You've restated the article author's point regarding Finland.
You also may have restated the author's point about the 50% of new teachers who don't stick it out 5 years.
Actually, it's not routine. It's a long drawn out struggle. Charters get closed much faster.
> You've restated the article author's point regarding Finland.
The person whom I was responding to seemed to be suggesting that Finland's experience tells us something important about the US. My point is that it doesn't.
> You also may have restated the author's point about the 50% of new teachers who don't stick it out 5 years.
Again, the person to whom I was responding suggested that certificate loss rates and the percentage of teachers leaving the profession because of work conditions have something to do with one another. They don't.
One difference - you can close the failing charters. Failing public schools are virtually immortal.
Another difference - choice is also valuable.
> * Finland, the movie's model school system, is entirely unionized, has much lower poverty, and has a stronger social safety net than the US.
Finland is less populous than LA, almost all interactions involve relatives and long-term acquaintances, and it's all proto-Scandanavians.
The last point is important - anything works if you just have to deal with Scandanavians (or Mormons).
> * While the movie points out that only 0.04% of teachers ever lose their certificate, it omits the fact that 50% of new teachers leave the profession within 5 years, mostly because of working conditions.
Apples and Oranges. Bad working conditions drive out both good and bad teachers. (Conditions might be more of a issue for folks who have other options, which might be disproportionatly the good teachers.) Certificate revocation is likely to be dominated by bad teachers.