Jackson Jambalaya

I couldn't open the chart but I'm curious. You don't list Madison's public schools or Ridgeland's.

White flight out of the public schools in MS didn't work out so well, did it? Pretty much left the poor folk in the public school systems. And now, most all the private schools have the children of black professional as well.

And, we can ignore the mountains of research on the effects of poverty on a child's development from womb to adulthood.

And, we can ignore teen pregnancy rates in MS. Since " just say no" didn't work, maybe we could give the girls aspirin to hold between their knees!

I'd also love to see stats on how many kids in these public schools test higher than 80 on an IQ test.

Are we going to end up paying for these percentages to go to a " charter" school?

Perhaps, we should look at education models in successful countries, some of which are doing what we USE to do when our educational system was the envy of the world.

If you're going to put a word in ALL CAPS to make your point, make sure you spell it correctly...especially when trying to sell me on the excellent public school system we USED to have.

12:59:

Are you seriously contending that poor and black = dumb?

And as always, blame it on the white folks.

Look, the JFP has to troll somewhere, they are doing it over on the CL, they are bound to do it here.

12:59PM has progressive angst and should seek professional help.

Overkill of late on the subject of Charter. Three threads or four?

8:16 am I am saying a lack good nutrition and good health care adversely affects a child's development and thus that child's ability to learn. I took for granted that there are poor whites in the public school system as well.

Some poor parents overcome great obstacles and make great sacrifices on behalf of their children. Those parents may well be represented in the percentage that is graduating.

5:58 am Mississippi's public schools may not have ever been excellent. I don't know for certain. I wasn't educated here. I'm relying on the reports and impressions of friends who were. But our nation was once envied for the success of our educational system.

I'm so sorry my spelling error offended you. But, since I have arthritis and macular degenteration, I'm rather pleased to have omitted only one letter .
And, I'm thrilled it posted since the latest means of proving I'm not a robot is a huge challenge.

By the way, I used the caps to emphasize a fact rather than to sell a point.

*** YAWN ***

Interesting FACT:

The new measurement (implemented under Bush):
* CURRENT: Physically tracking students attendance for four years vs.
* PAST: Divide number graduating by the number of enrolled in 9th grade.

These measurements clearly identify failing districts and is a call for establishment of alternatives to the current education system.

While opponents to change will scream the measurements are too tough; I ask, when was accountability thrown out the window when it came to education?

The current failing education system has hidden behind failure long enough. In the words of our latest Chief Executive, "it is time to change."

If you think money is the answer to the poor performance of public schools, Google "Kansas City schools and money" and read all about it. Money can't make up for the deprivations poor and inner-city kids experience before they enter school. And by deprivation, it is not so much physical deprivation but intellectual deprivation.

Total Nancy Loome Parent's Campaign Compensation

2008: $75,800 (Salary) + $14,674.88 (Lobbyist) = $ 90,474.88 (Total)
2009: $89,040 (Salary) + $14,887.49 (Lobbyist) = $103,927.49 (Total)
2010: $99,040 (Salary) + $28,222.39 (Lobbyist) = $127,262.39 (Total)

Nancy Loome Annual Compensation Increase (%)

2009 vs 2008 = +14.9%
2010 vs 2009 = +22.5%

Total Parent's Campaign Revenue

2008: $534,316
2009: $161,125
2010: $237,789

Nancy Loome Compensation as Percentage of Total Revenue

2008: $ 90,474.88 / $534,316 = 16.9%
2009: $103,927.49 / $161,125 = 64.5%
2010: $127,262.39 / $237,789 = 53.5%

What exactly do the numbers mean? Who is considered a drop out? If you transfer to another school, does that affect the graduation rate at the original school?

I was prompted to ask those questions because the white male grad rate is lower than the black male grad rate at JPS (according to the chart you posted).

Are these kids quitting school all together, or are their families moving?

If these numbers do reflect the kids who are not graduating because they totally dropped out, I must say that the most alarming thing that I saw was the extremely low percentage of kids with disabilities that are graduating. With so many kids being diagnosed with disabilities, the whole state is only graduating 19.9% of those students.

I think we all need more information to explain the numbers we have because this is just depressing. If the children are our future, the future isn't looking to great for this state!

RE: February 21, 2012 9:32 AM

Looks like the Parent's Campaign is little more than an employment agency for Loome.

9:46 AM That is exactly what I would expect from someone in the Teacher's lobby.

The numbers are accurate from this standpoint:

In the past, schools could "fudge" their graduation rates by taking the total number enrolled vs. total number entering. It always resulted in an inflated graduation rate.

It was for all intents and purposes an apple to oranges comparison. Additionally, it masked the real problem of "Poorly Performing Schools and the resultant staff, curriculum, programming."

Today, it is an apples to apples comparison. You track students with a number from the time they enter school to the time they leave school. Either through drop-out or graduation.

