Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, January 09, 2009
Ed Feulner :: Townhall.com Columnist
School Choice: The Real Test
by Ed Feulner
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


It’s official: President-elect Barack Obama’s two daughters are attending Sidwell Friends School in Washington, D.C.

The decision comes as no surprise. That elite private school launched former first daughter Chelsea Clinton on the path to success years ago. And the Obama girls are certainly used to attending a private school.

The Obamas steered clear of the Chicago’s failing public schools, where 34 percent of the students fail state reading tests and only about half the pupils graduate from high school. So there was never any reason to expect the Obama family to subject Sasha and Malia to D.C.’s failing public schools.

Yet as president, Obama will have some promises to keep. Not only to his daughters, but to all Americans. During his campaign, he vowed, “We cannot be satisfied until every child in America -- I mean every child -- has the same chance for a good education that we want for our own children.” And the best way to give students that chance is to give their parents a choice.

If parents were allowed to pick their children’s school (as the Obamas have now done twice), they’d pick the best available school, not merely the one that happens to be in their neighborhood.

Obama’s decision should serve as a teaching moment for his administration’s education policymakers. Lesson number one would be that spending doesn’t equate to success.

D.C. spends some $14,000 annually on each child in its public schools. A lot of that funding comes from the federal treasury, which means all American taxpayers are subsidizing the D.C. public schools. That’s one of the highest per-pupil costs in the nation. Yet if the District were a state, it would rank 51st -- dead last -- in test scores.

To address these failings, Congress created the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program four years ago. The plan provides low-income children the chance to attend a school of their parents’ choice. Some 1,900 disadvantaged children now attend private schools in the District.

Parents are happier with the schools they’ve picked, and the students are making progress, too. A testing evaluation shows that participating students scored higher than their peers who remained in public school.

Sadly, candidate Obama seemed to be leaning in the wrong direction. “What I do oppose,” he told the American Federation of Teachers, “is spending public money for private school vouchers. We need to focus on fixing and improving our public schools, not throwing our hands up and walking away from them.”

Yet real reform would involve expanding the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program so that all children in the District can have the chance to attend a safe and effective school. That’s not “throwing up our hands.” That’s doing something. Something other than simply throwing more money at a problem. We’d be expanding a successful program, so students could attend better schools and their parents could be more involved in their education.

The Obamas are already a role model for this, of course. They arrive in D.C. as an intact family, and both Barack and Michelle are clearly involved in their children’s education. The key is to take this to the next level by making school choice available to all parents in the nation’s capital.

Powerful politicians of all stripes routinely exercise school choice. A recent survey of Congress found that 37 percent of representatives and 45 percent of senators had sent at least one child to private school. The Obama administration could pave the way for a better education system nationwide by extending school choice to those less fortunate than Washington’s elite power brokers.

That would be a change Americans deserve.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dr. Edwin Feulner is president of The Heritage Foundation, a Townhall.com Gold Partner, and co-author of Getting America Right: The True Conservative Values Our Nation Needs Today .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Ed Feulner's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Non-Issue
Why is education considered a national issue? Why do we allow national politicians to tell us what they are going to do/not do about education?

School Choice
As I see it, school choice already exists: you either send your kid to a public school, a private school, or don't send him/her to an educational institution at all.

The real question--and it is a local question--is: why is primary education considered a state responsibility? How many kids in public schools really want to be there? How many parents really want to send their kid to a school for a education as opposed to "free" childcare?

The Euro model
Liberals are always chattering about the wondrous enlightenment of European health care and mass transit...but always "conveniently" avoid any reference to the system in most European school systems allow parents money to follow their children to the school of their choice. Even religious/parochial schools!!

The real question is why

are parents who do not agree with the religion taught in the government run schools denied equal access to taxpayers' dollars?

Why is this illegal discrimination allowed to continue?

Politicians
are beholden to their constituents. Unions and teachers elected him. "Do as I say, not as I do" is the operating philosophy in this senario. His children are at "greater risk" than normal students due to their father's position, and therefore merit greater protection... a private school. You see, we are all equal, but some are more equal than others.

eddie
Are you saying that parents who want to send their children to parochial schools should have tax money to pay for it? If so, I have to disagree with you for a couple of reasons.

First of all, the education of children is the responsibility of the family not the government. I don't want my neighbor's tax money to pay for my children's education and, a homeschooler, I certainly resent having to pay taxes for the public schools my children will never use.

More importantly, with money comes control. School vouchers come with a price tag: more government regulation of private schools. More regulations and restrictions mean less academic freedom and opportunity to excel.

It's time to jettison the public school system. It's not working and it can't be fixed. Repeal property taxes that are used to pay for public schools. Then more parents would have money to pay for private school if they don't want to homeschool.

Hey
If I was allowed to pick schools for my kids, they would be Exeter and Harvard, for the elite and rich, because who wouldn't want to be both, right?
The point is to make our public schools the best they can be, and for most of us, that is what is wanted

qhoratius from CA

You are correct the federal government should not be involved in education other than to act in an advisory capacity. The is no mandate in the U.S. Constitution for Federal Government involvment.

However at the State and local level, individual state constitution do mandate government involvement in education.

Since the State, by choice of the residence of that state, is taking tax payers money to operate schools. The american people have the right to demand quality schools. If the State is unable to provide quality schools, as is very common in Liberal communities, then the taxpayers have a perfect right to demand school choice, vouchers, refund of their tax money, or any other alternative education methods available in that state.

Problems with school choice

One of the problems getting school choice is lack of support.

Conservative communites generally have concerned parents, responsive school boards, fair pay for teachers and teachers that enjoy teaching. The result is good schools.

The elected officials of these schools see no need for school choice and don't push for legistlation.

Liberal comunities for the most part have bad schools, terrible school boards, over-paid teachers, parents that don't care about their kids education. Heck these parents won't even pack a lunch for their kids to goto school so the schools are forced to feed their kids breakfast and lunch.

The Liberals in these communites like big government and believe government can solve all problems. They oppose school choice because the teacher's union tells them they should oppose school choice.

The end result benefits the Democratic Party, as we seen with Obama's election because less informed and educated voters tend to vote for democrats.

So the Bottom Line is Republicans don't see a need so don't care. Democrats need to keep people dumb so they can get re-elected.

Government Monopoly Schools
I believe it was Charles Darwin who did not say, "Government schools are not the fittest and need the protection of a monopoly to survive."

The Heck with Govt Schools
What right minded conservative wants his kid to be bombarded by liberal drivel and incompetence, not to mention a lot of unchecked bad social behavior? Most "home schooled" kids (BTW, Abe Lincoln was homeschooled) completely blow away their peers academically, proven by test scores, spelling bees and geography bees. Obama's wrong--throw up your hands and walk away before it's too late. Government mind set will not change. If you're disciplined and organized, homeschooling is the way to go!

ObaMessiah's daughters
I find it stunning that nobody has drawn attention to Obama's daughters going to a very exclusive private school Sidwell Friends. While security reasons could be an issue in some Washington schools, why do those on the left who do well (Revrund Jessuh, etc.) ALWAYS send THEIR children to exclusive schools, even as they resist vouchers and school choice for the rest of us, and preach about the myriad virtues of our union-plagued LCD caliber public schools? Where is the practicing of what they preach?

the plague of teachers' unions

There is only one area where unions have not waned in influence in recent years-- unions of those working for government-- who can simply force the taxpayers to eat their increased costs. Consider teachers, postal workers, and bureaucrats... are you impressed with the service you receive from ANY of these "public servants?"

Postal worker clerks make exactly twice what their counterparts do working for the competing private companies... but ask yourself this-- if it is REALLY important to get it there on time, would YOU rely on the U.S. postal service?!

Teachers whine and bray perpetually about being "underpaid professionals." Yet if you look at the average teacher salary, and especially if you factor in their true qualifications, generous benefits, time off, and job security versus other options, teaching starts to look pretty darned attractive!

And what of this tripe about you cannot truly test a teacher with written competency tests... how then can THEY presume to test your child's competency? And WHY should someone who purports to teach students in high school not have to pass 8th grade equivalency tests with flying colors?

Those in real world jobs have to get performance reviews, and job security is virtually unknown.

a cogent, apropos post I saved
stephen--Location: MD

Date: Jul 30, 2008 - 5:37 AM EST

Subject: NEA and the negligence of GOP and Dems

I'm an NEA member. Unfortunately, it drifts into all kinds of extreme left positions that have little to do with the every day needs of kids. There is a learning deficit in US schools when it comes to the basics of science, math, English and most of all civics as we used to know it.

NEA would divert resources from the basics and the teaching of American history and culture as it really was, to a scrubbed version of history and English that makes mediocre literature acceptable because of authors from minority groups who don't match up to our greatest writers in English.

History now is taught totally as the history of the civil rights movement. There is no place for patriotism or pride in the accomplishments of the military in the schools. While the NEA plays a negative role when it strays from its economic function as a bargaining agent for teachers, and focuses on lobbying and electing liberal Democrats, it is primarily the fault of local school boards, parents and state education agencies that PC education, promotion of socialist learning theories like group learning, and anti-American ideology flourish in our schools.

We will be left in the dust by China and India which do not bother with such silly nonsense, but stick to teaching hard rigorous courses and turning out well educated linguists, doctors and engineers. We will have to import all our professionals from abroad, except for lawyers and community organizers.

Our brightest kids are encouraged to become Barack Obamas, not science researchers, engineers, or historians of actual U.S. or English History. I could go on but I'm getting depressed!

Teechurs
If yuo kin reed thiss, thanc uh teechur.

And if you cannot, then teachers, schools, their management, the NEA are to be held blameless. They mean well, it's just with Billions of dollars in your school district's budget, it's awful hard to want to spend it on such pointless distractions as students.

Seriously, my county in Maryland has a 2 billion dollar budget. There are over 3000 counties in this country. While I realize that not every county has a budget that big and some are bigger, just how much do we spend on public schools a year? Why can't our kids read and do math, science, and history?

More important, why don't we know the answers to these questions and why aren't we pissed off about it?

Col. Mitchell
"There is no mandate in the U.S. Constitution for Federal Government involvement."

You're correct, but as I'm sure you know, the idea that the Constitution somehow limits Federal power was buried in Appomattox, VA, in 1865. In pace requiescat.

"Conservative communities generally have concerned parents, responsive school boards, fair pay for teachers and teachers that enjoy teaching. The result is good schools."

Excellent point, and descriptive of my own situation.

Public school teachers
35% of public school teachers with school age children send their kids to private schools.
Hmmmm. Makes you wonder, don't it?

Col. Billy Mitchell
You make some very good points but ignore one very important one and that is the curriculum. Even in the "good" schools we have allowed the choice of textbooks and curriculum to migrate toward liberal mush. Some one-sided "truths"; we were wrong to use the atomic bomb to end WWII, we committed genocide on the American indians, the Great Society movement of the sixties eliminated poverty....

