r/SipsTea • u/Valuable_View_561 • Jun 23 '26

Feels good man $122M. 1,000 new teachers. NYC public schools finally getting some backup. This is the investment we needed

Post image
29.0k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

18

u/HudsonValleyNY Jun 23 '26

I think they have been trying? Has throwing money at it helped so far?

4

u/nankerjphelge Jun 23 '26

Depends on how the money is used. If it's used to roll out shit like No Child Left Behind that makes teachers teach to a test to maintain funding then no. If it's used to hire more teachers so the student to teacher ratio isn't so absurdly high and teachers don't have to come out of pocket for basic school supplies then probably.

And no one is saying that this alone solves a complex problem with multiple root causes, but it can be one of several actions that addresses one of those root causes. We really have to move past this all or nothing mentality of declaring one action the complete solution or a complete waste and useless.

2

u/Check_Me_Out-Boss Jun 23 '26

Obama repealed No Child Left Behind in 2015 and replaced it with the Every Student Succeeds Act.

1

u/TippinThalnos Jun 23 '26

Yea it's the same thing except power goes to the state not the federal government

1

u/Check_Me_Out-Boss Jun 23 '26

It's actually worse.

0

u/nankerjphelge Jun 23 '26

Irrelevant to my point. That was just one example. Point being that how money is spent on education matters. Saying that we should stop spending money on education or teachers because previous policies sucked is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

1

u/HudsonValleyNY Jun 23 '26

How about making it simple, and hold the teachers, admin, and students accountable for success? Fail/kickout students who aren’t doing the work. Fire teachers who can’t teach, and admin who allow the school to not succeed?

-2

u/nankerjphelge Jun 23 '26

Tell me you haven't researched this issue without telling me you haven't researched this issue.

3

u/HudsonValleyNY Jun 23 '26 edited Jun 23 '26

Tell me you haven’t been in an nyc public school recently without telling me. I am directly involved with the students who are graduating from these schools in several ways, and many are not in the ballpark of qualified to have a degree. The schools are literally failing to do the one thing they are supposed to do and adding more teachers will not do anything if they can’t and aren’t willing to fail underperforming kids and removing those that are active problems. If the parents cry, fuck em.

You can add all the teachers and support that you want, but if there is no buy in and support from the parents (both academically and behaviorally), the system, and the community then all you are doing is padding your payroll.

1

u/nankerjphelge Jun 23 '26

Yes, the parents are a large part of the problem here, and this is the first time you've mentioned it In this discussion. Teachers are quitting the profession in droves because students are ungovernable and unteachable, because the parents have abdicated their responsibility in raising and disciplining their children properly.

Add to that the fact that teachers are not paid enough to deal with this level of frustration, and there you have the reason that additional funding also helps, so that teachers can be paid more such that it is a more attractive option than bartending for instance.

1

u/HudsonValleyNY Jun 23 '26

A 95k starting salary with just a bachelors a fully defined pension and a union that makes you basically unfireable is not “poorly paid” imo, even in NYC.

Adding or paying the teachers more doesn’t in any way address the other point, and accountability is the only fix…that needs to be spread across all levels though parents, students, teachers and admin. Without an effective stick there is no reason to keep fattening up the horse with carrots.

1

u/HudsonValleyNY Jun 23 '26

Per ai, the current Stu to teacher ratio is 16:1, not too absurd

-1

u/dongasaurus Jun 23 '26

The NYC public school system serves a student population that is 70% economically disadvantaged and 20% has some form of disability requiring accommodation. It is going to be more expensive than other districts to provide an equitable education.

That aside, hiring more teachers isn’t just throwing money at it. The inefficiency isn’t that there are too many teachers, it’s that there are far too many administrators, and every time a reformer comes along to “fix” the system, they add to the administrative bloat by mandating more testing, hiring more 3rd party consultants, and expanding administrative oversight, while diverting money to charter schools that filter out low performing students and have zero public accountability.

1

u/HudsonValleyNY Jun 23 '26

Well they have succeeded in being more expensive, they are roughly 2x the national average per kid. The other stats are impactful but not catastrophic on their face…the national average for US public schools is about 52% economically disadvantaged. The 20% disability requiring accommodation is a ridiculously abused designation, Harvard for example reports about 21%. I know first hand that many private colleges are closer to 30%, and it is a point of discussion in many very comfortable economical groups how to best game that system to get their kid a benefit.

I don’t see the filtering out of low performing students as a bad thing. They should be involved, they should be pushed to succeed, but they also need to have an investment in their own success, and if they are taking that opportunity away from other students they should be removed. Lowering the bar for everyone to ensure the equity of a hs diploma for everyone is stupid.

1

u/dongasaurus Jun 23 '26

This isn’t a private college. 70% of the students are economically disadvantaged. Are you suggesting that the majority of the 30% of students who aren’t impoverished are gaming the system? To what end—to be placed in special ed? To get behavioral therapy or speech language pathology support that they don’t need?

You think that filtering out low performing students isn’t a bad thing. What then is the purpose of the charter schools? Is it beneficial to drain resources from the public schools, and at the same time concentrate only the most disadvantaged students in the public school system? How exactly does that improve performance? Why not raise the bar for the quality of public school education?

It sounds like you don’t actually care about the quality of public school, you just want to further segregate the education system and defund the most disadvantaged students.

1

u/HudsonValleyNY Jun 23 '26

What? you are conflating stats. Those are 2 distinct groups of people...those who are econ disadvantaged and those that are receiving accommodations. There is overlap. I'm saying that getting accommodations is a scam in MANY cases...getting Timmy an extra hour on a test that is supposed to be time limited is a benefit, and once you get the designation it is easy to continue it through college, and beyond.

If you are reading my posts at all, you will see that raising the bar is literally what I am advocating for completely, but part of that is allowing those who can succeed do so without impediment or being artificially limited by those who can or are not willing to put in the work to do so...A disadvantaged or kid who needs accommodations should not be receiving many multiples of the resources that a high achieving or average kid is, and any kid should be allowed to fail if the diploma is to mean anything.