The Enquirer noted twelve area school districts who received an "excellent with distinction" ranking (74 state wide).
Just out of curiosity, I wonder how these school districts would match up in the red state/blue state metaphor.
Forest Hills - Red
Indian Hill - Red
Kings - Red
Lakota - Red
Lebanon - Red
Loveland - Red
Mason - Red
Ross - Red
Springboro - Red
Sycamore - Red
Wayne - Red
Wyoming - Red
You'll notice that all of these school districts are populated with republicans. But let's say you're a hard core democrat and you want to live with and have your kids educated by democrats. Well, you have lot's of choices. Assuming you want your kids in crappy school districts like Hamilton, North College Hill, and Cincinnati Public.
I'm always cracking up with the liberal mantra that they are the "intelligent" ones and that suburban republicans are a bunch of goobers. Well, if that's the case, why do the school systems liberals run suck so bad?
What's so "progressive" about shitty schools?
3 comments:
20.3% of the kids in Cincinnati Public are considered disabled. That really is an incredible number.
Whenever have a question like this, if you answer money, you're right 90% of the time.
My guess, by labeling a kid as "disabled" the school system gets more money to educate kid. Parent gets money as a result of a social security disability and the kid gets labeled as a loser.
It works for everyone, except for the kid.
I think the money angle should be looked into. If you pay money for disabled kids it should be no surprise when the market produces more disabled kids.
Post a Comment