A bonus question
Did anyone seriously expect O'Blahblah to pass this test?

Like most of our rulers, he reveres public education not because it's educational (it isn't so much) or even because it's an inexhaustible source of votes and campaign donations, but because it's _public_. That is, it's for the people -- the little people, anyway -- and it's good enough for them withal. Watching the desperate masses dutifully send their chldren off to P.S. Rathole day after day is a source of pride and inspiration. It kinda gets ya right here, ya know?

School choice? Get real. That's only for the better sort.

School choice...
Is something that every parent would chose. The question is if the taxpayers are forced to pay for disfunctional and failing public schools, who can also afford to also send their own children to a costly private school. The answer is clearly the Obama's and other wealthy elitists but not most Americans. So if our hypocritical leaders wouldn't allow our taxpayers to chose their childrens schools should we really have to listen to their pleas for us to send more of our tax dollars to buy votes from the monopolists at the National Teachers Union? Let them buy their own votes.

Tim
You answered your own question. The management of the schools and the unions are the problem. As are the lemming citizens who allow the schools to be governed by politically correct everything from curriculum to lack of discipline and respect devived from a gutless surrender to the ACLU and other ambulence chasing lawyers. The only question is since the power to enforce taxation by the state supports the public schools.
(1)Pay your local,state and federal school taxes and suffer the results of the education system on your kids education.
(2)Do the above but homeschool your kids because you can't afford private school choices.
(3)Do the above and pay $10,000 to $25,000/year per kid to send your kids to private school while still forking over all your tax money to not educate the public children and keep the Teachers Union and other parasites voting for the clowns that we allow to run out government.
(4)Don't have any kids

Mod Mark
We have that system that you suggested right now. It is called the suburban counties and the inner city school systems. I live in the suburbs around a totally malfunctioning inner city school system. The suburban schools have many of the same idiocies of most public schools but they are still capable of providing an education at least for some students. The inner city schools have become the repository of "the future drug dealers" monitored by a faculty that has more in common with jailers than educators. In Maryland we call it suburban Washington and Baltimore, in your state of New York I assume you have the same phenomenum outside your major cities.

Mod Mark
"A parent who has unconditional love for their kids is the best method IF that parent is qualified to be a teacher." --ModMark
------------------------------------------------
Most teachers are as devoid of real skill as most of our journalists in US Pravda and our politicians in the halls of Congress. Hence, almost any parent is superior to whomever is "teaching" right now. The idea that those at the bottom of a graduating class, taught by professors that were usually at the bottom of their graduating class are somehow "qualified"
Please, show more respect for the audience.

When things are demonstrably terrible:

Government Schools
Media bias
Government spending......

The answer to liberals is always to do more of what caused the problem.

The schools say we need even more $, blames parents, attacks vouchers, etc

The media attacks consevatives like Joe the Plumber and makes up even more stories including forging documents and doctoring photos to sway opinion instead of reporting NEWS.

The government unconstitutionally acts as dictators and prints whatever money they deem appropriate to "fix" the economy and makes ridiculous assertions of "ONLY Goverment can fix" blah blah blah.......

Meanwhile, NOBODY in the Pravda Press (all preselected from a slip of paper), when called on at a "press conference, will even question the "ONE" about the Panetta appointment.

All 3 issues cry out for objective reporting.A free press? Not so much....

Well said Col.
Col. Billy Mitchell
Location: PA
Reply # 9
Date: Jan 9, 2009 - 11:57 PM EST

---------------------------------------------

Very, very well stated. IMHO, since the GOP is only the moderate wing of the dNC these days, only honest liberals can really fix this country. Are there any left? We could sure use real statesmen like Sen. Moynihan and Sen. Helms right now. Can anyone even point to ONE real, authentic statesman right now? I'll wait.

Hmmm?
Do they give out condoms at this school? Do they have the Rainbow Curriculum? Do they force students to study something parents disapprove? Do they indoctrinate? Hmmm?

Common Sense
The obvious, and totally politically incorrect (but totally necessary) solution is to go to (return to?) a two-tier educational system. From the onset of the "reading and writing" phase, those children who are less capable should be placed in classes which are more of a remedial nature. An education process which is forced to concentrate on those less capable abuses the privilege (and necessity) of educating the more capable students (elevating an educational system based upon the concept of a meritocracy). This concept does a service to both groups. Those remaining "students" who are either very disruptive, unduly aggressive, violent, or disrupt the class in other unacceptable ways, should automatically be placed in an "educational environment" which is capable of dealing with this type of behavior. Those who read this and think these proposed solutions are draconian and unacceptable should think back 50 years ago when this degree of "educational separation" actually existed - it served this country well without any interference from an all-too-bloated, incompetent and ineffective educational management and bureaucratic structure further complicated by a self-serving teachers' union.

School Choice
With Obama’s pick of Arnie Duncan as Secretary of Education, there is a very slim chance for change. I am sure Duncan will carry the Teacher’s union water. After all the Unions, Democrats and Media all sleep in the same bed, especially in Chicago. Take it form a Chicagoan, I know. Read more on Duncan at, http://stopthepresses2.blogspot.com/search/label/Arnie%20D uncan

If school choice were instituted
tomorrow, not all kids would go to private school. Private schools have only so many desks, books, rooms, etc, and cannot accommodate the general population. So where would parents go next? To the BEST PUBLIC SCHOOLS. This is the whole point of school choice: when public schools have to compete for students, the level of all public schools rises -- like water.

Obama's school choice- another phony lib
here we go again. another pro teachers union, anti choice lib in the white house and where does he send HIS kids to school?

i find it amazing that the teachers union hold so much power within the democrap party, when the public overwhelmingly supports school choice.

lets say it again, slowly, so even the bonehead teachers union can understand: we can pay 14k a year to send our kids to some crappy inner city school, were he will either drop out or emerge with a diploma and 3rd grade skills, or we can pay 8k year and give him a good Catholic education and save the taxpayer 6k.

PS: the 3 most unionzed industries in America:
1. Education
2. Auto
3. Ailines

Get the picture?

Hal
We have the worst of old and new. First we still have a two-tier system -- private schools, magnet schools (don't get me started on _them_), and a few publicly funded showcases for the wealthy or well-connected or downright lucky, bleak warehouses for everyone else. But we also get a "bloated, incompetent and ineffective" bureaucracy.

Wait, there's less. The old "meritocracy" wasn't based solely on merit, and it neglected most students. The new egalitarian system rejects the mere idea of merit and neglects everyone -- bright, dull, and in-between -- by replacing education and training alike with PC junk.

Mod Mark @ 7:40am 1/10/09
I am not paying off my public school education by paying property taxes. That's the same ponzi scheme reasoning that is used for Social Security, another entitlement the government has no business providing.

I started paying property taxes at 28 years of age. Let's say I live to be 78, that's an average of $5000 per year for 50 years. If you think my 12 years of public school cost $250,000, you are really mistaken. That's over $20,000 per year of schooling, even more than D.C. pays per student presently. I graduated from high school in 1974...there is no way the schools were spending that kind of money per student in the 60s and 70s.

As for the extreme and rare cases of negligence among homeschoolers, the exception shouldn't guide policy. Homeschoolers, by and large, are doing a much better job than the public schools.

All Mixed Up
Have you read Michelle's Princeton thesus? Angry at the white establishment that drives educated blacks to the white man's money making world and away from their roots. Her sugar daddy BHO went to a prep school as elite, if not more, then where her little girls go now. JUST WHAT do these people stand for? What do they believe in? Forget what comes out of their mouths, they are opportunistic classic lefty liberals. Barack scares me but wait until ugly angry Michelle gets her two cents in there. She already has her mother in law living in govt housing with them.

Mod Mark
I lived in NY for my first 40 years. I have only been in NC for 8. I went to Maine Endwell and Union Endicott systems in the 70's before my dad yanked me out and put us all in private school in Binghamton.

I raised my first 2 kids from k-7 in WNY- Dunkirk-Fredonia to be specific. I know all about a lot of the teachers there in NY. This is THE issue that Obama could have got my vote on. If he were a real thinking pol and not a party idealogue. It is to me, the only issue left with a clear distinction between the GOP and the D's.

Mod Mark
The teachers up there that I know-I am related to a few- are aware that the union influence is a major hindrance. I feel sorry for all of the gifted teachers stuck in a system that rewards and protects incompetence while supressing the true achievers and their real value through collective(@#$%^&*) bargaining.

I paid for Catholic school for my first 2 kids in the Vampire state while being fleeced for my public school tax revenue at the same time for that system which just cannot succeed because it is designed to fail.

How can a system work with tenure and the bottom being taught by the bottom and history books being whitewashed with impunity? I do not expect you will admit it, but their results, as a whole in NY- despite pockets of success are atrocious. Especially for the $ spent.

I do read all of your material though and enjoy the reasonable (for the most part) give and take. Maybe you can teach Mario, UncoolMoose, Chloe and some of the others a thing or 2? We won't hold our breath.

May I suggest Inside American Education by Dr. Thomas Sowell? Written over 20 years ago, he predicted much of what we continue to see today and it is truly depressing.



NCLB
The philosophy underlying No Child Left Behind is bankrupt. School choice won't solve the problem, because we are trying to get everyone to college. 50% of our kids can't do college. They might be able to do garbage collecting, though.

High School is for high level students. If we have to keep dumbing down for the dummies, we are doomed. We are spending (wasting) billions to try to teach kids with less than 70 IQ. The federal government needs to take itself out of education and let the states do it. It is the constitutional approach.

this is a false argument
My parents were well aware of the rules when they sent some of us
to private school.
They still believed that in the 20th Century one NEEDED mandatory
education for kids if the US were to remain a top country.
Thus, they also wanted the best public schools.
And were fully aware that public money should have strings attached
to it.

So

I think the best resolution is to have public school choice.
Where any parent/student can select any public school (exceptions
being test schools) that they can get to and there is room for them at.

On average, when comparing apples to apples, public schools do no
worse educating students than private schools believe it or not:

The NCES report using NAEP:

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006461
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard...es/2006461.asp



Wrong Solution?
Ask yourself this very simple quetion. What should be the goal? I would suggest the goal should be to get as many of our children to not only complete high school, but to have learned what they are suppose to learn by attending high school, and hopefully to get a whole lot more of them to attend college. If we can do that, then we will can say we have been successful. So, as much as I like the idea of school choice, does that initiative achieve the goals I have stated we should have? My answer is no, it does not. It helps a few children, but it does not help the vast majority of children. So, what is the answer? Let me suggest that the answer lies in somehoe convincing the chirldren that education is very important, and they should strive to get as much education as they can, and to learn what they are suppose to learn. How do you do that? Find out why the recent immigrants from southeast asia was so successful, while many other students who attended the same schools, were not. Let me suggtes the answer is right in front of us. When parents care deeply about the need for the children to get a good education, their children WILL most likely get a good education. So, the answer to the problem is to figure out a way to get parents to set high goals for their children, so that they want to get a good edudcaiton. If we can do that, the whole dynamics at work would change dramatically.

