School Choice
Here is an interesting piece from the New Hampshire Union Leader that I found in the Vermont Education Report. VER is a free e-mail newsletter from Vermonter's for a Better Education. You can sign up to receive it or look at past issues at their website: http://www.schoolreport.com/.
Basically, it says that Vermont spends $2,268 more per pupil on education than New Hampshire, but the test scores of the two states are comparable. In other words, we keep throwing more and more money at the system without seeing better results.
What can we do about Vermont's out of control education spending and schools that do not measure up?
Vermonter's for a Better Education is an organization that supports school choice. You can read their Q & A about school choice here. School choice would force schools to be accountable for the quality of education they are providing, or lose students (and dollars) to better schools.
I happen to think school choice is a good idea. When my oldest son was about 4, I started looking at kindergartens. I lived in the Old North End at the time, and no offense to anyone who lives there, but I did not want my children to attend Lawrence Barnes School.
I was fortunate to find an affordable apartment in the South End, which is where the elementary school that I chose is located. I am sure that there are many parents who want to send their kids to another school, but are not as fortunate in their ability to move.
But school choice should not stop with public schools. In my situation, I knew from kindergarten on that the public schools were not going to work out for my kids. I looked at Mater Christi (even though we are not Catholic), which was very impressive, but there was no way that we could afford it, even with financial assistance. We would want to have all three kids in the same school.
This is not just about a school's academic excellence either. There are kids who do not fit well into the traditional school model, who would really prosper at an independent school.
A good quality education should not be something that is reserved for the elite. If a child has the ability to attend a better school, he should have that opportunity. It is very frustrating as a parent to have children who are not reaching their potential because they are not in the right school.
We should be doing better than that (especially for the money the tax-payers are spending). Parents should have the ability to ensure that their children receive the best education possible and children should be able to attend the school that will allow them to thrive.
41 comments:
On a related note...
http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/05staxrank.html
Vermont residents are taxed more per capita than residents of any other state in the country.
I also support school choice. Anything to loosen the death grip that the VTNEA has on this state.
I hate when teachers complain about their jobs and pay. They don't know how good they have it.
Oh, come on, Anonymous. I love teachers unions....
"When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."
Albert Shanker, former president
American Federation of Teachers (1985)
See, it's all about the children..no..er..wait.
I wouldn't worry about calling Barnes a bad school, because that's what it is - verifiably the worst school in Burlington. The only arguments I heard for keeping it open were that it would be a hassle for everyone to get to a different building.
So Barnes is the worst school, eh? Tell you what: we'll inundate your south end schools with students who don't speak English and those with higher levels of lead in their systems (which consequently leads to insane learning disabilities - a struggle no other part of town suffers as much as the ONE). Then when you ask for help and resources, we'll tell you to suck it up and ship your kids miles away - at the mercy of our public transportation system. We'll also say that increased class sizes are good for you because that means less money out of our pockets.
School choice is nothing but welfare for those who least need it. It's a cop-out, like running away instead of solving very real problems in our schools. The beneficiaries: middle & upper class. The losers: low-incomers.
On the subject of choice, I came across an interview of a former superintendent in California that introduced choice to their system, with good results:
http://www.reason.com/0604/fe.ls.meet.shtml
"So Barnes is the worst school, eh?"
Yes it is, glad you agree with me.
There has been ample time and an ungodly amount of money provided in the interest of "solving very real problems," but it hasn't happened because there's no real incentive to make it happen. Anyone who's honestly interested in solving education problems should embrace school choice.
You are going to have to explain how the losers of school choice are the low-income. The low-income students are the ones who are not able to go to better schools. Parents of high- and middle- incomes are able to send their kids elsewhere. They don’t need school choice.
It’s a shame that people want to keep the poor kids in such a bad situation with no way out. I will never understand that position.
BTW: there are quite a few ESL (English as a second language) students at the south end elementary school.
My kids aren’t in public school any more anyway. They are homeschooled, so it is of no benefit to me if school choice is ever instituted. I am just concerned for other low- to moderate-income families like mine for whom homeschool is not a viable option.
It is sad when the politicians who say they care about the poor are so beholden to the teachers union for campaign funding that they do not want to do anything to improve the situation for poor kids trapped in sub-standard schools.
You are going to have to explain how the losers of school choice are the low-income.
