Senate Bill: Atlasian Education Modernization Act (Rejected)

[Napoleon]

So is there a vote going on right now, or?

I'd say what some know as a hissy-fit is going on right now.

That's what I kind of gathered. You guys lost me like two pages ago.

I'll summarize:

I proposed an amendment, after talking it over with other Senators, to continue standardized testing for the purposes of tracking the progress of education nationwide but divorcing school funding from the whole thing.

Apparently, Scott feels that being able to compare year to year and area to area test results would destroy the purpose of his bill (which is yet to be made public) and is now threatening to vote against this bill if it passes (after a previous attempt to withdraw it as soon as someone disagreed with a part of it, similar to what happened when he proposed this in the Northeast). Scott was uninterested in debating the merits of the proposal, and more uninterested in offering any sort of alternative way to compare progress in education and instead wants to aim vague threats at Senators such as "next time, I'm going to water down your bill!!!!!" as if that was the proper way to pursue public policy.

Scott has a lot to offer the Senate, so this behavior is unfortunate and saddening. I was hoping to be able to work with him, but his all or nothing approach to legislating does make that nearly impossible. If reducing the role of standardized tests is so bad that he would prefer the status quo, it's unlikely he really cares about improving the education system and is more concerned with passing "his bill" as "his accomplishment". The other 9 8 of us are here for the sole purpose of going along with it.

[MaxQue]

Sadly, Yankee, we'll need a new sponsor.

[Napoleon]

I would be happy to sponsor.

[Sec. of State Superique]

Sadly, Yankee, we'll need a new sponsor.

That is really sad indeed. No more Scott =(

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Sadly, Yankee, we'll need a new sponsor.

Ever seen WTF spelled out and written in 49 pt red font?

Ask Marokai, that is the response he got when he informed me about Scott.

Really people these unwanted Four AM surprises are getting a bit much to handle.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 56:06 by TNF:

Aye (2): Gass3268 and TNF
Nay (6): HagridoftheDeep, MaxQue, NC Yankee, sbane, Scott and TJ in Cleve
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (2): Kalwejt and Napoleon

The amendment has not been adopted.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators have 48 hours to object to Napoleon's assumption of sponsorship.

56:04 and 56:06 by TNF - rejected

56:05 an 56:07 by TNF and 56:08 by Scott withdrawn

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Unknown
Status: Objection file by Senator Napoleon, a vote is now open on the above amendment, please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile until Nappy is confirmed.
Status: Normally I would go ahead, but I have concerns Nappy might get an objection to being sponsor.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly/Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object to the passage of the above amendment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination/Friendly
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object to the adoption of the amendment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Pending adoption of 56:12

I just noticed a key problem, the number of day 190 versus 180. I was basing this of TNF's amendment that had 180 in it, without checking the original text. One more reason why I am holding it for now.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Nay

I do not want to entrench wage increases in a piece of legislation. Those should be properly negotiated through collective bargaining between the employers and the teachers.

Also, some of these evaluation processes just seem a little questionable to me. Our bases are covered with the AIT and NTLEs when it comes to teacher evaluation. I don't want to confuse it further. Sorry, TNF.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I agree with Hagrid, I would prefer to improveo n what we did with those previous acts then replace it with another system, so soon afterwards.


NAY

[TJ in Oregon]

Nay

[TJ in Oregon]

I object to 56:12 because I don't think study hall should be required and recess required for upper-level grades.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

That language is already in the current text. 56:12 is I think only focused on the school lunch issue.


This is why sometimes with Amendments, the lest text you incorporate, the better.

[TJ in Oregon]

That language is already in the current text. 56:12 is I think only focused on the school lunch issue.


This is why sometimes with Amendments, the lest text you incorporate, the better.

Objection withdrawn then.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You could object pending clarification from the amendment sponsor, just to be safe. There is a lot that has been posted in this thread and I could easily be wrong.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I did miss your vote on the previous amendment in my preliminary count, afterall.

[TNF]

Aye.

The wage increase is to act as a floor, not a be all end all. I think that ideally we should have teachers making as much as doctors and lawyers.

[Napoleon]

Nay

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Aye.

The wage increase is to act as a floor, not a be all end all. I think that ideally we should have teachers making as much as doctors and lawyers.

Then let's find a way to pay doctors and lawyers less.

[MaxQue]

Nay

I have issues with 2a, 4 (such details should be dealt by collective bargaining) and the "replace at every 4 years" part of clause 2.

[Ban my account ffs!]

This bill says nothing of implementing new technologies to make bigger educational opportunities to rural school districts, doesn't address replacing textbooks with e-textbooks or any technology acquirement for school districts.

Everybody is more worried about making sure unions have power and stupid time requirements for school.  You don't have to have school 7.5 hours/day.  By that point you're burning the kids out.  Right now most kids have around 360 minutes (6 hours) of instruction time per day.  If you're worried about idle teens getting into trouble, make after school programs available that offer extracurricular activities that complement the curriculum.

Also, I see a lot of platitudes that are being pushed as the basis for this bill.  Has anybody talked to the GM?  Figured out what past initiatives may have done to improve schools beyond their IRL counterparts?

This is a game, people.  Play the game... don't just pass feel good BS so you can stroke your ideology pole.

[Napoleon]

This bill says nothing of implementing new technologies to make bigger educational opportunities to rural school districts, doesn't address replacing textbooks with e-textbooks or any technology acquirement for school districts.

Yet...I'm open to suggestions, of course.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One or two Senators might be. I'm not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep. The original attempt to ram this through was disappointing, to say the least. I imagine spending about a month or so before we get a finished product that's worth passing. This will be one of those productive, inclusive debates that we haven't had since you and I were Senators!

[MaxQue]

This bill says nothing of implementing new technologies to make bigger educational opportunities to rural school districts, doesn't address replacing textbooks with e-textbooks or any technology acquirement for school districts.

I have doubts than those technologies are really useful. Here, all classes must buy interactive boards. The boss of the company selling them is a bog donator of the party which was then in power. I don't see why we would waste money in tools whose utility isn't proved at all.

[Ban my account ffs!]

This bill says nothing of implementing new technologies to make bigger educational opportunities to rural school districts, doesn't address replacing textbooks with e-textbooks or any technology acquirement for school districts.

I have doubts than those technologies are really useful. Here, all classes must buy interactive boards. The boss of the company selling them is a bog donator of the party which was then in power. I don't see why we would waste money in tools whose utility isn't proved at all.

I don't see where your concerns which could easily be addressed add up to full out opposition of liberalizing the source materials for teachers and children?

You don't think that textbook companies aren't connected at the hip to state governments?  And you don't think that that process is completely politicized and is damaging our schools?

The purpose of switching to an interactive e-textbook type program is that primary sources can easily be accessed and people with expertise in the various subjects can interact directly with children rather than having to go through middle-men who all have an agenda to push.

[Sbane]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Hey Snowguy, you did it again. I mean the same thing you did at the start of the GET Act. I will give you a pass since this thing is eight pages long now.

As you should know from GET Act I am partial both to technology and alternative models (I beleive I even said so in previous pages of this act).


That said I welcome the input to be sure. Sometimes, it takes a Minnesotan.


Vote on Amendment 56:10 by TNF:

Aye (1): TNF
Nay (6): HagridoftheDeep, MaxQue, Napoleon, NC Yankee, sbane and TJ in Cleve
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (1): Gass3268
Vacant Seats (2): Kalwejt and Scott

The amendment has failed.