"Special Interest" Public Schools ?
“There have been ten generations of Americans since this nation was founded... Each left this nation in a little better condition than when they inherited it from their parents. This is the first generation at risk of doing the opposite. Why? I have come to believe the reason is we have failed to acknowledge and discipline ourselves with the spiritual truths that made us great for theses two hundred years – Faith, Family, Country, Values.”... Former Senator Zell Miller (D-GA).

Parents no longer have any say in the Public Schools. Our entire public educational system belongs to “Secular Humanists” who want to indoctrinate the next generation against the traditional vales mentioned above AND the wishes of parents. When you shut out the parents, or seek to deceive them, the result is MORE PRIVATE or HOME SCHOOLING!

If we are going to save this nation, then parents must take back the National PTA, Traditional Values Teachers must take back their union leadership (especially the NEA) and average citizens and taxpayers must get involved. Good Luck with that one, now that the executive branch of government belongs to the “Radically Wrong.” School Choice is the first baby step on the road to taking back our public schools.

collective bargaining vs. right to work
states does not show that unionized states and thus unionized schools test
worse than right to work states, actually it shows the exact opposite.
An easy way to prove this is to see the NAEP results state-by-state
and compare it to which states are right to work

Chicago
Chicago has one of the worst school systems in the country, yet Obama just appointed Arne Duncan, who is superintendent of that failing system, to the position of Secretary of Education? huh????? What is wrong with this picture?

The Parent Issue
Another huge issue in the education discussion are the parents (of course). I live in a wealthy So Cal suburb. I send my children to a very good public school. Many children of these uber wealthy parents are extremely disruptive and have no respect for authority. They all have tutors and still are not all that bright. And where did they learn their lack of respect? Don't have to spend much time with the parents to figure that one out. They'll volunteer for the class and then "try to make it". Wouldn't want to cut into a girls lunch or private pilates session. We aren't uber wealthy and push our children to do very well in school. We need our children to get into UCLA or another top public institution. We can't afford to have our children get mediocre grades like the uber rich, then have the parents join the Univ Parents club with a fat donation, then able to send their mediocre kids to USC at $50k/yr. Many of these lazy parents here are Obama lovers. Guilt from not actually making their own money? Probably a bit of that + ignorance. I don't see this education issue changing anytime soon b/c the uber wealthy don't really want the middle class kids in their exclusive public and private schools (I can attest to this) and look who is in Congress. Look where the Obamas are sending their children. Caroline Kennedy graduated with top honors from law school...oh really??? Really?? Or did a professor not need a call from Jackie? I don't believe any of these liberal phonies about their children's academic achievements. They use their names and money to skate along. What exactly is Chelsea doing with her life? My point--the children of Congressmen and the Prez will never be wanting to get into a good school or get an overpaid job in the home district-- nothing to do with their own merit. No edcuation change is going to come Washington.

one more comment
Forgot to mention--at this public school in a wealthy school district..the parents threaten to sue when their child does not get a top grade and when their child is not put in the gifted program. The school district caves and alters the grade and puts the child in the program. This was revealed to me by my son's teacher. Disgusting. The education system is FAR more upside down then anyone even realizes, I believe.

Vouchers equal real choice!
In Florida, we used to have forced busing to achieve integration. I am all for having integrated schools, but not the way they handled it.

Children were bused all over, often when an excellent public school was literally right across the street.

The major problem with all this busing is that it significantly impedes parental involvement in the schools. When your child's school is a 45-60 minute drive one way, it's tough to put into your schedule. Add into this equation, children from low income single parent families—How often do you think they can afford to find the time & transportation to go across town to volunteer?

Like many other parents, we refused to let our children be bused at a young age; we were not about to put a first-grader onto a bus for a couple of hours a day. For many years, we paid to keep our children in parochial schools. How ridiculous when we were paying taxes for education.

Eventually our county implemented a new "school-choice" program. It didn't work either. A few lucky parents got to send their kids to the school of their choice. But others got stuck in less-than-desirable schools. It didn't matter that you lived in an above-average neighborhood, and paid above-average taxes on your home—the children were sent wherever there was an opening.

Why should any parents be forced to send their children to inadequate schools?!

The bottom line is—we should have vouchers allowing parents to truly send their children to the school of their choice! It should not be based on income or failing schools—it should be your right as a parent to select the school that is best for your child—just as the Obamas did.

Vouchers will not ruin public schools; it will save them!

School Funding
Are you kidding me??? 14K per student per year, and DC schools (public) fail miserably. I guess the gene pool of the students has something to do with it, and proves the old saying "you can't fix education by throwing money at it." It also proves old saying:"you can't make chicken salad from chicken poop."

Liberal Democrats benefit from bad Ed.

Well, as long as Liberal Democrats benefit from sub-standard schooling there will be no real reform.

Liberal Democrats need poorly or mis-educated people to get elected.

It does not matter how much teachers are paid, class size, condition of school because Liberal Democrats are not interested in solutions.

Choice
I won't hold my breath expecting school choice to be an option. With the NEA a large contributor to Democrats, it is extremely unlikely that anything will be done that the NEA doesn't want done.
So much for those who purport to support, "Choice."
Donald W. Bales

sad truth
I have to say, I am not surprised at the fact that school choice has never been embraced by the Democrats. They are bankrolled by the teacher unions and there is no greater obstaclt to school improvement than these unions. Very sad indeed.

You're all joking, right?
I mean, everyone wants to talk trees?

All responses written by middle-class Americans who seem to think all people think as nobly as they do. This in the midst of contrary evidence which even Obama can grasp. He may not be able to speak its name. But actions, like sending his daughters to a 'good' school, speak louder than words.

a saved post by another savant

Greyhawk Location: AL

Date: Sep 29, 2008 - 9:09 PM EST
(slight edit)

The kind of socialization that goes on in public schools is not a good thing. Students literally are being trained in the political correctness of a liberal government while being indoctrinated and dumbed down to the lowest common denominator.

Public schools actually do more harm than good to children, and to send your child to some of the schools is a form of child neglect and abuse. The public schools are being run, for the most part, by incompetent bureaucrats who take their cues from the U.S. Department of Education which was the Creation of another Liberal Democrat Socialist, Jimmy Carter, who created this particular worthless bureaucracy as a payback to the national teachers' unions who got behind him and got him elected.

The schools, since the creation of that worthless bureaucracy which is totally controlled by the leftist teachers' unions, is what brought us to the low point we are in now.

Before U.S. government interventions, beginning in the mid 1960's, we were in the top 3 educationally in the world, and now we are number 27 and sinking fast. And these corrupt and intellectually dishonest school "experts" keep saying, "We need more money to do more of the same worthless stuff we are doing already."

And how do they test themselves? With standardized tests on top of other standardized tests, and as one of my old professors stated 30 years or so as I was preparing to be a teacher warned, "the more you standardize test, the more you lower the standards." This is the type nonsense these snake oil salesmen are pitching now. Intellectually bankrupt and morally bankrupt individuals, for the most part, make up the U.S. Dept. of Ed, and the leadership at all levels of Teacher Unions.

This is why we say No Obama, and We Need to Say No To Socialized Education, which is what brought us to this current debacle.

another saved post
MassAppeal Location: OK


Date: Sep 14, 2008 - 1:16 AM EST

Education that works--and that doesn't

Poor preparation in the lower grades affects the whole lives of its victims. I posted this on another thread, but it seems appropriate here, too:

Dumbed down and dumber down
I used to teach college (English, journalism, and other writing), both at a state school and a prestigious private university. It was a depressing experience.

Some students did not know the parts of speech. I don't think any could diagram a sentence; most could not write one intelligently.

I blame the elementary education philosophy that holds that learning should be "fun," "relevant," and build self-esteem. A lot of people nowadays enjoy a level of self-esteem to which they are not entitled.

I didn't care for endlessly reciting multiplication tables in third grade--but by gosh I can tell you what 7 x 9 is without a calculator!

My suggestion for improving grades 1-6 is the same as for the oil crisis: "Drill, baby, drill!"

still another saved post
MassAppeal Location: OK

Date: Sep 15, 2008 - 2:45 AM EST

Subject: I forgot to mention....
...a couple of things:

When I taught college, it seemed that every time I had a student who was really struggling, whose aptness for university education was marginal, it turned out to be an education major. We used to joke about it in faculty groups. Of course, it is really no joke.

The system of training teachers is to load them up with questionable courses in teaching, then require a few hours in their teaching area. I think they should train school teachers the way they train college instructors: rigorous study in the major field, followed by a few hours' training in classroom management and psychology.

Finally, I point out that history and sociology both prove that the SINGLE element that most strongly bonds a people is a COMMON LANGUAGE. Without it, you end up like Belgium or Canada, with centuries of misunderstanding, prejudice, and mistrust against the "others."

I don't care what lingo you speak at home. But in the public square, we must have English as the lingua franca. I say that as one who has studied and enjoy several foreign languages. And the more diverse we are as a people, the more we need the glue of standard English, understood and spoken by everyone.

ModMark
Howdy!

