Posted on 02/05/2012 5:20:55 AM PST by Kaslin
Would any concerned parent willingly send their children to an average public school in this country if there was an option available?
The word concerned in the question should be a tipoff that the answer is no. Still, states, localities and the federal government continue to dump billions of our hard-earned tax dollars into a system that is rotten to its core.
Dont think things are that bad? A student in Washington state named Austin took a video camera into his schools cafeteria and asked students basic questions about U.S. history. The answers, although funny, are pathetic.
Progressives say its because teachers are forced to teach to the test meaning standardized tests designed to measure knowledge of important topics such as English, science and math. Lee White, executive director of the National History Coalition, told the Huffington Post, "They've narrowed the curriculum to teach to the test. History has been de-emphasized. You can't expect kids to have great scores in history when they're not being taught history." That would hold some water, of course, if those students who failed at history were excelling at other topics. But theyre not.
President Obama has attempted to address the problem of our failing education system in each of his three State of the Union addresses, but his solution, as always, is only to spend more money. But if money was the problem, wed be leading the world in education. We are not.
Progressives will tell you were spending a lower percentage of our GDP on education than other countries, which is true. But when it comes to per-pupil spending the measure that matters most were near the top.
Our education spending has skyrocketed. Our test scores have not.
A new study by Harvard researchers (yes, Harvard) found class size, the oft-cited straw man used by progressives to urge the hiring of more union teachers, essentially doesnt matter. But real facts, real evidence rarely plays a role when it comes to progressives pushing their agenda, so this wont matter either.
If meaningful reform is to come, and thats a big if, its going to come from the state level.
One person actually trying to bring change to public education is Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.
The Wall Street Journal says Gov. Jindal wants to create Americas largest school voucher program, broadest parental choice system and toughest teacher accountability regime all in one legislative session.
School choice and a voucher program that allows students and parents to choose any school that best suits their needs have been proven winners in the fight to improve education quality. Theyve also been the top target of teachers unions because families often choose private schools where the teaching staff is not unionized.
Gov. Jindal believes that every child deserves an equal opportunity in education, but that the current system doesn't allow for it. Emboldened by what has happened in New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina, Gov. Jindal is now pushing for statewide education reform.
Educational choice is one of the few good things to come out of the storm, which laid waste to dozens of the nations worst public schools. Instead of rebuilding the old, failing system, the state transformed most of the schools in Orleans Parish into autonomous charter schools.
Student achievement has improved dramatically, and in a poll last summer by the New Orleans Times-Picayune, two-thirds of parents in the city said they prefer the new system over the old one, and 98 percent said choice should be part of any future reforms in the state. The biggest challenge has been how to squeeze more students into the most successful of the charters.
Gov. Jindals plan would allow students in failing schools statewide to take the roughly $8,500 the state spends on their education to any accredited school they wish. The threatened loss of money would apply market forces to bad schools that routinely fail without consequence. Needless to say, unions representing teachers dont like the idea.
Teachers unions also arent crazy about the governors idea to reform tenure, the mechanism that makes it nearly impossible to fire bad teachers. His plan would grant it to teachers rated highly effective, but deny it to those who dont make the grade no matter how long theyve taught.
Also along those lines, Jindals plan also would end the practice of last in, first out the laying off of young teachers simply because they havent been on the job as long as others. This would allow schools to keep effective teachers and rid itself of bad ones which research indicates does make a significant difference in students educational achievement. These reforms make sense to anyone without a vested interest in the status quo, meaning union bosses and progressives.
Michael Walker Jones, executive director of the Louisiana Association of Educators, said of the school choice plan, If I'm a parent in poverty I have no clue because I'm trying to struggle and live day to day. Jindal and choice advocates could not have written a more tone-deaf line for their opponents if theyd tried.
Progressives think everyone but them is simply too dumb and/or distracted to negotiate school choice. You have no clue, but they, helpfully, know what is best for you and your children as evidenced by the state of public education in America today. Its the philosophy behind every progressive policy idea from education to financial reform to ObamaCare. It is rare and refreshing to hear one of them actually say it.
Jones, in working to stop needed reforms, gave reformers their greatest arrow in a quiver full of arrows tipped with facts, studies and statistics. As Jindal continues his push to improve education in his state, there will be more gaffes of this sort. Progressives arent used to being openly challenged on such a large scale. Gov. Jindal is. For the sake of Louisianas students, lets hope he wins.
excellent.
Here’s an idea to save money without costing the taxpayer a dime:
Allow any student of any age to take the GED or similar private exam. If they pass, award them a high school diploma from their local high school. As it is now, students must be a certain age or older before they are permitted to take the GED.
By having a regular high school diploma bright and ambitious students would be able to qualify for college scholarships and loans, attend trade school, or start their careers many years earlier instead wasting time in their local government kiddie prison ( oops! “school”). It would save the taxpayer money, as well.
By the way, no student should be given a high school diploma without passing the GED or similar exam, and no teacher should be teaching in a government school who couldn’t pass it as well.
Almost all the trouble we now have in the United States has come from a commie or a progressive trying to use the government to reform something.
Unions are interested in protecting systems and
monopolies,not people.Keeping the status quo is easier than
innovating.If vouchers are going to “siphon money from government schools” (as they claim) why isn’t the same true in higher education?
I don’t hear state college professors running around crying about Pell grant(”government dollars”)money “unfairly” being used to attend St.Thomas,Gustavus,St.Johns or
other private religiously affiliated schools. What happened to the imaginary wall of church and state there?
Since government doesn’t create wealth and only consumes it, how can it give parents back what was always theirs anyway?
Part of the beauty of being an American is choices.Look in the yellow pages. Thirty-one flavors or thirty thousand attorneys to choose from. Variety is a good thing.Some may choose for proximity,some for class size,some for shared belief systems,or a class for gifted mathematicians.Why is choice and competition considered good in everything except education?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.