Senate Bill: Atlasian Education Modernization Act (Rejected)

[DemPGH]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

/quote]

Sponsor: Senator Scott

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Scott start talking here. If I start first, no one will be alive wants I finish.

[Napoleon]

Okay, I have some amendments to propose but I only find it fair to let the sponsor speak first, so go ahead Senator!

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

As I've said in numerous other speeches regarding this bill, Atlasia's education system is in need of drastic reform.  I think the reasons why we need reform are self-evident, and they are listed in the second section of this bill.  While I know there are areas of this bill that some would like to change, my only request is that any amendments relate to the original goals of this bill, which is improving the quality of all schools and helping the regional governments craft education policies that work best for them, as has been done in the Northeast and, most recently, the IDS.

[Napoleon]

Amendment to replace section five:

SECTION 5. TEACHERS

1.   All teachers will be allowed to submit additional age-appropriate textbooks relevant to their respective curriculums.

2.   Regions applying for benefits must specify the minimum education level expected of their teachers.

2a.  Existing teachers whose level of education is below the region's requirement may retain their jobs, but will be required to attend a nightly college until the standard is met.  Tuition will be covered exclusively by the region.

3.  There shall be no specific curriculum assigned to any teacher from the Federal government but general curriculum guidelines shall remain intact.

4.   All school principals will be required to, assess their teachers for competence and expertise in their field of study and send their reports to their respective regions.  The appropriate regulatory department will be authorized to set its own guidelines on how each individual teacher will be paid and terminate the jobs of those deemed incompetent.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Unfriendly unless the amendment is modified to guarantee the right of teachers to unionize.

[Napoleon]

Unfriendly unless the amendment is modified to guarantee the right of teachers to unionize.

The constitution already does that so what's the point

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Unfriendly unless the amendment is modified to guarantee the right of teachers to unionize.

The constitution already does that so what's the point

Where does it say that?  I checked it and couldn't find any mention of unions.

[DemPGH]

Unfriendly unless the amendment is modified to guarantee the right of teachers to unionize.

The constitution already does that so what's the point

Where does it say that?  I checked it and couldn't find any mention of unions.

VI.11 gives indication of that:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There should be union representation of teachers during the above process, and I also support strongly urging if not requiring teachers to meet Masters level competency in their fields within a reasonable timespan.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

In that case, I will deem the amendment friendly.

[MaxQue]

I have doubts on the Constituonnality of Section 4.
And its practicalibity, too.

[TNF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Doesn't this line make this piece of legislation essentially toothless? Why shall the regions determine which policies of the legislation shall apply? If this is education reform at the federal level, should not the federal government lead and the regions follow?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Section 1 is another area that bothers me because it gives the regions a lot of leeway in implementation that may mean the policies that follow never get enacted or are enacted in a way that makes them essentially toothless. The idea of public funding for private schools as a possibility also rubs me the wrong way in that it will basically cause the degradation of our public education systems for lack of funds. Not to mention that regions deciding to fund private education would be ridiculously cost ineffective and bilk the taxpayer to pay for some fatcat education inc. ceo's salary.

If the state is going to pay for schooling, the schools should be publicly owned and administered, period. No public funds should be accorded to any private educational facility for any reason. The idea that the regions or municipalities will be able to adequately provide equal educational funding to all schools is likewise naive; the only way you're going to level the playing field for our schools is by adopting fully federal funding for education.

I move to amend this section with the following text:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[TNF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Section 5 is better, though I'd like to break it down some before offering my own amendment.

The right of teachers to organize is protected as Senator Napoleon has noted, but I think that we could use this section as an opportunity to give teachers far more opportunity to control their working environments. I'm going to propose an amendment below that will flesh that out more, but I think that we should introduce a mechanism that allows teachers to have more control over not only their classrooms but the schools themselves.

Choosing textbooks is nice, but they go out of date often and a lot of the time (at least in my experience) there are situations in which you never get new ones or you don't have enough for the children you have. I believe we should amend that section not only to provide for a textbook for every child at no cost to the student (because I remember having to pay a fee for ours), frequent and guaranteed renewal of textbooks (perhaps every four years?), and price controls on textbooks for college students. Textbooks having more teacher input in their design and a preference for the use of e-textbooks would probably be a good idea too.

Why not just bite the bullet on the next subsection and mandate federal standards for teachers? Let's require everyone who wants to be a teacher to get a BA/BS and a master's degree within five years of getting a job. But let's also take it one step further and make it free for anyone who wants to go to college to be a teacher. Those who want to dedicate themselves to public service shouldn't pay a dime for their education.

