Slashdot Mirror


Zuckerberg's $100 Million Education Gift Solved Little

An anonymous reader writes "In 2010 the state of public education in Newark, New Jersey was dire. The city's school system was a disaster, replete with violence, run-down buildings, and a high-school graduation rate of only 54%. Newark's mayor at the time, Cory Booker, teamed up with governor Chris Christie to turn the schools around. At the same time, Mark Zuckerberg was looking to get his feet wet in big-time philanthropy. The three hatched a plan, and Zuckerberg committed $100 million to reforming the schools. Four years later, most of the money is gone, and Newark's children are still struggling. Tens of millions were spent on consulting groups, and yet more went to union negotiations. Plans to change how teacher seniority affected staffing decisions — in order to reward results rather than persistence — were dashed by political maneuvering. The New Yorker provides a detailed account in a lengthy piece of investigative journalism, and MSN provides a summary."

28 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. Breaking news by nimbius · · Score: 4, Funny

    Rich man donating large sums of cash to education system shocked to find systems flaws are of great complexity and cannot be solved by simply shitting large sums of money into education. When reached for comment, Rich man was found paralyzed by indecisiveness during elusive hunt for tasty caviar on weekend aboard mega yacht.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:Breaking news by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Interesting
      If you think taxpayer-funded governmental programs are rife with waste and inefficiency, you're probably correct.

      Imagine that! Giving the same folks more money above and beyond taxes didn't improve things even marginally.

      Not to take anything away from what I believe is a magnanimous gesture by Zuck, but perhaps a college scholarship program would better serve the needs of inner city youths.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    2. Re:Breaking news by sphealey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      - - - - - If you think taxpayer-funded governmental programs are rife with waste and inefficiency, you're probably correct. - - - - -

      I don't, no. Compared to other large-scale human endeavors decently funded universal public school districts receiving strong societal support are among the most efficient institutions known to man.

      But compared to for-profit charter "schools"? Public schools - even the really bad ones - are havens of efficiency and good results.

      sPh

    3. Re:Breaking news by sphealey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      - - - - - but they are definitely not private schools.- - - - -

      Technically, some states do give charter funds directly to what were historically considered private schools. Although see Louisiana for why the charter crowd turned out not to be so happy with the consequences of that one.

      But that's not my point. I didn't say that "charter schools" were private. Some are, most aren't. But "charter schools" are not part of a universal free (and equal) public school system, and are in fact specifically designed to destroy free universal equal schooling. So charters are in no way shape or form public schools. You might want to check back with your private school logic teacher for a bit of a tune up.

      sPh

      This can be confirmed by what happens when charter schools fail: their students are sent back to "the public schools" - namely the local universal public school district.

    4. Re:Breaking news by FuzzNugget · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not that it's surprising. It's about the most American concept in existence: ignore a problem chronically until ignoring it further would cause chaos... then smother it with money and hope it goes away.

      The education system
      The financial crisis
      The war on drugs
      The war on terrorism
      (goddamn, America loves its wars)

      No real plan, no forethought, just vulturous agencies and contractors circling the poor starving bastard, waiting to feast on that juicy pile of cash that they know will come soon enough.

      Show me a national problem where this response isn't the default.

    5. Re:Breaking news by sphealey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      - - - - - I may be naive, but can't students from failed charter schools attend another charter school as well as the conventional public school? - - - - -

      I'd suggest reading the series in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch about the model charter school program in that city. Two sets of articles: the first hopeful and complementary, describing how powerful institutions in the region (universities, medical centers, etc) were going to sponsor each of the five "super charters", full backing of the political class, will fix all the problems and can't fail, etc... Then the second set of articles four years later when the for-profit operator pulled out (no profits), the big sponsors disappeared, and the children were told in June they were going back to their home public school districts (which were in even worse shape after losing four years of funding).

      Sure, parents can find different charters. Of course that's a large investment of time, effort, and money for a family which might not have much of any of those to spare. But it is important to keep in mind the effect on the children: pulled away from their friends, their teachers, their familiar building and routine. A school and a teacher can be very large things in the life of a 2nd grader (esp one from a neighborhood where the school might be the only safe place he can go); pulling them here and there by what seems to them a whim is not a good thing. To me anyway.