The person might be referring to Bush's "voucher" plan, which would have used public money to help familites who can already pay part or most of the cost of private schools make up the difference.
For the poorest people, the gap would still be too wide, making vouchers useless to them. That plan would have drained money from public schools where the poorest kids would still be left and essentially redistribute wealth upward.
That scheme seems to have died, thank God, but it might be what the commenter was talking about.
That is just a bunch of anti-Bush, class-warfare rhetoric.
It is the poor kids who can't get out of the bad schools. You have no idea how awful it is to be a parent who knows that your child will never reach his full potential stuck in a public school. And I don't even know the half of it. My kids went to the "best," high-test-score, often-awarded schools with a "sustainability" curriculum that would give any liberal a wet dream.
I can only imagine the parents of a child stuck in some inner city school while the Democrats can't see their way out of the teachers' union's pockets well enough to help these kids.
What are the alternative solutions? Throw more money at the schools - which has been proven time after time after time to not improve performance.
I was just reading about how internationally, the countries with the highest test scores (which is not us, of course) are the ones who value giving the parents control over their kids' education - now there's a concept - and forcing the schools to become better by offering competition.
It's funny how liberal whine and complain about monopolies except when it comes to education.
Why don't you guys want the schools to improve?
What? Are you talking to me? I think school choice is fine- but why should the government pay to send someone's kid to a private, or especially a religious school school?
If you want to send your kid to private school, feel free! If you can't afford it- pull yourself up by your bootstraps and better yourself! Don't make the public pay for your private choices! You're the one who sounds like a socialist on this.
Good morning, by the way.
The public already does pay for education, so why shouldn't the parents and students have a say in the child's education. All kids are different. Our public schools are set up like factories programmed to put out a certain type of product. There are all different types of schools out there and parents should have a choice.
I wasn't necessarily talking to you, but to anyone with that view you were articulating.
Good morning to you, too.
You know public education is a great example of why government-run healthcare is a bad thing. There is monopoly with no competition, so the quality goes down, and we lose our power of choice.
Okay, I really have to go. I have lots to do.
The public does have a say. It's called the school board.
But hey- I know there's a culture of stupid in some of the public schools around here. I worked as a paraeducator at Edmunds Elementary for half a year, Wheeler for half a year, Tuttle middle school in SB (for 2 weeks) and Colchester Middle School for a year. I've also substituted at BHS, Champlain, CP Smith, Edmunds Middle, Barnes, and JFK in Winookski.
Of all those, Wheeler and Smith were the best in my opinion.
Colchester Middle School was the absolute worst. I would NEVER send Koko to a dumb-it-down, lowest-common-denominator, lying, cheating, back-stabbing, unethical, law-breaking, piece of SH*T "school" like that, EVER!!!
(I had a wicked bad experience there that killed my dream of being a teacher. It drove me to the "office space" where I sit now.
ARRRHGGGG!!! My blood still boils when I think about it!! I wish the lot of them had been fired when the whining Bee-otches went on strike last year!!! ASSHOLES!! GOD I HATE COLCHESTER MIDDLE SCHOOL!!!!!) ....OK...I'm calm. Sorry about that...
I don't have an issue with public funds being redirected to private institutions so long as the private institutions adhere to the same [unfunded] federal mandates imposed on public institutions. I'm thinking along the lines of 1) teacher certification 2)testing standards 3) special education. It needs to be a level playing field otherwise private institutions will cherry pick the best students leaving public schools to grabble with the most troublesome of society's ills with less funding.
Special education is a broad field. It can mean providing therapy for severely handicapped children who previously would have been institutionalized or it can mean providing oversight to borderline IQ sociopathic violent youths would have previously been expelled from school and sent to group homes. And, there's the great in-between, children who greatly benefit from being mainstreamed without adversely impacting the education of the general population of students.
We need to rethink how special education is funded, we need to lift some of the unfunded mandates and we need to be realistic with what we can accomplish in special education within the public school system before redirecting public funds to private schools.
I don't see why private schools should get tax money. Why shouldn't they sink or swim like any other business?
Responses to various comments:
Haik: I hate when teachers complain about their jobs and pay.
Hallelujah! Their pay range looks pretty good compared to much of the private sector jobs here. Especially considering all the vacation time they have. I had a friend who taught English and she said it was like being on stage all day long. It sounds tiring, but you still have those four months of vacation to recover, and you're home by 3:30. Boo hoo.
