[Mr Roboto]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

But that is what I'm saying.

One of the main solutions to Chicago's problems (high crime, poor school performance, demographic stagnation, etc) is for the gangsters to leave. The whole reason Chicago looks bad is because of this particular population of people.

They make the law-abiding, working African American population look bad (and drag them down), and that's the real, real fucking tragedy.

And THIS is exactly what your problem is, and why I think your opinion is so invalid on the subject. Its simply not realistic. All the students are not gangsters, a certain percentage are, but not all. Some have no choice being in gangs either. And to have them all leave doesn't exactly get rid of the problem, it only addresses one of the symptoms. Gangs will continue to exist if the conditions that created them exist. Work on the root causes; address why there are gangs in the first place, address why drug use is so high, address why people are struggling with poverty, etc, and address each issue with creative and maybe some innovative solutions. Or utilize existing solutions that have worked in other cities. Yes it is not easy, but this is why your simplistic take is so frustrating, especially when you represent a portion of the population that has no clue apparently.

Originally Posted by rgolch

So Mr. Roboto, I'm trying to understand. What exactly do you think is the reason many CPS schools are failing? Is it lack of funding? Disengaged teachers? Crap facilities? I mean, I get that your deeply offended by some of what TUP and LouisVanDerWright said, but they at least stated some reasons (much of which I agree with).

Im not deeply offended (calling out a dumb post makes me deeply offended?). I just think they are lazy, and their analysis is simplistic and actually rather dangerous. Displaying one side of the equation and disregarding the other is disingenuous. Some appear to think otherwise, but I thought this is an easy thing to point out.

I don't have all the answers either clearly, I just want people to understand the situation is incredibly complex. Do you think its as simple as they are making it out to be? I agree buildings themselves are not the cause of poor students performance, who would say that they are, but I could at least make the point in a better and less inflammatory manner. If what you think he said is cool and actually adds to the discussion, then alright for you too.

As far as solutions, actually LVW said something I agree with, mixing the socioeconomic groups, most likely by inclusionary zoning and other types of affordable housing requirements for larger developments, incentives for businesses, providing more after school programs for students to improve productivity. programs like upward bound and project bootstrap could have used more funding. Ceasefire seemed to be rather effective and at least provided people n the communities with employment. Obviously job training, educational opportunities maybe in tech trades etc could be made more accessible and available. Maybe there are solutions no one has thought of, as it will take thinking outside the box, and being NOT lazy.

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Comparisons? It's almost as if you've never heard someone use a hypothetical before. This is not about comparing those schools, but rather illustrating that the school itself (i.e. building, teachers, administration, etc) has very little to do with the success of the students and that almost all of it has to do with the parents.

Sure basic hypothetical situations work so amazingly great when you are trying to illustrate a point while discussing a complex and varied topic. Like heres mine: we have a problem with the pension reform. I bet if we replaced all our workers with people from the south, who don't care about them damn unions, we could eliminate this problem. Oh, not so illustrative huh. You see, some of us prefer actual data based on actual student performances, and their actual situations . But why use those when you can just come up with some random off the wall scenario that has little to do with what is actually happening.

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Your anecdotal position does not further your argument.

Yes, it actually does. See below.

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Also, no your expectations have nothing to do with it, the amount of time and attention your devote to your children does. Maybe you will commit more time to your children if you have high expectations, but the expectations are not why your kids are excelling, the time you are committing is.

Chicken or the egg. Why do you even put in the time to help a child study? Why do you care? Oh that's because you have expectations, you have hopes, dreams maybe? Your nitpicky arguing over semantics is rather silly, actually makes me just think you are arguing for arguments sake or something.

And yes, my anecdotal position shows that I actually may be more knowledgeable about what it means to have expectations over your child than a nonparent, who would not actually have the experience of working with their child after school and teaching them subjects outside of school activities. My perspective is more defined and actually supported by real life experience. And what, pray tell, is your experience? Are you a teacher, do you work with students? All of those are highly relevant as well. But I suppose you enjoy the hypotheticals so much maybe reality is a little difficult for you to swallow.

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Kids don't do do well because your expect them to, they do well because you help them do well. There are plenty of parents who do a lot of "expecting" and very little helping and the end result is almost invariably under performance among their children regardless of economic class.

Obviously they go together. Again, you put the time in helping them expecting to see results. Ok, if not, maybe you have no idea and are completely clueless, have no idea what they are doing what they are learning and just go about it day to day with no context for their educational experience. Sounds very effective.

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Again, no one is proposing we actually do that, it's a hypothetical. An "if you were to do this" not a "let's do this!"

See his answer above. And thanks for stating what hypothetical is. I had no idea what that meant. In other words, no shit its hypothetical. So is saying, lets take out every gangster in Chicago and we'd all be safe. Oh really? how is that helping and how is that actually opening anyone's perspective on crime in Chicago become clearer. Or how about this, lets magically make all drugs disappear.

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Uhh yes they have the same parents, live in the same place, etc, they just now take a bus to Englewood every day. That's exactly the point. Hell, let's say you moved the school and not the kids. Let's say you got a huge helicopter and flew Deerfield High, teachers and all, to Englewood and vice versa. The test scores and graduation rates at Deerfield High would plummet and Harper would be fantastic because the school has almost nothing to do with the education the children are receiving. The same would hold true if you did this for years and years.

Oh, so bus them to Englewood. Magically replace all of them. Wow, what incredible insight this provides. You mean the actual building itself wasn't holding them back? You mean the rampant crime, low parent expectations, low involvement, drugs, police treatment of young men especially, and all the other negative impacts on them might actually be a major cause of poor performance? I thought it was because the walls in the building told them to stop studying!

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

And if you look at the average cost per student of CPS versus the suburbs it becomes quite clear that they are spending about the same per student and getting radically different results. The fact is CPS does not have a lack of resources, bad teachers, bad administrators, or any other problem along those lines. CPS has a parent problem.

No. Shit. But you need to keep in mind this funding situation has certainly not always been the case. And resources do have some impact. For example, class size has a pretty strong relationship with student performance. Been researched and documented. Arts programs, and others extra activities has some impact. Been documented as well. Tutoring clearly does. Besides, kids in Englewood probably need MORE resources than Deerfield, because they are more adversely impacted by negative outside forces in their day to day lives.

So anyway, I already agreed that school resources alone are not the key, and that parenting is clearly more important. But continue to ignore everything else I write, and continue to say the same thing over and over instead of addressing that I already said the exact same thing you did - but with caveats that you ignore. The caveats are there because, um, well, the situation is COMPLEX. My only point is that you and TUP need to stop being lazy on the topic, get a little less hypothetical, and get back into reality maybe.


btw, sorry to derail the topic on Chicago's entertainment, arts etc, but I actually think this is a relevant topic since its on that show.