9 Comments - Quinn T. Sential - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 11:45 am: The $90 million Pension Surprise is a fascinating read, and I am surprised to some degree by some aspects of the case because Judge Arnold is one smart cookie. She is usually quick to distill a complex issue into easily digested bite size pieces. I think the Schoool Board is now looking at prospective litigation from retirees whose pension formula was changed based on pending litigation without a ruling; and therefore no legal basis to do so. Applying the forumula differently to two sets of similarly situated retirees, and either over paying one group, or under paying the other without a legal basis to do so is ripe for a class action suit. In which case of course the old adage previals “the lawyers are the only one’s that win” - Left Out - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 11:50 am: No Child Left Behind was passed in 2001 - ten years ago. Congress increased federal funding of education, which flowed to the states, from $42.2 billion in 2001 to $54.4 billion in 2007. Funding specificly tied to NCLB increased from $17.4 billion in 2001 to $24.4 billion in 2007. The federal funding for reading quadrupled from $286 million in 2001 to $1.2 billion. Now we find that that less than half the students in Illinois meet standards. We also find that only half of high schoolers read at grade level. The question that needs to be asked is: after ten years of ‘reform’ and billions of tax dollars what did we get for our money? Is the answer “nothing”? - just sayin' - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 11:53 am: I predict when Quinn’s version of the gaming bill hits the board in the Senate this week there are a whopping 15 yes votes……….. - Pot calling kettle - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 12:36 pm: NCLB was written in such a way that by 2014 ALL school districts will fail. The way the law was structured, the target % of students moves up each year until 2014, when all students will need to meet Annual Yearly Progress as measured by an exam that is given in March. More schools will failure each year until, in 2014, they will all fail. I cannot imagine how anyone would expect 100% of the students to meet such a benchmark. Unfortunately, this is typically viewed as the schools failing rather than as the law failing. We do need to fix the schools, but setting the bar too high and then punishing schools for not achieving the impossible will not result in better education for our children. - Das Man - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 12:57 pm: The Tribune “Clout Street” article twice referenced also notes that Cullerton would advance a bill “…(that) will result in them (the CME) paying less and the state and local governments getting less” I wonder how much would be given away compared to how much would be gained by gaming expansion at the tracks? The Tribunes “Business” article also referenced notes “…his company paid $150 million to Illinois last year, which represented 6 percent of all corporate taxes collected by the state” A NYT article http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/26/us/26cncgambling.html From August 26th remarks that “Illinois casinos earned $1.4 billion in adjusted gross receipts in 2010, sending $384 million to the state treasury. An additional $83 million went to host towns.” and “A longtime gambling researcher, John Kindt, professor of business and legal policy at the University of Illinois, met with Mr. Quinn last week along with other gambling opponents to urge him to veto the bill. Gambling, Mr. Kindt said, is not the pot of gold supporters often suggest it is. For example, he said, money pumped into slot machines and other forms of gambling is lost to the overall economy. “There are thousands of pages of research showing market saturation and how the gambling economy is cannibalizing the consumer economy,” he said. “As Governor Quinn has said himself, you can’t gamble your way to prosperity.” - Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 1:07 pm: Why are you comparing CME to the gaming bill? Not sure I get your drift. And as far as gaming goes, Kindt is right to a point. But snatching our dollars back from Indiana is also important. They’re already being wasted on gaming, just not here. Same goes for Wisconsin. - Left Out - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 1:34 pm: I fully agree with the comment that the goals of the No Child Left Behind Act cannot be reached and never could be. I also agree that the goals in the origional bill are in need of change. The problem in Illinois, and many other states, is not reaching the unrealisticly higher and higher goals each year. The problem is the inability of the educational system to show improvement of any degree. In 2002 56% of Illinois 11th grade students were able to meet state standards. In 2010, the last year for which the ISBE web site has data, the number had decreased to 53%. During the nine years the number of Illinois students meeting standards never went above 56% (never an increase from the base year). The number meeting standards has been 53% for the last four years (2007 to 2010) as shown on the ISBE web site. From press reports we also learn that the percentage of Illinois students meeting standards has gone down in 2011. So the question is why the decrease in student performce given the increased funding and all of the ‘reform’ over the time period in question? - Timmeh - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 2:45 pm: “So the question is why the decrease in student performance given the increased funding and all of the ‘reform’ over the time period in question?” A couple of possibilities: #1: NCLB’s standards failed to motivate schools to make programs that would raise student performance. #2: The amount of dollars per pupil may have been offset by greater costs. #3: Federal dollars may have replaced state dollars needed for rising education costs. #4: Funding alone may not increase educational value. I think that reform has been too much “top down”. Setting higher standards for teachers and administrators is the trend, but I don’t think that these higher standards have resulted in new ideas about how to educate children. I don’t think that these standards look at the people who do meet and exceed state expectations: Are they truly successes of the educational system or are they intelligent pupils who are able to get through the system with ease? There are a few main difficulties that public education has right now that I don’t feel are being addressed. #1: Students vary highly in intelligence. My final math class in high school was Calculus. The final math class needed to graduate was Geometry (which was 3 classes behind Calculus, or 3 years worth of material at the rate that it was taught). Furthermore, I felt there was a “lull” between High School; where I wouldn’t learn anything new or not learn new things on a day to day or even a week to week basis in a subject. On the other hand, there were definitely students who were falling behind when given the same material. Schools have failed to address these differences enough: We risk letting creative and intelligent students going through school without being challenged and developing a proper work ethic. #2: Students who should not pass a grade are passed anyway or are stigmatized. They fall behind quickly and end up in a hole that they don’t have the ability to climb out of. They lose confidence in education and may stop working. #3: Teachers don’t have clear or reasonable expectations. How many hours outside of class should students have to work outside of school? For some classes, that number may be less than an hour a week. For other classes, that may be an hour a day. What is reasonable? #4: There is no set time for teachers and students to meet one on one, without other students around. College professors have office hours (and at state universities, they actually show up). High School students don’t have the same ability. - Das Man - Friday, Oct 21, 11 @ 2:53 pm: The “Clout Street” article on gaming expansion included the discussion of Cullerton’s proposal for the benefit of the CME. This got me thinking about how much revenue might come to the state from a gaming expansion bill, versus how much might be lost to a bill that benefits the CME. Perhaps it is apples and oranges, but the Tribune article prompted the drift. It seems to me that either will benefit one special interest or another, and I am unclear as to what the dollars gained or lost to the state would be. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.