Charity: "When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children."
Unions suck. When every I see a product that says 'Union Made' I get a little nervous. What they're saying is more like this: 'Made by a worker who cannot be easily fired or reprimanded of poor performance and who will continue to get raises and promotions just for showing up here.'
In "education", it's more like: ' Not responsible for future strife, losses or missed opportunities due to sadly lacking education.' Or even better: 'Don't blame me if your kid can't add, read or spell by his eighteenth birthday'!
Anonymous: we need to lift some of the unfunded mandates
What are these 'unfunded mandates'? As far as I know, that means that children have to be reading, doing math, etc. at their grade level, based on standardized tests. I could be wrong on this.
What we should do is dust off the tests from 1950 and give them to today's students. That would be a real eye opener. Then we could have the teacher's unions defend the abysmal results. When they blamed it all on inadequate funding, we could adjust those 1950 school budgets to today's dollars and then ask them again to defend the abysmal results.
Personally, I say abolish the Dept of Education. The federal government has no business meddling in the states' affairs.
Haik: 'If you want to send your kid to private school, feel free! If you can't afford it- pull yourself up by your bootstraps and better yourself! Don't make the public pay for your private choices!'
Haik! You are starting to sound like a conservative! Not quite though. You sound like your buddy 'Louie the Cowman' did during the mayoral debates. He could spot the problem, but his solution was way off. Regardless of that, we're still warming up a seat for you on the Right side of the isle. It's even got a beverage holder on one of the arms, just like at the movies!
Haik: 'ASSHOLES!!'
Why is it you won't type the word 'shit', but you will type the word 'assholes'?
Why is it you won't type the word 'shit', but you will type the word 'assholes'?
I don't know. I have a little standards and practices guy in my head telling me what to do.
Left wing Smeft wing. Right wing shmite wing- y'know?
I'll bet I'm as "right" as they come on eminent domain for example, or deficit spending... but you could call me a "leftist" on issues of war or health care.
It just depends on the issue. Like most Vermonters, I'm an independent
"Their pay range looks pretty good compared to much of the private sector jobs here."
Out of curiosity, do most teachers around here work summer jobs? When I was a kid, ALL teachers worked summer jobs; they saw their salaries as covering the 3/4 of the year that they worked, so they needed to cover the other 1/4. The few teachers I know around here just consider the summers off to be a perk of the job. Is that typical here?
Hard to say what's typical- except I do know most teachers start at an incredible thirty-thousand dollars per year and just go up from there! I noticed in the annual report that my high school social studies teacher Jim Donahue has been around so long he now makes over sixty-seven thousand dollars per year. If that's not enough money for nine month's work, then you must have a serious coke habit, or something.
Bob the O. said: "I hate when teachers complain about their jobs and pay. Hallelujah! Their pay range looks pretty good compared to much of the private sector jobs here... Boo hoo."
And so the epitome of ignorance sounds off. Sure Bob, teachers only work from 7:30AM'ish to 3:30PM then go home and dance wistfully on their lawns enjoying summers off and holidays as well. How plush. You're obviously not a teacher. Because if you were, you'd know that limiting one's thinking to those parameters ignores most of what a teacher does. There's prep work, grading, tutoring, and using their own money to buy supplies thanks to Republicans who reject school budgets so they can spray extra chemicals on their immaculate lawns. If you take into account all the prep and grading time along with "stage" time, then there is no way you can say teachers are well paid.
Haik: right on with your assessments, brother. Welfare for the mid-to-upper classes comes with the tax shift that moves from a public education system to the privileged well-to-do private/religious system. As such, those schools that have cherry-picked the "good" students leave the bad apples to the public system which would be left with no choice but to wallow in the problems discarded by those who supported school choice. Then watch those same supporters say we need to build more prisons thanks to the increased crime rate (a common result of areas with high school drop outs).
Charity said: "It’s a shame that people want to keep the poor kids in such a bad situation...."
"It is sad when the politicians who say they care about the poor are so beholden to the teachers union...."
"That is just a bunch of anti-Bush, class-warfare rhetoric."
