Do people know about Google's App Status Dashboard? It's information for when google stuff is down....

But I also suspect that if you took any underperforming school and spent a big chunk of money on it so it had good facilities and equipment and well-supported well-trained teachers teaching small classes it would improve VASTLY and just about immediately.

This, but also given what java said about family involvement -- our school district is failing horribly and is set in an economically depressed area. One way teachers get around the issue of family involvement, or lack of it, is simply to assign very little homework at the elementary level. Work gets done in class, where it can be supervised.

Of course, one of the elementary school teachers admitted to me that it's also due to needing to teach to the lowest common denominator -- there are no separate special ed classes, so they can't assign homework that half the class can't do, or something.

I went to great public schools in suburban NJ. But so much about the way curriculum is designed now has changed, I think it has to be a factor, too.

I swear that getting bargain bin software from "The Learning Company" gave our kids a massive head start on school.

They mostly outgrown that phase though, we can't fool them into thinking that doing math is a entertaining video game.

gmail is back.

gmail is back.

I think I brought it back by giving up and setting up IMAP to read me e-mail. Almost the moment I did that, my gmail notifier reestablished its connection.

Even when gmail was down, they were saying, "Users can access their email via IMAP or POP."

I am not a teacher, but I'd say that along with the money in wealthier districts, you also are more likely to have parents who went to college and have the resources to be actively engaged in their childrens' education.

Doesn't always work well. We live in a quote/unquote "wealthy district" or at least, one that's considerably better off than the majority in the state and the kids' classes are still overcrowded (average 30 kids in a class), in the middle school they've dropped all electives with the exception of band, P.E., and art/health (everything else is an extracurricular activity), and even the electives are short on money. The band director can't buy new music for the band, all of the kids have to either rent or buy their own instruments from an outside source because the school can't afford to buy instruments for the kids to borrow (which was the norm when I was in band), and if the band needs buses to go anywhere, even up the street to the elementary school, to do a performance, they have to pay for the buses-- neither the school nor the district will pay for them.

And the downside to parents who are college educated (at least around here) is they have a sense of entitlement that is not to be believed. It's not a matter of being engaged and active in their kids' academic lives, it's interfering in them. They want to ensure that their kids get the best education (read: make good grades) and refuse to take into account that teachers have more than just that one child they must teach.

This is just a HUGE difference from my solidly middle class public school education-- but then again, we're twenty-five years removed from that.

Timelies all!

We ended up going for a TiVo last year when we couldn't find a DVD recorder for a reasonable price.

I would absolutely agree that money is not a sufficient solution to problem schools, but it sure as hell is a necessary one.

This, but also given what java said about family involvement -- our school district is failing horribly and is set in an economically depressed area. One way teachers get around the issue of family involvement, or lack of it, is simply to assign very little homework at the elementary level. Work gets done in class, where it can be supervised.

Totally as an example, a school district with funding might try to finesse the lack of parental involvement with more agressive and extensive after school programs where kids could do and get help with their homework.

And that's not a perfect solution either. But money gives you options, and lack of money generally means you're stuck picking from the worst ones.

[From way up: Sorry, I had to go to a meeting, so had to leave this post in the middle of writing it!]

I am not a teacher, but I'd say that along with the money in wealthier districts, you also are more likely to have parents who went to college and have the resources to be actively engaged in their childrens' education.

An excellent anecdotal evidence note: My friend Karen basically won SF's version of the lottery when her children were accepted into one of the BEST public schools in SF. It's literally a lottery. The Friday before the official first day of school, there was a special optional orientation. Karen took her daughter and had a great time meeting teachers, seeing the classrooms, meeting new classmates. However she said that a lot of the name badges that were prepared for the kids across town (from the poor part of town) were still lying on the table at the end of the day. Those parents didn't have the resources to take time off of work and attend something like this. So already their kids were going to be at a disadvantage because so many of the kids there on Friday got that huge head start. My cousin the sociologist refers to this as "structured racism". It's not intended, but it's not properly mitigated, either.