As a parent to both private and public school kids myself, I think what you mean about the quality of the kids is that they reflect the quality of their parents' involvement. After all, kids being in private/religious school does not also equate to their being "holy Joes". The difference between private and public is very much evident in the amount of control the private school has over its students; lazy, disruptive and unwilling kids (I've seen 'em all) have no place in the more disciplined environment of a private school-and the public schools do nothing to help them find a more appropriate niche. Truly it would be better they go to a tech school funded by vouchers (and I daresay the parents of ADHD-type kids would leap at the chance for their boys to be treated like boys instead of being drugged zombies) to learn how to work with their hands, being apprenticed out when a certain level of achievment is reached. What say ye to that?

scrap iron reply #17
Thats because they can afford it

Homeschooling-observation and enlightmen
I agree with Andrea- I have personally not seen a homeschool parent voluntarily keep their child home 24/7, take responsibility and spend time to teach them, when all-day daycare is available at the school system they are paying for anyway. I have 8 children and now homeschool the last 2. Never would I have thought I would go this route because we live in an "exceptional" school district in a suburban/semi rural area. And my hubby works for that school district. Sending my children to school is what prompts me to homeschool now. I had to supplement their education anyway when they were in elementary by practicing flashcards and reading with them. I have had to volunteer on field trips, events, and in libraries. I have spent hours selling school products for fund raisers or sporting events. I have witnessed first hand what goes on in those buildings, and I dont want that for my children. My older children agree with our decision and plan to homeschool their own eventually. I wish I had known better years ago. By the way- my kids were the popular, super atheletes, that did well in school. They werent total angels but these thoughts dont stem from resentment, single bad experiences, or anything else you may be thinking. Just observation and enlightment.
Now your friend with the 2nd grader may be involved in a lax curriculum, or unschooling, or something of that sort. You may want to wait and see how the children end up in the end. I have seen many, many children that were straight A students in elementary school barely scrape by later. Children need to be emotional, mentally, and spiritually matured for life. That is the true responsibility of the parent before sending them anywhere, like sheep among the wolves.

oracle 1 reply 61
I have had the opposite experience. The younger kids are multiplying in first grade, they have cut gym to weekly, limit recess, and expect them to sit like drones for 6 hour days or medicate them until they do(I was a school nurse to about 300, passing out 130 Ritalin a day in 1999). In high school, papers posted read like IM messages, swearing is allowed in creative writing(real creative), and most kids arfe half dressed in pj bottoms, tanks, ripped pants. Such preparation for life.

reply2oracle1/greyhawk/Massappeal/steven
The facts are correct about America's decline in international
comparisons, but these tests do not reflect an American decline
(actually NAEP shows a slight improvement and so do most of these
tests as does IQ), but rather improvement everywhere else. See NCES
for proof of this.

Almost every state now requires teachers to have a degree in their
field and I am not talking about education. So contrary to Massappeal's
assertion most teachers have to be doubly certified both in a field -
bachelor's degree worth of credits and education - the equivalent of
a bachelor's degree worth of credits (30-39). I cannot speak for OK
though, there state DOE might have different requirements. Also more
states have tests for teachers entering the field that did not exist 10
years ago. You want to teach reading in MA? be prepared to pass
four tests - 1 in general ed (reading, writing), 1 in el. ed. (basic
content and classroom practices), and 2 in aspects of reading.

fyi - college instructors are not known for being good teachers or
using best methods. We might want to train k-12 teachers like
college teachers are trained but we surely don't want most k-12
teachers teaching like them.

stephen, just sounds ignorant of what is happening around him
although I can't speak for his specific state or circumstances. But
the belief that history is becoming just the teaching belies the fact
that nearly every state in the last 10 years has created standards
that teach all of US history - before this there were only local
standards and several of these local standards were not written
down. So it is actually the opposite of what he thinks.

I would suggest Stephen and other teachers and all concerned US
citizens read "Teachers and the Uncertain American Future," a
report put out by the college board for what I think is the best plan
to get better teachers into classrooms and get rid of others who are
not so good.

Do As I Say -- Not As I Do!!!!
Sidwell Friends, a school that carefully conforms its curricula to its benefactors, the parents, once again is rewarded for doing so.

Public Schools also carefully conform their curricula to their benefactors: Unions and the education industry.

Schools that compete for parent-controlled-funds seem to be schools of choice for rich folk. However, that same rich folk seem to go out of their way to insure that everyone else gets hand-me-downs.

Unless one argues that the difference between intelligent and dumb is money, then why not let the poor also dictate the curricula like their rich cousins are allowed to do?

Teachers and Unions are no more qualified to dictate curricula than engineers are qualified to dictate what to make.

Certainly, citizens may not know how to make cars, but they are the best arbitors of which cars to buy. By the same token, parents may not know how to teach, but they are the best arbitors as to what to teach. It seems that Obama knows what is best for his kids, but thinks you're not so smart.

To America, From Obama: Do As I Say, Not As I Do --- I know What is Best For Your Kids, Not You.

How public school curriculums are made
Same way as sausages. lol.

A reply to Mac:

"Sidwell Friends, a school that carefully conforms its curricula to its benefactors, the parents, once again is rewarded for doing so."

Perhaps, but you don't believe that all thousand plus parents at
Sidwell agree on every aspect of the curriculum, do you?

"Public Schools also carefully conform their curricula to their benefactors: Unions and the education industry."

Actually to the citizens through school boards and the state legislatures. There are also some federal laws or statutes that must be followed like Title I, Title IX, Citizens with Disabilities Act, etc., etc.
Surely the unions are an interest group that pressures both to
conform the way they would like just as the Catholic church
has long pushed for vouchers. Democracy is messy.
I do not necessarily understand why you would not want to know
what a teacher(s) or their union thinks is best - since the teachers
have the most experience in the classroom!

"Schools that compete for parent-controlled-funds seem to be schools of choice for rich folk. However, that same rich folk seem to go out of their way to insure that everyone else gets hand-me-downs."

Say what? Look at the richest towns or districts in your state - do
they have some of the best public schools? I would bet yes. In MA
nearly all of the top districts (most districts in MA are 1 or 2 towns)
are the wealthiest. And I am talking about public schooling. This
argument does not hold up unless you can show many poor districts
in wealthy areas. It is more common for wealthy people in poorer
districts in MA - this does happen - to send their kids to private
schools.



how public school curriculums are made
"Unless one argues that the difference between intelligent and dumb is money, then why not let the poor also dictate the curricula like their rich cousins are allowed to do?"

They do. See how curriculums are made above.

"Teachers and Unions are no more qualified to dictate curricula than engineers are qualified to dictate what to make."

Well, I hope engineers have a say on public building projects like
teachers and their unions speak out on public education. Doctors
certainly speak out on public health issues, etc., etc.

"Certainly, citizens may not know how to make cars, but they are the best arbitors of which cars to buy. By the same token, parents may not know how to teach, but they are the best arbitors as to what to teach. It seems that Obama knows what is best for his kids, but thinks you're not so smart."

Again, see above at how decisions are made in your district.

"To America, From Obama: Do As I Say, Not As I Do --- I know What is Best For Your Kids, Not You."

You have as much right to try and get your kids into Sidwell as the
Obamas. Have you tried?

And finally don't feel bad because as mentioned before when comparing apples to apples public schools are doing just as good
a job as private schools:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006461
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard...es/2006461.asp

And here:
http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=document.showDoc umentByID&nodeID=1&DocumentID=226

Of course these reports are not arguing that every public school is
the equal of every private school, but that, in general, your child
should get the same basic education at either.


Col. Billy Mitchell - you spoke the
truth in your earlier post! The Democrats do NOT want educated citizens!!!! We need look no further than the interviews conducted of Obama supporters who knew NOTHING about the various Congressional leaders - who knew NOTHING about what the man actually stood for - but who knew EVERYTHING about the mainstream media gossip with regard to Sarah Palin!

My husband made a comment earlier today that so many of today's young people have lost all initiative - the desire to find out how something works - the desire to create - they have become so used to 'being entertained/informed by' sitting in front of a tv or holding an electronic game that they have lost the ability to think for themselves - to be curious.

A good first start for education would be to disband the federal Dept of Education entirely and return the responsibility of educating our children to the states. The NEA is one of the main reasons our children are failing. We must return to the principles upon which our country was founded - not some socialistic 'capture the minds of the children and they will be ours!'

reply to: everyonesfact
You speak of the wealth of school districts and correlation to school performance results... it turns out that intellect correlates highly with income, and intellect is substantially genetic. Ergo, it should not surprise that schools do better where there are more well-to-do families/students.

The social engineering apologists have to look for other excuses, so they bray that inner city type schools are "underfunded."

But the correlation between $ spent and results is very low-- some of the top performing schools in America in the Midwest have low per capita expenditures compared to, say, D.C. schools, but they have excellent results (versus egregious) because they have more innately able students... their teachers do not have to spend the day trying to prevent fights and other class disruptions.

The inconvenient truths about public education give lie to teacher union and other bureaucratic/statist LCD drivel.

2nd reply to: everyonesfacts
I checked out a couple of your reference sites, both from the U.S. Dept. of Education... a couple of observations--

First, one site did not come up. Second, the site which did was garbled with bureaucratic babble which made no clear point. Third, by definition anything from the Dept. of "Education" is suspect prima facie... I must echo earlier sentiments that it has CAUSED many of the problems in public education. Like any bureaucracy, its purpose is self-perpetuation and self-aggrandizement.

Someone noted here that about 1/3 of those who teach in public schools send THEIR children to private schools, as do 2 of our immediate neighbors-- res ipsa loquitur.

It DOES speak volumes that ObaMessiah's girls are going to Sidwell Friends-- just like Revrund Jessuh's did and the rest of the liberal "elites." Social engineering and public education is fine for YOUR children!

liberal districts vs. con districts
a reply to col. mitchell and Cape Conservative

again demographics go against your arguments.
Col. Mitchell argued conservative towns have better schools than
liberal ones.

In MA some of the most liberal towns and certainly most liberal when
it comes to spending money on public education, for instance in PA:

the liberal Philly suburbs overwhelmingly voted for Obama
This is where most of the best public schools in PA are located.

In MA - look at Lexington, Concord, Newton, Brookline, etc. etc.
Compare these to the more conservative western parts of the state.
Or compare the liberal towns of MA 4th District (Barney Frank's) to
the more conservative ones. Nuff said.

This is an argument based on something you made up.
The only areas that would correlate to your argument are inner cities.
And
If you can show me some conservative inner cities that have like
demographics to liberal ones we could see a good case for your
assertion.

For my sake, I don't think people's political ideology has much to do
with their schooling. The Soviets had a great education system until
they broke up and Chinese students seem to be doing well so what's
your point again?



Teachers Are The Engineers Of Education
everyonesfacts offers, "I do not necessarily understand why you would not want to know
what a teacher(s) or their union thinks is best - since the teachers have the most experience in the classroom!"

Teachers know best how to teach, not what is best to teach. What is taught is the curriculum. Parents are the best arbitors of what to teach, not teachers.

Public School curricula are driven by Teachers, Unions and Bureaucrats. Private school curricula are driven by what attracts the most parental controlled funds.

In the same way that you would not have an engineer dictate to you what to drive or consume, it is silly to accept such dictation from a teacher.

Of course, if you are an elitist, you would never accept having to conform to the demands made by the Consumers of your goods.

suburban schools vs. city schools
I would argue the reason for high per pupil costs in urban schools
are for two reasons - 1) special education and similar services that
are disproportionate to suburban schools. 2) larger bureaucracy -
some of this is necessary - see #1

I do not agree with the assertion that intelligence is genetic, but
I do agree that it usually reflects the parents educational background / income level - this is based on nurture not nature. If one were
to switch all the kids born in Scarsdale, NY in a particular year and
give them to parents in Bed-Stuy and vice versa you would see my
point. This has not been done, but adoption results have proven
this. Of course, infants and the mothers have to be healthy.

"But the correlation between $ spent and results is very low-- some of the top performing schools in America in the Midwest have low per capita expenditures compared to, say, D.C. schools, but they have excellent results (versus egregious) because they have more innately able students... their teachers do not have to spend the day trying to prevent fights and other class disruptions."