[see above for more Limbaugh-parroted snippets]
As you once said, such comments hardly dignify a response, but I'm feeling charitable, so here you go: HUH??? Yeah that's it, I'm a whiny liberal who wants to shovel my hard-earned money out for nothing (kinda like owning a boat). Boy, you are perceptive. There is plenty of data to show that school choice is another way of saying "seperate but equal". Do you happen to teach about the Civil Rights era when you homeschool? Remember why seperate but equal was not a good rule for schools? What do you have against a federal responsibility to raising the education level of our children? Why do you support welfare for private businesses and not for those who need it?
Strom Thurmond would be proud of you.
There is plenty of data to show that school choice is another way of saying "seperate but equal".
Where's this alleged data?
Are you saying that school choice is an attempt to segregate schools?
Is there something genetic that causes liberals to play the phony race card?
Strom Thurmond would be proud of you.
Yes, in fact I am a proponent of segregation. In fact, I make my black sons and my white son use separate bathrooms and eat at separate dinner tables.
(That was sarcasm - for you liberal readers didn't realize.)
Question: Are you really a complete moron or do you just play one on my blog?
"And so the epitome of ignorance sounds off..."(snip)
This is why Vermont has the highest taxes per capita in the country - the VT NEA has trained its members well. Whenever anyone questions the party line, no matter how intelligent or reasonable their arguments, a borderline psychotic talking point eruption will shut them up every time.
"There's prep work, grading, tutoring"
Gee, that sounds rough. I would imagine the turnover for Vermont teachers must be staggering. No wonder a high school social studies teacher makes a higher annualized salary than the Governor of the state.
"What do you have against a federal responsibility to raising the education level of our children?"
So you support No Child Left Behind?
"And so the epitome of ignorance sounds off. Sure Bob, teachers only work from 7:30AM'ish to 3:30PM then go home and dance wistfully on their lawns enjoying summers off and holidays as well. How plush. You're obviously not a teacher."
You are correct. I am not a teacher. I am an optimzer.
Spare me the boo hoo about all the "extra work" teachers have to do. After the first year or two all the lesson plans, tests and quizes are done. Then it's just a matter of sticking to the plan. If only non-union jobs in the private sector were like that. Oh well, even in my "limited parameters" I can dream of something more.... Maybe a teachers' certificate. That would be the crown jewel of all my achievments!
I don't know of anyone in the private sector here who makes over 40k and isn't expected to put in more than 40 hours at least occasionally.
Dance wistfully? Are you that boob who used the term 'perfectly silly' a while back?
Wow, it seems that our prestigious She-blogger is losing composure. So let me get this straight: anonyous bloggers have no credibility, but those who name-call and make wildly unsupported statements (that's you, by the way) are totally credible. Got it.
No wonder you're a Republican.
Anyway, on to the issues (more than I can say about you and your little faux blog playground here):
"Where's this alleged data?" [re: supporting how school choice equals segregation]
What do I look like, Google? Figure it out, genius. Nonetheless, to assist you in your ways, I offer you a link to this study out of SUNY-ALbany: http://www.albany.edu/~wyckoff/segpapr14.PDF#search='school%20choice%20%20segregation'
"This is why Vermont has the highest taxes per capita in the country."
Are we talking about school choice here or taxation? If you are implying that it's the fault of the NEA that Vermont has high taxation, then I'd respond that you have much room for improvement in learning about taxation. If I were King Douglas under the Montpelier dome, I'd move the burden of taxation from property taxes (regressive) to income taxes (progressive). Conversation for another day....
"So you support No Child Left Behind?"
Finally, a fair question. There are many things I like about it (i.e. identifying schools in need and funding special programs to help them succeed). There is much I don't like about it (i.e. another layer of testing bureaucracy whose cost is set squarely upon the shoulders of local school budgets). Seems like we can do better.
"Spare me the boo hoo about all the 'extra work' teachers have to do."
Ummm, yeah. Nice comeback. Your deja-vu answer tells me you're out of arguments. No use in reiterating my point as it was never addressed to begin with.
Gosh, this must be what it feels like to be a lone protester at a Ku Klux Klan rally. All the "liberal" & "psychotic" comments prove that this blog has zero interest in engaging in conversation on this and 100% interest in right-wing masturbation. That's the same reason your Congress & President are seeing polling numbers at their lowest since Nixon.
An interesting aside....
