread on a physician office visit to a TV screen in the next room---unbelievable!