Bad comparisons. The best districts in say greater Chicago or
greater Cincinnati are the higher per student schools. I am sure
there are exceptions. Same for here in MA. I would be interested in
seeing the schools you are writing about and then comparing them to
neighboring towns. Comparing a suburb to a city school tells us
something, but not imo what you are asserting. See my argument
above for why city schools usually cost more.


Shadow Government
This unseen government started destroying the schools decades ago. It really went into gear when the Feds got control.

There was a plan to dumb down the schools and it has worked beautifully. Brainwashing 101 is a success. The left was at work.

History books have been rewritten. It's just a social experiment now. Government schools are now operated as a Democrat Training Center.

Children are writing letters and singing songs to Comrade Obama. It is a sad commentary,but true.

Parents Should Pick Topics, Not Teachers
everyone'sfacts offers, "I hope engineers have a say on public building projects like teachers and their unions speak out on public education. Doctors certainly speak out on public health issues, etc., etc."

An engineer makes what is dictated by the Consumer. An engineer that makes a bridge when being commissioned to make a building is a waste. Doctors that treat ailments as they wish instead of ailments as their patients wish are a waste. Of course, in the new social order, we will need to get used to both of these examples.

By the same token, teachers that teach curricula as they think best instead of curricula as the parents think best are a waste.

Again, with the new social order, as USSR before us, the teachers, doctors, engineers and bureaucrats will get more power to dictate all things.

Parents Are The Arbitors Of Curricula
everyonesfacts offers as to how Public School curricula are developed, "Actually to the citizens through school boards and the state legislatures. There are also some federal laws or statutes that must be followed like Title I, Title IX, Citizens with Disabilities Act, etc., etc."

Now, there's a cluster mess!

How about this, open your doors and see how much consumer dollars you attract? Or, is that too easily manipulated by the ignorant masses for you?

Setting standards are fine. That happens in every industry. However, I think the ignorant masses are pretty smart. If you give parents vouchers to spend at any school, public or private, there will be a paradigm shift in how the curricula are developed.

The ignorant masses figured out how to pick and choose from Pintos to the modern car without engineers telling what to buy. Heck, if the engineers were in charge, we still would be buying Pintos.

We can do the same with education. All we have to do is take it out of the hands of the engineers and give it parents, where it belongs.

cutting through the mumbo-jumbo
"the site was garbled with bureaucratic babble which made no clear point."

Let me help, then when comparing like students at grade 4
public schools do "significantly" better at math and there is no
significant difference between public and private in reading.

At grade 8 private schools scored "significantly" better in reading
with no significant difference in math.

I think if you look at the results you will find that the significant
differences were not that much.

Oh, and don't send your kid to a conservative Christian private
school for readin', writin', and 'rithmetic.

The other study is clear:
"This study, based on an analysis of the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988-2000, finds that, once family background characteristics are taken into account, low-income students attending public urban high schools generally performed as well academically as students attending private high schools. The study also found that students attending traditional public high schools were as likely to attend college as those attending private high schools. In addition, the report also finds that young adults who had attended any type of private high school were no more likely to enjoy job satisfaction or to be engaged in civic activities at age 26 than those who had attended traditional public high schools."

public v. private (reports continued)
"Third, by definition anything from the Dept. of "Education" is suspect prima facie... I must echo earlier sentiments that it has CAUSED many of the problems in public education. Like any bureaucracy, its purpose is self-perpetuation and self-aggrandizement."

What would you use instead for reports on education - I would prefer
not to go on your or my feelings. Something else I'm all ears.
I am not defending the DOE but find their reports to be matter of
fact.
And the report in question was done under GBII and Spellings
and they were sure they would get different results, hence why
many don't know about it. They released it during the holidays
and tried to make no public comment on it.

"Someone noted here that about 1/3 of those who teach in public schools send THEIR children to private schools, as do 2 of our immediate neighbors-- res ipsa loquitur. "

It is true that teachers send their kids to private schools at a higher
rate than average, but teachers are less likely to send their kids to
private schools as people from the same socio-economic status.
I would like to see proof of the 33%.

See here: http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/klan9904.htm

"It DOES speak volumes that ObaMessiah's girls are going to Sidwell Friends-- just like Revrund Jessuh's did and the rest of the liberal "elites." Social engineering and public education is fine for YOUR children!"

As I like to say you can be for good private schools and good public
schools they are not mutually exclusive nor a zero sum game.
There is social engineering at almost all schools - maybe not
Summerhill

Customer Satisfaction Arbitrates Quality
everyonesfacts offers, "Of course these reports are not arguing that every public school is
the equal of every private school, but that, in general, your child should get the same basic education at either."

What a Bureaucrat! If that is so, how on earth does a private school stay in business?

Does Consumer satisfaction ever enter your mind? Private Schools exist solely on the good will of parents -- the gold standard of quality.

The standard of excellence should not be ".. same basic education ...". It should be Consumer good will. And, the best method of determining good will is the simple, volunatary exchange of money from the Consumers hands directly to the supplier. It works every time.

Vouchers will do just that.

how public school curriculums are made
everyonesfacts offers, "I do not necessarily understand why you would not want to know
what a teacher(s) or their union thinks is best - since the teachers have the most experience in the classroom!"

mac replies: "Teachers know best how to teach, not what is best to teach. What is taught is the curriculum. Parents are the best arbitors of what to teach, not teachers."

I did not disagree with that as my offering above does not contradict
what you wrote. Fyi - teachers and union officials are sometimes
parents too.

"Public School curricula are driven by Teachers, Unions and Bureaucrats. Private school curricula are driven by what attracts the most parental controlled funds."

Having attended both and knowing both curriculums what do you
see as the major differences? Usually they are virtually the same
except for religion, maybe health class. Any others?

The belief that teachers are the sole arbitors of curriculum is wrong
and not worth arguing about.

"Of course, if you are an elitist, you would never accept having to conform to the demands made by the Consumers of your goods."

I hope in our new curriculum we can know what the meaning of elite
is. LeBron James seems to be an elitist when it comes to basketball.
If you look at my post I am merely suggesting it makes sense that
teachers have a say in curriculum matters. They might be able to
say if kids are ready for topics when they are, etc., etc. This should
complement parents (and teachers are some of these parents)



What makes a good education?/Mod Mark
I am wondering what parents mean when they say they have an excellent school system or curriculum no matter who educates their children or where.

What specific criteria are you using?

How familiar are you with the curriculum and texts your children are using in each subject? How do that curriculum and those texts compare with the others available?

What method of teaching/pedagogy is being used and why do you prefer it to others that are available?

What worldview is being taught and why do you like that one over others?

As a producer of education, I have to do this all the time and I have fairly strong preferences, so I am curious what the consumer of education point of view is.

For example, I am opposed to "unschooling by default" where all teaching is driven by the interest and motivation of the child which sounds like the situation Mod Mark is observing.

I am not opposed to "unschooling by design" for the parent who actually systematically teaches all core subjects using real life hands on examples and projects all day long year after year. It is very time consuming and labor intensive.

I prefer a mix of mentor model and Trivium model forms of Classical education. The Mentor model is good for customizing the aspects of education that are unique to each individual child, while the Trivium model is great for systematic core learning of subject matter every child needs.

OOps!
Make that, "How does that curriculum and those texts.."

how public school curriculums are made
everyone'sfacts offers, "I hope engineers have a say on public building projects like teachers and their unions speak out on public education. Doctors certainly speak out on public health issues, etc., etc."

Mac writes: "An engineer makes what is dictated by the Consumer. An engineer that makes a bridge when being commissioned to make a building is a waste. Doctors that treat ailments as they wish instead of ailments as their patients wish are a waste. Of course, in the new social order, we will need to get used to both of these examples."

You miss my point. I am talking about public projects and having
the say of "experts" - engineers at a public hearing of how to build
the new courthouse, for instance. Your argument does not address
what I wrote. You speak of private contracts and appointments of
which I do not disagree.

Mac writes: "By the same token, teachers that teach curricula as they think best instead of curricula as the parents think best are a waste."

This does not happen - see your state standards. If you don't like
them contact your state rep and senator.

Mac writes: "Again, with the new social order, as USSR before us, the teachers, doctors, engineers and bureaucrats will get more power to dictate all things."

What new social order?



how public school curriculums are made
everyonesfacts offers as to how Public School curricula are developed, "Actually to the citizens through school boards and the state legislatures. There are also some federal laws or statutes that must be followed like Title I, Title IX, Citizens with Disabilities Act, etc., etc."

mac writes: "Now, there's a cluster mess!"

Perhaps, won't disagree with you on that one.

mac writes:"How about this, open your doors and see how much consumer dollars you attract? Or, is that too easily manipulated by the ignorant masses for you?"

This is how it operates already. You don't like public schools take
your $, as my parents sometimes did, elsewhere. You don't like
public transit, drive.

mac writes: "Setting standards are fine. That happens in every industry. However, I think the ignorant masses are pretty smart. If you give parents vouchers to spend at any school, public or private, there will be a paradigm shift in how the curricula are developed."

Actually, parents imo have more of a say in public education
curricula. If you can give examples of parents at private schools
say Sidwell or Philips Andover I would know where you are coming
from better. I do not know of this at Catholic schools either. Most
private schools I know, and many of the best are in short driving
distance, do what they like - you can like it or lump it. Catholic
schools have virtually the same curriculum as public schools as I
wrote earlier.

Who are the "ignorant masses"? I do not feel this way, poor assumption.



how public school curriculums are made
"The ignorant masses figured out how to pick and choose from Pintos to the modern car without engineers telling what to buy. Heck, if the engineers were in charge, we still would be buying Pintos."

This comment is off the mark. Didn't engineers make the cars that
replaced the Pinto?

"We can do the same with education. All we have to do is take it out of the hands of the engineers and give it parents, where it belongs."

It is already there. If a majority of parents feel as you do
(spoiler alert: they don't) legislatures and school boards will change
their curriculums.



Here imo is what most hs curriculums entail:
4 years ELA/English/literature
3-4 years history
3 years science
3-4 years foreign language
4 years math
2-4 years phys. ed/health
electives (mainly technology) mostly in junior and senior year except music and art which can be all 4 years.

I bet Sidwell, Philips Andover, Catholic schools, and most private
schools try to deliver a similar curriculum

Fix The Paradigm - Fix The Problem
everyonesfacts offers, "Having attended both (private and Public Schools) and knowing both curriculums what do you see as the major differences? Usually they are virtually the same
except for religion, maybe health class. Any others?"

The major difference between Public and Private schools is the stardards by which they are rewarded. Public schools are rewarded for their ability to attact Government Funds. Private schools are rewarded for Customer satisfaction.