I don't like this no specific curriculum bit either. I'll go into more detail in my amendment, but I think that we need at the very least a national outline of a curriculum designed by teachers themselves, with input from parents, students, and educational experts.

I cannot express my opposition to Subsection 5 of Section 5 enough. The idea that a principal would be given all that power to review the status of teachers and that the regulatory departments would have the final say on hiring, firing, and pay is egregiously wrong and unfair to the skilled professionals that teachers are. Teacher pay should be higher than it is now, for sure, (AFAIK a starting salary around these parts is ~$35,000/year) but allowing a regulatory agency to set that salary, without any input from teachers themselves, is ludicrous. I am all for setting a floor, but I am opposed to setting a ceiling on teacher pay to be determined by some bean counter in one of the regional capitals. I will outline an alternative in my amendment.

I move to amend Section 5 with the following text:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[TNF]

Whew. On to the next section.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think this section needs to be clarified a bit. When we reduced the workweek to 32 hours, did we also reduce the number of days students spent in school per week? Not doing so in tandem seems a bit assbackward, but I want to offer an amendment doing just that while readjusting the days required in school to reflect that. I think that a prohibition on schools opening before a certain time would likewise be helpful in that it would minimize some of the problems that come with working parents trying to get their kids to school. And no less than eleven years? Surely we can make than thirteen, which would include kindergarten through 12th.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that we should abolish all fees associated with school lunches. This would make for a great bit of economic stimulus and surely the Republic of Atlasia can afford to pay for the feeding of it's children.

I move to amend this section with the following text:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And for the final section (so far)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I move to amend this section with the following text:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I am considering withdrawing this bill and starting from scratch.

[Napoleon]

If the sponsor wishes to withdraw,  I would like to sponsor.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

If the sponsor wishes to withdraw,  I would like to sponsor.

I am considering withdrawing this bill and starting from scratch.

[MaxQue]

TNF: Banning tuition fees AND public funding for private school is not possible. They will go bankrupt very quickly in that case.

I oppose the moratorium on standardized testing. It's needed to allow a comparison to allow universities to pick the best candidates. I'll not accept leveling down our system.

[TNF]

TNF: Banning tuition fees AND public funding for private school is not possible. They will go bankrupt very quickly in that case.

I oppose the moratorium on standardized testing. It's needed to allow a comparison to allow universities to pick the best candidates. I'll not accept leveling down our system.

I would be completely fine with that.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

For cost reasons, I'm going to have to deem all of TNF's amendments unfriendly except for the one addressing section five.

I agree with MaxQue that standardized testing is necessary, but such tests must be as limited as possible (as they are in the Northeast).  I think the bill's current policy on testing is the better one.

[Napoleon]

I will go ahead and object to TNF's amendment to Section 5 then.

If the sponsor wishes to withdraw,  I would like to sponsor.

I am considering withdrawing this bill and starting from scratch.

You don't hold a monopoly on education reform. If you don't want to push this bill, I do. But I think you do, so its moot.

[Gass3268]

TNF: Banning tuition fees AND public funding for private school is not possible. They will go bankrupt very quickly in that case.

I oppose the moratorium on standardized testing. It's needed to allow a comparison to allow universities to pick the best candidates. I'll not accept leveling down our system.

I would be completely fine with that.

Same with me, private schools shouldn't get a dime of public money. I also agree with every point made by Senator TNF in terms of his changes to the bill.

[MaxQue]

TNF: Banning tuition fees AND public funding for private school is not possible. They will go bankrupt very quickly in that case.

I oppose the moratorium on standardized testing. It's needed to allow a comparison to allow universities to pick the best candidates. I'll not accept leveling down our system.

I would be completely fine with that.

Same with me, private schools shouldn't get a dime of public money. I also agree with every point made by Senator TNF in terms of his changes to the bill.

Oh, I agree with them getting no public money. I disagree with banning tuition.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Keep in mind that in Finland, the use of tuition fees is strictly prohibited and all schools are well-funded.  The prohibition of tuition fees hasn't stopped schools in Finland from ranking highest in the world, let alone existing.

[TNF]

Keep in mind that in Finland, the use of tuition fees is strictly prohibited and all schools are well-funded.  The prohibition of tuition fees hasn't stopped schools in Finland from ranking highest in the world, let alone existing.

I don't understand why we should subsidize private schools to make up for banning tuition, though. Why subsidize the private education sector when we could simply just pump more money into the public sector and drive the perceived need for private schooling out altogether? I'm all for banning tuition fees and private schools, but I don't want the state to make up the difference. We shouldn't pay a dime for people to educate their children outside of the regular public school system.