      I would suggest that, but unfortunately last time I checked the STLPD had put up a paywall so those articles may no longer be available. Try google and see if you can get to them though. Here's one link

      http://www.stltoday.com/news/l...
      sPh

    6. Re:Breaking news by hsthompson69 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that even *decadently* funded universal government schools that don't have the ability to discipline or expel problem behavior students suffer from the tragedy of the commons in the worst way - a small set of bad apples ruins the whole damn bunch.

      When children succeed in schools, it has much less to do with the school than with the child's family and it's attitude towards education. Asserting that success stories are due to money, and failures are due to the lack of money, is to ignore the first order terms in the equation.

    7. Re:Breaking news by mrvan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Just for another perspective: In the Netherlands, a constitutional deadlock between religious and liberal parties in the early 1900s resulted in a compromise with financing of religious schools and universal suffrage both constitutionally enshrined in 1917/1918.

      The result is that anyone can start a school, and if it matches minimum quality requirements it has to be funded on the same (relatively generous) level as public schools. This lead to a lot of catholic and orthodox protestant schools being established, but also to Montessori, Jena and similar alternative schooling methods. The schools are under scrutiny of the government and they do need to teach a basic curriculum, but are free in teaching religion, values etc. and also in approaching the teaching the way they want it. Most bigger villages have a public primary school as well as one or more religious schools, and the religious ones are usually not very fundamentalist, many atheists have no problem sending their kid to a religious school if it is better or more convenient.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

      Of course, this system has some serious problems as well. People are now choosing religious schools sometimes mainly because they are more "white", there are clashes with e.g. christian schools trying to block gay or non-christian teachers, and there were some issues of low quality teaching on Islamic schools.

      See e.g. http://vorige.nrc.nl/internati...

    8. Re:Breaking news by michelcolman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How on earth do you spend tens of millions on consulting groups? Let's say its 20 million, in 4 years, that's 5 million per year or 416 thousand per month. You can pay a hundred people 4000 dollars a month to work full time (!) for 4 years and still have money left over. It boggles the mind...

      And union negotiations? How much money does it cost to have a meeting with the unions? Do the unions actually charge money for this?

      Unbelievable.

      How about just talking to the school directors, asking them what they need most, and then giving it to them? You could repair a lot of run down buildings with 100 million.

      Consulting groups are for governments looking for ways to waste money. If you're doing philantropy, it's your own money so you just go out there and decide "this is what I'm going to do with MY money to help these people". Screw the consulting groups.

    9. Re:Breaking news by TheP4st · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How on earth do you spend tens of millions on consulting groups?

      Not that hard when as the MSN article states "Many of the consultants were being paid upwards of $1,000 a day.", nothing is being said about what the average consultant fee were but for the sake of argument let's say it is $500 that amount to just 4000 days of paid consultants with an average of 250 working days per year that comes down to 3.2 full time consultants per year that evidently have been grossly overpaid.
      Very few careers beyond politics reward ability to talk and write BS combined with failure and/or incompetence to such an extent as that of consultancy.

      --
      "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
    10. Re:Breaking news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      not to mention, charters have a NUMBER 'unfair' advantages that public schools don't:
      1. by hook and by crook, they reject low-performers... (guess where they end up ?)
      2. (in florida) their teachers DO NOT have to be certified...
      3. they are NOT having to comport to an INSANE testing regimen which FORESTALLS actual teaching...
      4. they do NOT have to accommodate 'special needs' children... (guess where they end up ?)
      5. the kicker: virtually ALL articles/studies on the subject find that -in general- with ALL THEIR HUGE ADVANTAGES, they STILL do not perform significantly better than public schools on the all-fucking-mighty tests... (oh, and they CHEAT on the tests, too...)

      note, NOT that there are NOT good charter schools with good practices which make for a better learning environment; but MOSTLY it is a SCAM: rich pukes are 'investing' in these because they get all kinds of tax breaks to fund NEW SCHOOLS, but not a fucking penny to upgrade existing ones... it is a money-making proposition, has NOTHING to do with actually educating the rugrats...