The difference in paradigm is dramatic.

Issuing Vouchers would put Public and Private schools on equal footing -- Customer First.

Do Not Confuse Message With Messenger
everyonesfacts asks, "Didn't engineers make the cars that replaced the Pinto?"

Not by choice. They were just the messengers, the Consumer dictated the message.

Engineers had to succumb to Consumer good will. The Consumer was the master, not the other way around.

Private schools adapt to Consumer good will. Public Schools do not even measure Consumer good will, much less adapt to it.

The paradigm difference is profound!

public v. private (a reply)
everyonesfacts offers, "Of course these reports are not arguing that every public school is
the equal of every private school, but that, in general, your child should get the same basic education at either."

Mac writes: "What a Bureaucrat! If that is so, how on earth does a private school stay in business?"

I hope you could guess that on your own.
1) some are better
2) on average private schools deliver a better education than public
schools - but, as I said, when similar students are compared they
are virtually the same. So I would say by reputation of being better.
3) religion or other belief
4) other reason - networking - see #1 - much wealthier kids on
average attend private schools at least as tested, and for sure at the
best private schools - Sidwell, Phillips, Groton, Governors, etc., etc.

"Does Consumer satisfaction ever enter your mind? Private Schools exist solely on the good will of parents -- the gold standard of quality."

Then why have they not gotten a larger or growing percentage of
consumers?
About 88% of students attend public schools now, same as 20 or
50 years ago.
The one thing that does back up your claim is not the choice of
private, but the choice to homeschool which has risen from roughly
0% thirty years ago to 1% and growing.

"The standard of excellence should not be ".. same basic education ...". It should be Consumer good will. And, the best method of determining good will is the simple, volunatary exchange of money from the Consumers hands directly to the supplier. It works every time."

Actually state legislatures have made education a positive right so
this falls outside your framework.
Your idea holds up when we compare private school to private school.
For instance, the Obamas picked this school over others in the D.C.
area.

"Vouchers will do just that."

They might. I remain a proponent of public school choice as I noted
earlier.

Public Schools Are Political Pawns
everyonesfacts offers, "If a majority of parents feel as you do (spoiler alert: they don't) legislatures and school boards will change their curriculums."

I bet your determination of whether parents feel like me has more to do with some intellectual analysis than simple Consumer Satisfaction.

Parents should not have to fix schools bureaucratically. Imagine fixing the auto industry like that. Consumers don't have time to run everything. Most are too busy working their own jobs, let alone the schools' jobs.

Why can't they just pick and choose and move their money accordingly?

Just change the paradigm of how schools get paid, from taxed dollars given anonymously, to vouchered dollars given to them by Consumer Good Will. The nexus of who to please will move quickly to the Parents, where it belongs.

Mod Mark @ 11:40am 1/10/09
Your estimate of $8000/year for my education is twice the actual amount. According to the Heritage Foundation, the average cost per student in 1970 was $4,060. See

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Education/bg2125.cfm

I graduated high school in 1974, so it was lower than that for most of my education. So, I'm still paying in way more than my education cost, even with interest.

onPintos,(my 1stcarwasa MercuryBobcat!)
"Public schools are rewarded for their ability to attact Government Funds. Private schools are rewarded for Customer satisfaction."

Actually, no.
If no students choose to attend any of a districts schools and rather
attend private schools or are homeschooled - they will get no $.
If the population of a town goes down - usually for economic
reasons the $ in the school will go down.
It is too difficult to generalize about public school funding since
there are at least 50 systems of doing it. The best private schools
cost more than public education. I am from MA I know of what I
speak.

"The difference in paradigm is dramatic."

Actually no.
If there is an exodus out of a public school system say in Boston
after busing the system has less $ to spend - same principle.

"Issuing Vouchers would put Public and Private schools on equal footing -- Customer 1st."

So would public school choice without bringing other issues into
it - giving public / tax $ to the Papists or the Madrasa curriculum, or Summerhill, etc., etc.
etc. etc

everyonesfacts asks, "Didn't engineers make the cars that replaced the Pinto?"

Mac writes: "Not by choice. They were just the messengers, the Consumer dictated the message."

Ummm, was the Pinto the only choice, ever?
Even Ford had several other cars, never mind GM, etc., etc.
Not sure these are equivalent to public education where imo it is
more important what the kids go home to than what is at the school.
See Asian performance and levels of support when it comes to
education.


Customer Satisfaction Is Not A Discard
everyonesfacts offers as to a standard for educational excellence being Customer Satisfaction, "Actually state legislatures have made education a positive right so this falls outside your framework."

"positive right" does not discard Customer Satisfaction as a standard of excellence. That only means that a school is a requirement. Customer Satisfaction can still be used as a very powerful measure of success.

Vouchers lead the way for that.

public v. private (a reply)
mac writes: "Engineers had to succumb to Consumer good will. The Consumer was the master, not the other way around
Private schools adapt to Consumer good will. Public Schools do not even measure Consumer good will, much less adapt to it.
The paradigm difference is profound!"

Again see the %s and I am for public school choice.

mac writes: "I bet your determination of whether parents feel like me has more to do with some intellectual analysis than simple Consumer Satisfaction."

Actually the survey on attitudes of parents says this every year.
In general, parents like their local school but are less favorable of
schools in general. This I leave you to find on your own.

Mac says: "Parents should not have to fix schools bureaucratically."

how do they fix the private schools then by osmosis?

"Why can't they just pick and choose and move their money accordingly?"

Again, I am for public school choice.

"Just change the paradigm of how schools get paid, from taxed dollars given anonymously, to vouchered dollars given to them by Consumer Good Will. The nexus of who to please will move quickly to the Parents, where it belongs."

It is the taxpayers $ not just the parents.
So as a taxpayer I might not be wild about supporting your Summerhill experience, your madrasa, or your Liberty U. HS.
And as I said in my 1st post public $ comes with strings as it should.

public school choice instead of vouchers
same idea without the problems with vouchers as mentioned earlier.

check back on Monday
Thanks to TH's wonderful servers I can no longer read all the replies on
my Mac Mac so I will check back on Monday.

about homeschooling

The NEA opposes homeschooling because it makes the poor results of public schools, at GREAT taxpayer expense, so glaring. The typical homeschooler makes in the 85th percentile on those standardized tests where the scores have generally eroded since the 60's. We spend $8-10k per capita on public schooling for too often underwhelming results... and there is LITTLE correlation between the magnitude of spending and measured results.

Notwithstanding fatuous suggestions that homeschoolers will lack social skills, quite the contrary, they actually excel in team player interpersonal relations, and tend toward leadership positions when they go to college or segue to "regular school." Actually, homeschoolers participate in many group activities among themselves and others.

The NEA likes to challenge the qualifications of homeschool parent teachers, but the relative results make that challenge silly and presumptuous prima facie. Parents teaching their children, by definition, have exemplary dedication to their welfare... and "Education" degrees are too often a non sequitur farce.

teachers' unions

There is only one area where unions have not waned in influence in recent years-- unions of those working for government who can force the taxpayer to eat their increased costs. Consider teachers, postal workers, and bureaucrats... are you impressed with the service you receive from ANY of these "public servants?"

Postal worker clerks make exactly twice what their counterparts do working for the competing private companies... but ask yourself this-- if it is REALLY important to get it there on time, would YOU rely on the U.S. postal service?!

Teachers whine and bray perpetually about being "underpaid professionals." Yet if you look at the average teacher salary, and especially if you factor in the true qualifications, generous benefits, time off, and job security versus other options, teaching starts to look pretty darned attractive!

And what of this tripe about you cannot truly test a teacher with written competency tests... how then can THEY presume to test your child's competency? And WHY should someone who purports to teach students in H.S. not have to pass 8th grade equivalency tests with flying colors?

a reprise of a telling post
FairnessMan Location: NJ

Date: Jul 30, 2008 - 12:48 AM EST

Since 1993…
I have been studying the privileged, parasite class, the teachers. Little naïve me was complaining to a neighbor about how property taxes were rising so fast here in a town in the public worker's magic kingdom of NJ. He started telling me about teachers' salaries. I didn't believe the numbers he talked about, so I went down to the local board of non-education.

I found that, again in 1993, one third of the "educators" were ripping off $64,000 per year with another large percentage right behind them. Naturally the number is now over $100K per year for the world's best part-time job.

Do the math folks-- that's $100+ per hour based on their part-time status PLUS a benefit and pension package that would make many mid-level executives of large companies take notice. That's why I pay $8900.00 taxes on a modest three bedroom split and I expect a hefty increase next month.

I have tangled butts with many of them and they are adamant, greedy, ungrateful, militant virtual thugs. With a five hour day and sixteen weeks off every year, they try to tell me that they have a hard job. I tell them to tell that B.S. to the soccer moms (that they and/or they predecessors educated) with fall temperature IQ's.

Yes Virginia, teaching is the hardest job in the world except for every other job!

No problems with Vouchers

All the possible problems reported with vouchers are not really problems. They are canards use as distractions.

Vouchers would relieve overcrowded schools, allow more resources for those choosing to remain in public school, and would provide current teachers more carreer opportunities by allowing alternative employment opportunities.

If a failed school district is currently paying $12,000 a year per student to educate their students and provided a $5,000 voucher for parents to go to an alternative school, that would result in $7,000 left over for the school to spend on children who remain behind. Its a win-win.

everyonesfacts @ 8:05pm
You said: "It is the taxpayers $ not just the parents. So as a taxpayer I might not be wild about supporting your Summerhill experience, your madrasa, or your Liberty U. HS.
And as I said in my 1st post public $ comes with strings as it should."

I agree with you! Even though I am a conservative Christian and a homeschooler, I think vouchers are a mistake. If they are given directly to the private school, then they bring government control with them. If they are given directly to the parent, then people with differing beliefs are made to pay for my children to be educated in a parochial school.

My solution is separation of state and school. Shut down the public school system completely. Or at the very least, let parents opt out of paying property taxes for public schools they don't use.

Capitalism, Mod Mark
As radical as it sounds, I believe it is the responsibility of parents to provide for their childrens' education. If they don't want to or are not able to homeschool, they can send their children to private school. Lower taxes would help with the tuition. Why wouldn't market forces apply to private schools as well as other businesses? More private schools would be established because there would no longer be a government monopoly on education. That would drive the price of tuition down as private schools would be then be competing with each other and would find ways to give the same service at lower rates.

Col. Billy
I'm not sure about this, but I think the schools get their money based on how many students are enrolled. So, if you take your child out they will not get that $12,000. At least that is what public school administrators tell us homeschoolers as an objection to what we are doing.

Obama and School choice
Obama would like all of America's children (except his) to be in government schools. All the better to turn them into little cookie-cutter socialists.
Every family needs to do all they can to get their children out of government school before it's too late for their children and for America.