Omaha Schools Split Along Race Lines
LINCOLN, Neb. - In a move decried by some as state-sponsored segregation, the Legislature voted Thursday to divide the Omaha school system into three districts — one mostly black, one predominantly white and one largely Hispanic....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060413/ap_on_re_us/omaha_schools_1
Anonymous, you have a really weird perspective of reality. You are the one who started engaging in name calling and has an issue with maintaining your composure.
I lost mine because my blood boils when I am accused of being a racist. (That must be why you brought up references to the KKK.)
It is completely pathetic that you must stoop to that level. I guess it's easier than trying to articulate a cohesive argument, though.
I always hoped that my kids would not have to deal with racism when they get older. I had hoped we would offer better as a society by then. With ignorant assholes throwing unfounded accusations of racism in order to feel morally superior and consistently trying to fan the flames of racial tension, I doubt if we will reach that point.
So, yes, I will lose my composure when confronted with such idiocy.
Okay, so where exactly are my "wildly unsupported statements"?
Side note: I find it ironic that you would broadly call my statements unsupported, yet have a hissy fit when I ask you to back up a specific claim you made.
If you don't like my "faux blog" then you are more than welcome to see your way out. I promise you won’t be missed.
"If you are implying that it's the fault of the NEA that Vermont has high taxation, then I'd respond that you have much room for improvement in learning about taxation."
This was a bizarre attempt at a joke, right?
I am leaning towards the idea that the noble goals of "Leave No Child Behind" Act with its emphasis on testing as a means of social engineering will ultimately fail.
This afternoon I came across this article, "Top High Schools Fight New Science As Overly Simple, San Diego's Physics Overhaul Makes Classes Accessible, Spurs Parental Backlash," Robert Tomsho, WSJ.
"The skirmishes in the nation's eight-largest urban school district reflect a wider battle over how to make science classes accessible to a broader array of students while maintaining their rigor."
"The new program de-emphasized textbook learning in favor of hands-on activities designed to engage students with little science background or limited English skills. Initially, district officials also aimed to stop dividing students by ability and to make them all take the same courses. They reasoned that lower achievers would benefit from mixing with better students. (...) 'The thrust was to say that all kids have the same access to the same quality of material.'"
"The backlash erupted immediately." La Jolla High parents and teachers hashed out a plan for the school - the district's highest achiever on state tests - to break away and become independent."
"Kati Haycock, director of the Education Trust, a Washington-based advocacy group for at-risk students, says parents in affluent schools often resist changes that affect students who are already thriving. "People with privileges fight to keep privileges," she says."
Since when has demanding your child's high school physics coursework remain academically challenging become a privilege?
In 1970, only one in 10 adults had a bachelor's degree and about half had high-school diplomas. In 2004, one in 4 adults had a bachelor's degree and about 84% had high school diplomas or the equivalent. (WSJ 4/11)
The problem with incentives is that they work. If the goal is to increase the number of students who pursue higher education, there is a whole industry afoot to make it happen and one unfortunate unconsequence is the lowering of standards to reach benchmarks.
Is it really possible or even desirable to push all students through to college? Can you accept disparity and not be guilty of the soft bigotry of low expectations?
" I offer you a link to this study out of SUNY-ALbany"
Interesting paper, the premise of which begins to fall apart as you move away from its subject area of New York state, and completely dissolves in Vermont. Unless you think that the exodus from Barnes would be due to "concentrations of African-Americans or Latinos" in that "inner-city school," and not because their kids can't get a decent education there.
Wow Charity. You are losing it. Your Hello Kitty icon needs horns and angry eyebrows to properly reference your little tantrums. And how do you justify losing it? Claim that someone who posts reasonable arguments supported by facts that contradicts yours is losing it. Whatever works for you. By the way, your response didn't address a single thing I said. Not a one. Oh wait, you dredged up my Klan simile. Come on now. Here, maybe this will help to alleviate your stress: Official Disclaimer: I, in no way, can neither confirm nor deny that Charity is or ever was a member of the Ku Klux Klan.
(That was sarcasm - for you Republican blog authors that didn't realize.)
Back to the issue at hand.... If my argument against school choice is perceived as me calling you a racist, then you run with it and spew all the venom you want to defend yourself. All I'm saying is that there is research to show that school choice leads to segregation.
