If the government has control, what could go wrong?.... everything. If parents are neglectful or endangering their children, that is one thing and the state may have some small interest, but even that must be extremely limited. If they must pull a child from their parents and send them to a different school then that is an indictment of the parents as well as the local public school system. Why would it be likely to be better at another state run school? Send them to a private institution. I don't trust the government to indoctrinate.. er, um educate children. Close the Department of Education and let it be a local matter. People that want better education for their children should vote with their feet and move to a better district. Let the market work. Those that don't value education for their children may be hopeless, no matter how much taxpayer money is spent, or wasted. We must change the minds of people by demonstration of prosperity by example. A desire to learn is the most crucial aspect. One can learn anything with basic reading skills and desire. We must get back to the basics the 'three Rs" and instill desire as the first priorities.

I believe Cuba takes every child from their parent's home at 12 years of age and "educates" them in government schools until their 18th birthday.
This idea in Buffalo is just another example of Marxist failure being fixed by more regulations and more control. When implemented, Buffalo's children will be perfectly educated.

This is all done "FOR THE GOOD OF THE PEOPLE!" Did you not realize that?

How atrociously disgusting! Yes, it does remind me
of the Communist and Fascist situations. If they do
it, I hope the kids run away, vandalize the place,
and burn it down.

Good Heaven How Scary. -- j

Sounds like Mao to me. He wanted kids under government influence as early as possible, to keep parents from passing on their ideas. Are we sure the unions won't also be part of the project in Buffalo, more union jobs? Teachers have done a great job of indoctrinating kids into being against parental values, and an equally lousy job of teaching academics. Kids will not learn until they learn respect, for others and themselves - teachers have pretty much short circuited that idea, then complain when they can't control them either. More government schooling will create hostile sheep, not psychologically healthy.

Oooo, Marxist reeducation camps rearing their ugly heads.
I guess it was only a matter of time.

There is a big problem in most of the statistics on single parent homes and children. In virtually all of these overviews, no distinction is made between causes due to low economic condition and causes due to single-parent family. Indeed, one study (http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publi...) that normalized the economic conditions showed that, "When controlling for other differences in family characteristics, such as race, level of parents’ education, family size, and residential location, McLanahan and Sandefur found little difference in outcomes for children according to whether the single-parent families were a result of non-marital births or divorce. However, children of widowed parents do better than children of other types of single-parent families with similar characteristic."

There is no 'putting Humpty Dumpty back together again' with respect to enduring marriages. As long as both members of the relationship have the ability to support themselves, you are going to get a higher rate of divorce than in a society where half of the family was economically dependent.

Another thing is that I was a day student at a prestigious Catholic boarding school. We day students noticed that the boarders did not have any trouble getting drugs (from their politician or actor families, probably). The dorm had a problem with drugs (mostly pot; some cocaine I think). Anecdotes from other people in boarding schools recount similar experiences. As Wm is fond of saying, "If you can't keep drugs out of prisons, how do you expect to keep them out of the rest of society?"...in this instance, boarding schools.

Jan

Sounds like desperation. As I see it, one aspect is the way we tip-toe around calling the situation what it is for fear of being called a racist. There is a predominance of single parent homes in the Black community. Fathers are not in the home. Some are fathering children with several wives. The onus is on the Black parents who refuse to deal with this situation through some misguided appearance of what manhood is. Not only are men not put down for their bad behavior, they are applauded for it as if it were a desirable thing. Until the Black community starts promoting two parent families and holding up that as the right thing to do, they are getting what they deserve, namely, a generation of uneducated, poor people, who think the only way they can make it in the world is by being criminals. The only thing that Buffalo's "solution" will do is turn education into a punishment, like reform school of old.

I have no problem with public or private boarding schools if the curriculum stresses true learning and not fake gender or race advocacy. The problem with Hitler's schools (and the equivalent Soviet schools) was that they taught the politics of the ruling party.

Little known sociology fact: the #1 indicator of success in schooling is not money, teacher quality, or availability of technology, but simple parental involvement. You want good kids at school? You start with good parents: married couples devoted to each other and their families.

Schooling starts at home. It always has and always will. You want better kids, stop encouraging behaviors that destroy family. You're not going to solve the problem by taking the kids away from their families and support structures.

Vee have vays to make dem learn!!!! You know, no matter HOW well intentioned someone is about raising my kids, AND no matter how much YOU may dislike how I raise them (excepting physical Abuse) it is NOT your "choice" on how children should be indoctrinated (afterall, that IS what education and conditioning manifest). My rights as a parent are proctected by SEVERAL of the 1st 10 Amendments to the Constitution and we have John Adams to thank for being such a visionary... BUT we MUST defend those rights or they will slowly evaporate like the experience of the residents of the "Animal Farm".

At least it 's a charter school. What I want to know is why are the unions involved in pushing this?

Not surprising in the least.

People fail to take care of there kids and want someone else (this time around; science and government) to do it for them.

I thought we already had boarding schools for troubled teens. I understand that they call it reform school and when they grow up, prison. Boarding school is another way to milk the public that don't have troubled youth.

This reminds me 20 years ago when Newt Gingrich (and I think Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation) proposed orphanages for poor children in single-parent homes.

I think people proposing this are responding to the issue of kids from dysfunctional families sending their kids to school without meals or proper clothing. Then the teachers need to make up for a bad home life to educate them.

I don't have an answer to the problem because I see the logic in getting these kids to a stable environment and hopefully breaking the cycle of poverty. But I'm loath to expand gov't in any way. Many people rise to the occasion when left alone but lean on gov't programs if they can. I also question if gov't run boarding schools with a bunch of troubled kids segregated from the rest of society would be any better than kids growing up in troubled homes.