Mod Mark
Hope you enjoyed your game-Super Bowl Sunday is the extent of my involvement and at that DH and my BFF's spouse watch the game while BFF and I visit and make sure there's enough food, LOL!

Anyway Andrea is absolutely right. Let parents decide where, how and what their kids will learn. Trust me, nobody wants his kid to be a moron; as mentioned earlier, trade schools will make a huge comeback to accomodate those students who aren't so academically minded. Someone has to know how to build/wire/plumb a house, do concrete work, or repair the family automobile.

Andrea-My dearest friend works for our school district and is responsible for submitting the annual head count-no small task believe me. Dollars are indeed allocated based upon student enrollment; if the kids aren't there, neither is the money. Question is, who gets the money that would otherwise go to the students? It sure doesn't come back to us taxpayers.


Andrea from WI

What ths school Adms are telling you is only partly true.

A very very small percentage of their total money comes from the Federal Government is based on how many students attend.

A couple thousand is provided by the state and that may or may not be based upon number of students.

But the bulk of school funding for most communities comes from local property and sales taxes and that is not based upon population.

So lets say your school district is paying $12,000 per student per year. Because you Home school your district is losing $1,000 from the Federal Government and $3,000 from the State.
But they are still getting $8,000 from local taxes. They are still way ahead of the game.

Because your child is not attending school, They now have $8,000 to spend on the other kids that are attending school.

Economic factors like "economy of scale" etc etc will factor in as to how much benefit they will receive but its clear they will do fine with school vouchers.

Puleeze
"spending doesn’t equate to success"

It does if "success" is defined as putting more money into the coffers of the NEA, to be regurgitated later as Democratic campaign contributions and union member votes.

Conservatives constantly measure the world based on rational priorities and attempt to aim factual arguments at leftists who could care less. This fight isn't about better education for all, and it never has been. It's about money, political power and unions. If millions can be indoctrinated and graduated (or dropped) from poor schools without the ability to think beyond "progressive" slogans, so much the better for Dems. ACORN will bus them to the polls and tell them which buttons to push. That's modern democracy at work.

All schools should be privatized
Conservatives at the state and local level should be pushing to get all public schools sold to the highest bidder, and eventually, parents should have to pay the cost of their kids' education, not the taxpayers. There is a model out there for this. There should be no public schools. What are social conservatives doing these days except whining about Jesus-in-a-manger not being displayed in the public square? Privatized schooling should be issue #1 for social conservatives.

Mod Mark
Okay, you've made your point that I should owe a lot of money for my public school education. Here's another objection: Who pays for all those children of non-property owners to go to school? That's right, you and I, without any choice in the matter. Not exactly fair. If we must continue this government monopoly on education, why not finance it with a sales tax? Then everyone who takes advantage of the government schools would be contributing to fund them.

Again, you give an extreme example to oppose my idea of separation of school and state, but I'll bite. If the child of a crack addict manages to make it through labor/delivery and subsequent withdrawal unscathed, he/she could become a charity case for private schools. Non-profits could get a tax write off for educating such children. Large corporations and wealthy families that are looking to donate money could fund scholarships for indigent children. Churches that have poor member families can assist with tuition to parochial school. There is always a way, if we are creative and are not already being taxed to the hilt for government programs that don't work.

But, we ought not to decide policy on the exceptions. Most parents are able to teach reading, writing and arithmetic. It doesn't take a genius. I've done it five times and my master's degree is in nursing not education. There are hundreds of curricula available now to deal with every contingency in homeschooling. Some have detailed parent/teacher guides that tell the parent exactly what to say when teaching the child.



Wendy
Amen! I agree with your entire post.

Disccussion highlights need for Voucher

This whole discussion really hightlights the need for education vouchers.

One size does not fit all. Not public schools, not private schools, cyber schools, or homeschooling. All work very well went managed well.

Freedom means we get to choose which is best for our particular circumstances. The more options for parents/taxpayers the better.

#1 son might do well in public school but #2 son might do better in private school while #3 son might do best at homeschooling. Again one size does not fit all.

Vouchers give the taxpayers and parent the most options.

Why should all taxpayers support the education? Because all taxpayers benefit from an educated population. From nurses, to engineers who design your highways, refrigerators, and household goods. To the farmer, sales cleark, and waitress. We all benefit from a well educated population. Should non-parents pay the same as parents? Maybe not. But thats not an insurmountable problem with a combination of Sales tax and property taxes.

Wendy of 5:50
You cut to the chase. Public schools were a good idea at the time, and truancy laws served a positive purpose. Since our economy was agrarian, many farmers saw no reason for book learning. Things have changed. The system itself, instead of being small community schools where the same teacher taught the same children usually for their entire career, has become a bloated bureaucracy with most decisions made by people who have never been in a classroom. Vouchers and parent choice is the way to go.

Oops
I meant for-profit schools could get a tax write off.

Best form of birth control
1.Why should the tax payers pay the union dues that go to the Democratic Party?

2.Home school or tuition would reduce the amount of children down to the ones the parents can afford to send to school or are willing to home school.

3.The tax payers are forced to have only the children they can afford because the taxes on our homes and labor to support the standing army, federal camp followers, agents and agencies.

4.The tax payers are having less kids while the Indians not taxed are having more children then they can afford.

5.The only good news is the children of the illegal aliens will have to pay off the debt in the future. Lol

Equal Educational Opportunity
To fix our broken educational system, we need to return control to parents, as it should be in a free society. This requires federal legislation that follows the example of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which mandates equal opportunity in housing, employment and public accomodation - excluding education. We need to extend this to education with sponsorship and passage of the Civil Rights Act for Equal Educational Opportunity. This legislation would mandate equitable funding for children in nonpublic schools, while respecting the liberty of schools in hiring and provision of services. In accordance with the 10th Amendment, academic standards and the means of funding would be left to the states. If you agree, please express your opinion to President-elect Barack Obama at http://www.change.gov.

Israel
The problem is that the government will not relinquish control over schools as long as it is charge of the money. Wendy is right, all schools need to be privatized. Get the government out of education altogether!

Blue Milk
With one in seven Americans having the ability to read, the Democrats should be happy as hell. What better way to develop an American Taliban of idiots who worship the Chicago slicksters and their fawning press. The public education system will change when cows give blue milk.

Mod Mark
"They still pay property tax if a renter, it is just added to the rent while the owner pays property tax."

That's true for most, but thanks to section 8 and other tax-funded housing programs indigent tenants don't pay much rent. So, again I am paying. Moreover, all of my five children will be paying property taxes for a system they never used.

"My son is taking physics, chemistry, robotics and in a couple months, calculus. I am an engineer but it has been a long time since I solve a 2nd order derivative."

There are lots of ways to make sure your children get these kinds of courses if they want them: tutoring, online courses, community college. Parents often form co-ops to teach or hire in teachers for these specialized courses.

On the other hand, in 2005, only 35% of high school graduates in our public schools tested proficient in reading; so the "professionals" are not doing a very good job. When my daughter was tested in third grade, she had a reading level above 7th grade. They just stopped testing her at that level since she was so far above expectations.

"Concerning your charity comments, we really should not have to depend on charity. In our area, 1/3 of the Catholic schools closed last year so they are hurting these days."

This is not surprising--the government has a monopoly on education! And with the ridiculously high property taxes and other taxes you have there in NY, it's no wonder that few families can afford to pay for parochial education these days. If the working citizens weren't taxed so heavily in this country, they would much more amenable to giving to charity.

underdog
"With one in seven Americans having the ability to read"

**

Where are you getting your figures?

qhoratius
"Why is education considered a national issue? Why do we allow national politicians to tell us what they are going to do/not do about education? "

**
Has our interest in an educated population
degenerated this far? Our forefathers would
hang their heads in shame and despair if hearing
this sort of sentiment.

Say No to IBO
Obummer and Arne Duncecap will try and do to American schools what they did to Chicago public schools - waste taxpayer's money on a globalist educational program tied to the UN - the IB. Since Obummer, Duncecap and Ayers worked on the Annenberg Challenge to provide initial funding to an IB MYP program in 1997, IB schools have grown to 25 in the city of Chicago with NO SIGN OF IMPROVEMENT in 10 years. Learn the facts, please visit http://www.truthaboutib.com

reply to oracle1's post
The NEA does oppose homeschooling on the basis of
what they consider prerequisites for the ability to teach –
degree in field and education etc. etc.
I am opposed to their stance on this.
Nor should we be surprised that homeschoolers on average
do better than public or private schoolers – they are tutored
which is more personal and more accountable and when
a parent’s lost income is taken into account more expensive
than either.

Unions have remained strong in the public sector because they
are protected and union members are not fired for their activities
or for “organizing” as is standard operating practice in the private
sector.
I am impressed by the service of the postal service (and I worked in
shipping for several years! UPS and Fed Ex handle as many packages
in a year as the USPS handles in a day – they are different animals. I
have not ever known a piece of mail I sent not to get where it was supposed
to, except by my error. I still pay my bills this way.) and by most
teachers I know. Bureaucrats less so, but I do not feel the quality
of service of say a private contractor and his employees is much
better than the bureaucrats I have dealt with. Same can be said
of Target, Home Depot, and other large retailers. So I have to
say the level of service is about the same, but the bureaucrats seem
to handle more customers one on one.

As darned attractive as teaching is there is still, and in the last 10
years constant need of teachers in many fields – math, science,
reading, special education – in most places.

The teachers unions are for competency testing of incoming teachers.

reply to oracle / fairnessman(sic)
Oracle, the salaries and numbers Fairnessman provided
Are for NJ and northern NJ – one of the most expensive
Places to live. For a comparable place see Thomas Friedman’s
Sunday column and what he thinks should be done to get
More teachers into the darned attractive job of teaching.

The $100k salary is rare. I bet dollars to donuts there is not
a single teacher on salary in GA who CAN make it. In my
home state of MA there are a number of districts where this
is possible – but one needs many years of teaching and a lot
of education – the equivalent of 2 or 3 masters. It is more
common for districts to top out at $70,000 – and that’s not
for spring chickens.

Fairnessman also believes police and fire (I don’t even want to
hear what he thinks about military) are overpaid too. So every
public servant is pampered and overpaid.

And Oracle do you truly believe that teaching is the easiest job
in the world? This kind of garbage does not need reprinting!

If you look up fairnessman on some previous
threads you will note that he plays around with
the numbers - in other words, his assertions
are not to be trusted.

problems, issues, with vouchers
Col. Mitchell writes:
“All the possible problems reported with vouchers are not really problems. They are canards use as distractions.”

Actually, no, I think they are problems and so do many on
the left and right side of this issue – funding of ideological
schools, government interference, a larger bureaucracy, etc.
are if not problems, issues that need to be addressed.