      'the problem' with public education, is NOT public education (or unionized teachers, you fucking conservatard dingleberries), it is the socio-economic disparity: education/learning tracks EXACTLY with socio-economic status: you come from a middle-class or above family that has books and some discretionary income to go to museums, etc; you do okay in school... you come from a poor family that doesn't have one book in the house, you generally don't do well in school.. gosh, who would have thought that ? well, EVERYONE *EXCEPT* the education scammers who are making money from bad-mouthing public education...

  2. Imagine that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Throwing money at every problem doesn't make it go away. Who woulda thunk it?
     
    While I appreciate the research potential of this experiment I just don't think people are looking at the human element when it comes to social problems like education and welfare. Our politicians don't seek a better answer because they don't care that people are wasting their lives on reality TV and booze as long as they get their pockets lined from it.

  3. rich people go back to paying taxes? by k6mfw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    there was a time when they paid more taxes, and they were still rich (and also employed many others in this same country).

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
    1. Re:rich people go back to paying taxes? by geekoid · · Score: 4, Informative

      So you just repeat what the media tells you? well done.

      in 1969, the average spending was $4,221 per student, per year.
      the $27,176.91 in today's dollars. We spend about 40% of that.

      Spending on kids has gone down.

      Why? becasue the tax decrease since then. Look at all the data, the only reason not to go back to 1968 tax rates(adj. for inflation) is pure and simple greed for the top 1%.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  4. well its obvious... by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 5, Funny

    a multi-billionaire like Zuckerberg just didn't give enough.

    a measly $100mil?? it should of course had been $500mil

    THEN...the problems could really be solved!

    --
    never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
  5. Proverb by McGruber · · Score: 4, Funny

    "A fool and his money are soon parted."

    (Zuck should have Googled it).

  6. just pay the kids already. by oneiros27 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Personally, I'm of the opinion that the Department of Education should do studies on how to teach kids & how to motivate them to do better ... how public vs. private vs. charter schools affect them, etc.

    And study what the long-term effects are of just paying the kids when they get good grades:

    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...

    Because the short term seems to be that they do better ... and it's a hell of a lot cheaper than most other things that people come up with. (but then again, the money doesn't go to some corportation with a great 'solution' to the problem)

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  7. Unions and comitties by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem with the education system in this country are pretty strait forward. They stem directly from the completely inflexible teachers union (who should be ashamed of themselves) and management that does nothing more than attend endless meetings over and over that churn out bullet point after bullet point. My kids school actually has some pretty good teachers by some miracle, but the management issue is ridiculous. I try to be an involved parent but all the events they have are so ridiculous it borders on insanity. They always serve Pizza Pit, the champaign of pizza. Follow that up with great games or skits to entertain the crowd... then the principle gives a 30 to 45min speech about all the great plans she has (but will never implement) then they let the parents talk for about 10min and avoid answering all our questions like "When will you fill in the 6 foot sink hole in the middle of the playground?" and no, I'm not kidding, there really is a 6' sinkhole.

    The last one I went to they sent out a questionnaire that asked:
    What is most important to you in the education of your child?
    a. Hands on learning
    b. A diverse and equitable learning environment
    c. An involved teaching staff

    What the hell does that mean? I just circled them all and wrote "YES" underneath. And these people have 4 to 8 year degrees.

    1. Re:Unions and comitties by sphealey · · Score: 5, Funny

      Although I'm generally a strong supporter of public schools and public school teachers, I will concede that your spelling teacher needs a bit of remedial classwork himself.

      sPh

  8. This shows the real problem by Vermonter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the money was wasted by upper management, then that should be a big red flag that the problem is most likely with upper management.

  9. Re:Technically by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone who is a parent with a kid in public education can see that there are flaws. The whole system is setup to reward CYA behavior. Don't get me wrong, the vast majority of educators are well meaning and pretty hard-working. But the system itself thwarts them. There is no reward for going above and beyond. There is no reward for reaching out to parents - quite the opposite, since this will make more work for you and increase your risks with absolutely no benefit to your own situation. Problem kids are kept in the system. The system is set up to assume that budgets will always increase - even a mild decrease results in mass hysteria. Construction is shoddy government lowest bidder crap, and maintenance is nonexistent.