One person brought up that Burlington's racial divide is hardly that of Albany. I'd agree. However, I believe it goes deeper than race. It gets into a socio-economic divisions. The lower or working class is generally the same class that minorities find themselves in, unfortunately. Here in Burlington, the ONE is generally the area of less income. My theory is that school choice will further deprive the resources from who most need it. Playing it out, school choice will leave our lower income children (including minorities and our growing immigrant population) with less resources and less chance of even graduating from high school. Naturally, all the social ills that correspond to school drop outs apply (i.e. higher crime).
I'll sign off for the night with a few samples of Charity's "wildly unsupported statements" just to say that at least one of us responded to another's allegations:
"You know public education is a great example of why government-run healthcare is a bad thing. There is monopoly with no competition, so the quality goes down, and we lose our power of choice."
"It’s a shame that people want to keep the poor kids in such a bad situation with no way out."
"It is sad when the politicians who say they care about the poor are so beholden to the teachers union for campaign funding that they do not want to do anything to improve the situation...."
"It's funny how liberal whine and complain about monopolies except when it comes to education."
[More available upon request]
"One person brought up that Burlington's racial divide is hardly that of Albany. I'd agree."
So you knew the study didn't support your point, then?
"My theory is that school choice will further deprive the resources from who most need it."
Only if an ONE resident chooses not to take advantage of school choice.
If consolidation results from school choice, the only victim is the convenience of the parents in having to travel a bit farther to get to their kids' school. I would think that any responsible parent would consider that a welcome tradeoff for a vastly improved (and for most ONE residents, very nearly free) education.
I'll sign off for the night with a few samples of Charity's "wildly unsupported statements" just to say that at least one of us responded to another's allegations:
"You know public education is a great example of why government-run healthcare is a bad thing. There is monopoly with no competition, so the quality goes down, and we lose our power of choice."
I am not sure what part of this you are disagreeing with. Are the public schools not a monopoly? Is the quality of the public schools not declining? Do we (parents) not lose our power of choice?
The public schools are the only institutions that we can send our kids to and still receive our share of per pupil spending for our child’s education. That sounds pretty darn close to a monopoly.
For a low- to moderate-income families, especially a single-parent family, the parent(s) do not have a choice in what school to send their children to that is economically feasible. They are forced to send their children to what ever school they live in the district of. That sounds like they lose the power of choice to me.
"It’s a shame that people want to keep the poor kids in such a bad situation with no way out."
What way do you propose for poor kids to get out of bad schools? Correct me if I am wrong, but you offered none, making my statement true.
"It is sad when the politicians who say they care about the poor are so beholden to the teachers union for campaign funding that they do not want to do anything to improve the situation...."
I don’t have the time to look it up because I have to go, but are you denying that Democrats and other liberal politicians are heavily funded by the teachers union? The Teachers Union is in the business of making the teachers’ jobs better, not improving education. Name the last time the union supported meaningful education reform.
"It's funny how liberal whine and complain about monopolies except when it comes to education."
Which part here are you disagreeing with? That liberals whine and complain about monopolies or that education is a monopoly they like?
Maybe I misjudged that you were implying that I am racist, but I have been told that to my face so many times based solely on the fact that I am a Republican, I have come to expect it. It is deeply offensive to me.
Sorry if you were not saying that, but the segregation, Strom Thurmond, and KKK references threw me off.
"So you knew the study didn't support your point, then?"
I'm sorry, didn't realize you needed research written on your back doorstep in order for you to believe it. The point is universal: school choice leads to segregation.
"Only if an ONE resident chooses not to take advantage of school choice."
So are you saying that whichever school a child/family chooses, then they are 100% guaranteed to get it? I'd dispute it if you said yes. With school choice, schools will have to get into the business of having admissions offices not unlike colleges. They will then select which applicants to take and which to not take (thus the cherry-picking). Under this type of system, what chance do you think there is of one of our immigrant kids with little english and behavioral problems, for example, of getting into the best school in town (likely to be the kid's first choice)? Or how about the "C" student whose parents don't care about her over their own drug habits? Or a kid who had run-ins with the law?
These kids will ironically be left with no choice but to choose a school that will take them. That school's population, therefore, will present the same exact challenges as we face presently except it'll be magnified (with more disadvantaged kids at one school than any other).
"If consolidation results from school choice, the only victim is the convenience of the parents in having to travel a bit farther to get to their kids' school."
You mentioned consolidation. Am I to assume you are also proposing that on top of school choice? Either way, convenience to the parents is hardly the only victim. I'd better hold off on responding without understanding more about what you are saying.