Col. writes
“Vouchers would relieve overcrowded schools, allow more resources for those choosing to remain in public school, and would provide current teachers more carreer opportunities by allowing alternative employment opportunities.”

It could relieve them or create them – depends.
If it works as planned we should have the best schools completely
Filled – which means overcrowded.
It could arguably provide teachers with more career opportunities.

Col. writes:
“If a failed school district is currently paying $12,000 a year per student to educate their students and provided a $5,000 voucher for parents to go to an alternative school, that would result in $7,000 left over for the school to spend on children who remain behind. Its a win-win.”

I don’t think that is how the math would work.
Nor should it. If the student has left the school should get $0
for said student. Under your system a district should try its
darndest to get rid of as many students as possible. That should
not be the aim.

reply to posters
Wendy writes:
“My solution is separation of state and school.
Shut down the public school system completely.”

This would take a change to the Constitutions in
Every state – the policy of suffragists before the
19th (?) Amendment.

Wendy writes:
“Or at the very least, let parents opt out of paying
property taxes for public schools they don't use.”

This I don’t agree with at all. Would the same apply
to people who do not use public transportation or
would those who use public transportation not have
to pay for upkeep on roads, etc. etc. Public education,
transportation, upkeep on roads are viewed as “public”
goods and everyone pays in whether they use the
service or not there should be some benefit to society.


The belief that a poor single parent (and there are many
of them – 9% of households and 1/3 of households with
kids! http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/ families_households/009842.html
So 1/3 single parents – 2/3 two parents!)
could pay for a “good education” out of pocket
are imo not a reasonable proposition.

Private schools already compete with each other for
clients – has their prices risen at a lower rate per
pupil than public schools over time? (I would be
interested to know!)

“Anyway Andrea is absolutely right. Let parents decide where, how and what their kids will learn. Trust me, nobody wants his kid to be a moron;”

This is already the case. That is what school boards and
state legislatures do. If you want complete control over
decisions you need to hire a tutor or homeschool. The
belief that 2 never mind 20 parents would agree on curriculum
is wrong-headed. The whole show wife-swap, although not
about schooling shows how far off parents can be on how
to raise kids. State legislators, school boards, teachers, and
Democrats don’t want your kids to morons either. My parents
thought it was their duty to teach us what the public or
private schools didn’t.

reply to random comments
The comment that the government has a monopoly on
education from someone who homeschools is interesting.
Also, others in these postings have either attended or
sent their children to private school

Col Mitchell as I stated earlier school funding differs from state
to state and in many states district to district. So your ideas are
probably correct for your state/district.

The NEA only gets more money if it gets more members or raises
dues on its members. Same as any union.

If Obama does not supports you sending your kid to private
school or homeschooling – please show proof of where he
has said this.

The IB program is used in international schools and is comparable
if not preferable to the Advanced Placement curriculum. It
is less American centered than regular curriculums. It is
considered better than your average public or private school
curriculum. FYI, Jay Matthews writes on AP and IB schools quite
often at the Washington Post.

Mod Mark #123
I am curious what grade level your son is and if he takes these classes at the high school or a college co-op program through the high school. I have a tenth grader in similiar classes, except robotics. He is planning to enroll in an aeronautics program at college level his next two years, and then enter college as a sophmore.
First of all as a homeschool parent I know my limitations. They have many resources, such as DVD, VHS, internet, along with educator tutors for individuals desiring higher level education. But how many high school teachers actually teach these subjects well, and how much does the student self-teach? How often does anyone need to determine the 2nd order derivative that doesnt work at NASA? If your son is going to work at NASA, he probably should be educated somewhere else anyway.
I agree with a blend of what I read. Public schools need not close but can charge tuition, like a community college. Students who can choose private, parochial, or charter have money freed up from taxes to pay for it. It is unrealistic for all students to expect equal education.

I stand corrected...
the government only has a near monopoly on education. Because the government taxes everyone for a school system whether they use it or not, they have limited the options of most people. If you don't want to or are not able to homeschool and you cannot afford the added cost (above taxes) of private school, you are stuck sending your children to the local public school. So, in effect the government has become an almost exclusive provider of education.

Some numbers
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in 2005 9% of students were enrolled in private schools, homeschoolers account for probably about 3-4% more (it was 2.2% in 2003).

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2008/section1/indicator04.a sp

So, approximately 88% of children in America attend public schools. Would that qualify as a near monopoly?

Questions about vouchers
Public schooled-around 86% Private Schooled-around 12% Homeschooled-around 2%

1. Will the private sector be prepared to meet the increased demand vouchers could bring? If private institutions cannot accommodate every student seeking admittance, who will determine who goes and who stays? How?

2. Who will define a quality education? How will quality be measured and disclosed? How will this affect innovation?

3. Will private schools be required to use materials with a secular world view to qualify? If not, who will pay the court costs for the lawsuits? If the private schools loose what legal implications will it have?

4. Will teacher certification be required? Why or why not? What qualifications will teachers/administrators have to have to qualify? What control will administrators and parents have over poor performing teachers?

5. What required accommodations will there be for children with social, medical, behavioral problems? If so how will it affect the cost of tuition? If not, will there be discrimination law suits?

6. Which, if any, of the many standardized test available will be required, and who will decide? What will be the minimum test score standard required of the students? What will happen if the standards are not met?

7. What entity will monitor the schools and their performances? Will it be a government or private agency? How much will it cost in tax dollars to fund monitoring? Exactly how will they monitor schools?

8. Can anyone prove increased regulation and monitoring directly improve academic performance?

9. If more people have more funds available to them, will the tuition of private institutions most in demand increase? Will investing in additional facilities and staff raise the cost of tuition?

10. If private institutions financially invest to meet demand will the government have control by determining who receives funds by meeting government defined certification/accreditation/approval?

Parental Responsibility with vouchers
1. How many private schools are in my area? What is the difference in the schools I have access to? Have I checked out the educational philosophies, methods, materials, and test scores? Which do I like? Which don't I like? Do I have the ability to influence change in those areas?

2. Is there a deadline for registration? How many students can this school take? What if I change my mind about this school mid-term and there are no other openings at my second and third choice schools?

3. Do I care about teacher certification and qualifications? Do I know what certification and qualifications the teachers and administrators have at the schools of my choice?

4. Are the dress codes, world views, disciplinary policies, and social climates acceptable to me? Do I have the ability to influence change in those area? What kinds of participation are required of me as a parent? Does my child have to maintain a certain level of academic performance or social behavior to stay? What if my child is not compliant and has to leave?

5. How will my child get to and from the school? Are the daily and annual schedules compatible with my family's?

6. Is the amount of voucher money I have available to me enough for the school I am interested in? What financial and lifestyle changes will be required of me to make up the difference?

Many parents WANT the government to take responsibility for their children, so even if vouchers are available to everyone, many parents will choose what requires the least of them-a public school.

Public school monopoly is a
public school monopoly.
It is also a monopoly on public school funds.

But not an educational monopoly.

One has the choice of private schools or home schooling.

Even the public school monopoly has choices.
(The more rural you are the fewer choices you
probably would have, but you would be more
likely to attend a comprehensive high school
which would have aspects of a tech school and
possibly an aggie school) In every area of
MA I know of - one can choose from regular
hs, tech hs, and aggie hs and in many one could
also choose a charter school(s) and in most
communities there is public school choice so
you can attend a school in a better district.

public education a reply
"I stand corrected...
the government only has a near monopoly on education."

Agreed - the government schools have an 88%
share.

"Because the government taxes everyone for a school system whether they use it or not, they have limited the options of most people."

Again the same argument can be made for almost
anything with the word public. Public library,
public park, public transportation, etc.

"If you don't want to or are not able to homeschool and you cannot afford the added cost (above taxes) of private school, you are stuck sending your children to the local public school."

Again, if you cannot afford to buy all the
books you like you might have to use used books
from the library if you cannot afford your own
yard and gardens you might have to settle for a
public park that is not as well kept as you
would prefer. You get the point.

"So, in effect the government has become an almost exclusive provider of education."

No, no more so than it has become the sole
provider of transportation. It comes down
to priorities for some for others you are
right. But remember free education is a gift -
that people were so lucky 200 years ago!
What was once a privilege is now a (positive)
right!


Mod Mark #144
I appreciate your desire for higher education with your child. I felt that way for a long time, thus our first 6 kids went and are in public education.
I dont agree that understanding basic addition isnt more necessary to life than solving derivatives. I dont think that is comparing apples to apples so I cant logically reply.
I am not criticizing your questioning of parental ability either, but I also recognize that there is so much more to homeschooling than you realize until you do it. I rejected homeschooling until I had children go through the highschool process. I just want you, and everyone else here, to understand that there are great options for homeschool students for difficult subjects. You will only begin now to see how successful a homeschooled child can be because the numbers, now only up to less than 4%, didnt exist until recently.

Mod Mark reply #144
Sorry, I hit enter before proof reading or finishing and off it went.
Anyway, I was just going to point out how many parents felt homeschooling would keep their children from succeeding in sports. Look up Tim Tebow- the first sophmore ever to win the Heisman Trophy. It wasnt until 1996 in Fl that a homeschooler could play school sports, so the options were always unavailable, as they still are where I live. If the 2012 rumours do not occur, you will see many more successful homeschooled people.

parents already have school choice
Feulner wrote: "And the best way to give students that chance is to give their parents a choice"

What are you babbling about?? Parents already have school choice. If they can pass all the application requirements (e.g., no physical impairments, no mental impairments, the right religion, the right race, ect) and if they have enough money, they can choose any school they want.

So your entire argument is bogus.

Parents already have school choice.

Mod Mark
Yeah, my son says anyone can do honors classes, its really for kids that try. College prep and advanced placement are for kids that just come to hang out.
who knows...

Affordability is not the only impediment
A healthy functioning marketplace for education requires more than just additional money (scholarships/vouchers) in the hands of parents. It also needs accurate information about the products' and services' quality.

Public education officials routinely deceive the public about the student performance levels in their schools. Every state in the Union is guilty of this (Mississippi the worst, Massachusetts the least bad). If parents and other stakeholders really knew how horrible the public schools were, they'd have an additional incentive to choose a better private school.

everyonesfacts @ 3:40pm 1/12/09
"Again the same argument can be made for almost
anything with the word public. Public library,
public park, public transportation, etc."

I believe all those services should be privatized. The proper role of the government is to protect us from invasion and punish criminals. That's all.

"But remember free education is a gift -"

It's not free! That's the whole point. We are taxed ver heavily for if and we are not getting a good return on our "investment."

Andrea
If you don't like public education then change your constitution.

Libraries should be privatized?
This is a bad idea.

Public education is free to the recipients of it.
That of course does not mean it does not cost
anything. This does not need further explanation.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.