    I have my kids in public school to expose them to a diversity of classes and cultures... I feel that being able to relate to people not entirely like oneself is an important life skill. But there is definitely an allure to private schools, where the vast majority of the students are there to learn, most of the parents care enough to spend inordinate amounts of money on education, and the entire system is geared towards keeping your business and keeping those Ivy League acceptance rates up instead of ass-covering.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  10. Re:Technically by plopez · · Score: 5, Informative

    When I went to school we had shop as well as math, art as well as science, and PE as well as literature. Boondoggles such as "No Child Left Behind" changed that.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  11. Re:The dollar isn't worth as much as it used to be by russotto · · Score: 5, Informative

    Which if any of the graphs on that ed.gov page are adjusted for inflation?

    The ones which say "Constant Dollars".

    The Newark School District gets more money per pupil than the suburban school districts surrounding it. And its outcomes are far worse. It's not the money.

  12. Re:Dear Mark by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 4, Informative

    Dear Geekoid, Do you really think Mark didn't have that sort of thing in mind? That he didn't pay the consultants to come up with such things? I'm afraid teachers are a large part of the problem. Their unions consistently thwart attempts to address teacher performance or rather the lack thereof. Do a search on the various attempts to deal with bad teachers and you will find attempts that have nearly all failed by the hands of the teacher's unions.

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  13. Re:Technically by jmv · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But there is definitely an allure to private schools, where the vast majority of the students are there to learn, most of the parents care enough to spend inordinate amounts of money on education, and the entire system is geared towards keeping your business and keeping those Ivy League acceptance rates up instead of ass-covering.

    Having been to a private school, I can tell you that most of the focus is not education, but on looking good to the parents. I don't think teachers are any better (though probably not worse), and the main reason students are better come down to pre-selection (entrance exam, no poor children). The only fundamental plus is that they're allowed to expel troublemakers.

  14. Re:Dear Mark by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, I'm not wrong. Total funding has gone up, up, up for US schools. Measure it in constant dollars, % of GDP, any way you like. Compare us to other countries, and there are perhaps two who beat us per-pupil. We spend enough money - the solution lies elsewhere.

    And while schools still are highly dependent on local funding, that too has been changing steadily to the point where it is no longer the largest source.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  15. Re:Dear Mark by sphealey · · Score: 5, Interesting

    - - - - - Vint Cerf - Vinton F'ing Cerf - was not allowed to fill in for his kids schools CS teacher for a couple of months while the teacher was unable to teach.
    The reason for this was that Vinton F'ing Cerf did not have a California teacher certification to prove he knew how to teach computer science. Clearly unqualified, after having invented the F'ing Internet. - - - - -

    There is a hell of a lot more to working as a K-12 teacher and successfully and safely managing multiple classrooms of students than just technical/domain knowledge. Try volunteering at your local middle school for a few weeks and tell me how "inventing the f'ing Internet" [not technically accurate, but we'll let that go] is of any value at all in handling a classroom full of kids who act like young adults one minute, wild toddlers the next minute, and insane hormone-crazed preteens the third. Also tell me about how "inventing the f'ing Internet" gives one an understanding of the legal requirements of being a school employee in your state and county (e.g. sexual harassment regulations and reporting requirements, counseling students who approach you to report abuse at home, the 8347 reporting requirements of NCLB, etc).

    I've known some very good college professors who fled the high school classroom in terror when invited on site to teach AP classes, and who weren't afraid to admit they couldn't do what their HS counterparts do. Yes, there is a reason for teacher certification requirements.

    sPh

  16. I would call the FBI, call fraud by cheekyboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If 100M yields no results, call the FBI.

    All those advisors and union officials need to go to jail now.

    And kids, lesson of the day, all school work was a waste of time to graduate, just become a union official or politician, no qualififications, easy money, and your above the law.

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.