"The point is universal: school choice leads to segregation."
The study deals only with race-based segregation. You admitted that its conclusions WRT race are invalid here. So what's left?
"They will then select which applicants to take and which to not take (thus the cherry-picking)."
This is pure speculation. I could just as easily say that private schools designed specifically for troubled youth would spring up, providing them with a quality of specialized attention that is not hobbled by the inefficiencies that come with the current public school monopoly.
"Am I to assume you are also proposing that on top of school choice?"
Regardless of what happens with school choice, it's inevitable in Burlington absent a big turnaround in the enrollment trend. So go ahead and tell me how consolidation is going to negatively impact childrens' education, preferably citing examples from Burlington's previous rounds of school consolidation.
Okay, that was a cool new Hello Kitty. Kudos for finesse!
My solution, though admittedly indrectly stated was: "[Sitting and]... solving very real problems in our schools.
The problems are different in each school and with each kid so it's hard to generalize. For now, let's single out Barnes. For one, how about letting immigrants' kids complete an ESL program before entering the classrooms. Until then, they are ill-prepared for the rigors of education let alone one in a foreign language to them. Consequently, schools will not be seen as "failing" as badly since test scores will only include kids who at least have a grasp of the language.
Other problems: I know of one couple who wouldn't let their kids go to Barnes because, according to them, the school did not try to help their boys achieve as well. I've heard others say that some of the kids there can be very problematic bullies.
Solution: [all I can do if offer a variety of proposals. Each parent will have a different opinion as to how best to tackle it] Hold teachers accountable. This not only means that they are responsibile for having their kids meet the objectives of certain tests (I think kids are tested more than lab rats these days, but that's a different conversation), but responding to teachers' needs as they see it. Interfacing with them and learning why their kids are struggling is key. Could be a variety of issues since all kids are different. Maybe one kid needs counseling to deal with a divorce. Maybe another kid is ADHD and needs to have it addressed appropriately with the parents. Maybe a teacher is genuinely bad and needs a new career. This is where sitting and talking about one kid's individual situation is key. Nip it in the bud now before they go on to high school and cannot receive such individual attention.
As for bullying, the state legislature attempted to address that last year. That's one step. Another is to get one-on-one time with each kid to assess what incidents have occurred. Once determined, hash it out with that kid and his/her parents. Otherwise, that kid suffers the consequences of whatever schools have set up for kids who misbehave in school.
In short, there are a variety of solutions to solve problems in schools. My belief is that school choice will only add another layer to mask what society already struggles with.
Sorry to hear about someone calling you racist due to party affiliation < being sincere here >. Labels and generalizations serve no one even if I sometimes get caught up in it too.
"Maybe a teacher is genuinely bad and needs a new career."
This is NEVER THE CASE. Just ask Angelo Dorta.
anonymous, you are right that teachers should be held accountable. That is something that always fails to happen because of the unions. Teachers (as a collective group, not necessarily individually) do not want to be held accountable, they want job security at any cost.
I agree that there are ways to solve the problems with schools, but they are not being done.
Part of the problem is that the educational establishment is entrenched in the current education paradigm. It is very hard to change their way of thinking because it is indoctrinated in them during their college education as the right way to do education.
I believe that school choice is a good solution because it forces schools to be accountable. They need to compete for students - thus for money - and they cannot afford to continue on with things that don't work.
You seem to claim there will be a mass exodus by every "good" student, if given the chance, leaving only the "problem" children. Do you really have such little faith in the public schools or people's commitment to them?
I don't think that will happen. People value community schools and they will continue to support them, but the kids who really need a different educational model will have options regardless of income class.
(Thanks for the kudos.)
Hi all - I just found this discussion. I wanted you all to know that a Task Force has been meeting for a couple of months to discuss how we best can restructure Burlington's schools, and we have spent a lot of time so far talking about the future of all our kids (it takes a village) although our special emphasis is on kids from low-income families. Our report will be out in mid-June. As a school board and task-force member who has spent the last year researching all these questions, I wanted to just let you know that there are some misperceptions in this discussion about what NCLB does. You can get the facts on the Department of Education website. My take on this law is that it is brilliant -- if your goal is not to have any public schools in 2014. The charter schools do a great job of training poor kids for the military, by the way. If you like that outcome, sign on. . .
Post a Comment