The light has been shined on the poor performance of a broken education system. I can understand the difficulty in accepting this if you are a teacher; the administrations kept everyone in the dark about the performance, but as long as it brought more money to their fiefdom, they did not care - not for the students or the teachers. This is the sad reality some of the educational systems in MS today. Parents, students and teachers should demand change.

This is 9:46 again.
I'm no lobbyist for teachers. I'm just trying to figure out what the numbers mean.

Poor kids usually move a lot more than other kids. I was just wondering if kids who move from school to school are considered drop outs at their original school.

Where are all these people moving? Out of state? I'm not sure intra-transfers within the JPSD is an issue. Are you making an assumption? Poor children may move more between rental properties, but not sure that is contributing to switching schools. That would mean they are moving away from jobs, family, etc. Not sure that it would really be a significant factor. I will give you a margin of error of 3%. The schools are still failing.

I wholeheartedly agree that most of the schools in MS are failing our children. I didn't say they were not. I was just trying to understand the data.

What's the point of having actual data if no one even cares what it says?

8:50,

As a JPS graduate who also just happened to be poor, your drivel sounds like excuses.

At some point the kids need to be responsible for their actions. Just labeling them poor, black, under/over-fed, sick, transient or whatever adjective you can think of will not change that fact. Until there is a line drawn in the sand we, the taxpayers, will continue to not get what we are paying for.

for those of you who do not understand the data. i suggest you go to your local school office an sign up to substitute. do it for a month and you will know exactly why the rates are so high.
vocational schools is the answer to the problem. the drop out kids are not dumb, just bored. teach them a skill.

The actual student is tracked so if he transfers to another school or moves, that is accounted for in the cohort, not to be confused with a maniple.

Yes, well, we all know our teachers know nothing about education and are all just selfish SOBs who are interested only in their own careers.
Clearly, the parents ought to run the schools or , better yet, do as Santorum wants, let parents be completely responsible for education.
Really, people , can none of you actually get past partisan crap and educate yourselves on the facts?
There is so much research that has been duplicated. This isn't rocket science. We actually know how to educate children. And, guess what? There are unbiased sources of information.

The verification tonight includes
" saidsuc"...how lovely.

All the gov't really wants from our children is: 1. for them not to become killers so taxpayers won't need to support them for life at a rate of appx $73 per day 2. for them to pay taxes.
Our students are bored. How many eighth graders can list the Constitutional qualifications required for a person to become a US Representative, US Senator, or to hold the office of President? Teachers have a mandated curriculum that they strictly adhere in hopes of their students passing mandated test.
Currently society, encourages children to stay young, enjoy life, party through college and spend the next few years trying to figure out what they want to do with their life. Young children should be encouraged to learn subjects that interest them until they master the skills necessary to acquire their slice of the great American dream.
10:02 - highly likely an accurate observation
8:50 - for poor students who qualify, taxpayers already feed them a free breakfast, a free lunch plus provide their families with EBT cards so they can go to McDonald's for dinner. What do taxpayers receive in return for this hefty investment?

12:19 am Quite alot of development takes places from conception to age 5. Lunch and breakfast are often all the children that qualify get to eat, but we likely agree that these programs aren't working as they should.

12:41am part of learning is to learn to be responsible and self-sufficient. We agree that children need well defined boundaries. We likely agree that " welfare" , as it's currently structured robs people of incentive and has created dependency. Not all " poor children" have bad parents. Many parents or extended family sacrifice for their children. Some children are born bright enough to fend for themselves in very creative ways.

I disagree with 12:19 am that young children should "learn subjects that interest them". I was not naturally interested in math, science,or learning a foreign language, but I was required to become proficient. I wasn't interested in reading Gibbons or Plato but by doing so, I have a better since of the world around me. I learned how to go to the original sources of ideas and how to analyze logically.
There is value in what used to be called " a liberal arts" education. It helps keep humans from growing up to be narrow minded people who can't contemplate unintended consequences or learn from the past.

I think we have politicized and oversimplified a serious problem since the 60s. I think special interests on both sides of the aisle have created a mess. I think parents have contributed either by neglect and selfishness AND by ignorant interference.

It MIGHT be best to listen to those who have expertise and have gotten successful results in the relevant fields and who do NOT have a personal agenda. Or , we can continue to listen to people who don't know what they don't know( but have anecdotal stories from limited experiences) or to a bunch of politicians playing to public frustrations for personal gain.

"8:16 am I am saying a lack good nutrition and good health care adversely affects a child's development and thus that child's ability to learn."

It doesn't seem to have an adverse effect on their ability to serially procreate, though...my stars, we are kinder to our dumb animal population (spaying initiatives by generous veterinarians and rescue organizations) than we are to the humans who are flooding our system with unwanted spawn...what's the answer?