[ladylib]

That's why these people want "passive consent." They know if enough parents opt their kids out, the survey means nothing. However, in NJ, parents actually have to give their permission -- no "passive consent." No signing on the dotted line, no survey.

Why should it be the school's business who is boinking who and how, or who is taking drugs? It should be out of their purview -- none of their business. They claim they want to know so they can develop curricula.

If schools really taught students how to read, write, reason, and do math, half these problems would go away.

I don't trust any school administrator who says "We want to teach the whole child" because he is more interested in indoctrination rather than imparting academic knowlege.

[Ligeia]

I thought you two might be interested in this book review.

Feb 02, 2003

Aggressive Agenda: Politics Is Driving Force in National PTA

REVIEWED BY ROBERT HOLLAND

THE POLITICS OF THE PTA, by Charlene K. Haar; Transaction Publishers, $39.95.

The very name PTA conveys an image of All-American good - Mom and Pop involved in Junior's school, bake sales and spaghetti dinners to raise funds for educational extras, special recognition for dedicated teachers.

Indeed, such constructive things do happen at thousands of schools across the country, but this important book by a leading education scholar establishes that the venerable PTA - in particular, the National PTA - is not always the instrument of good. Charlene Haar finds that 90 percent of America's parents of K-12 children do not belong to the National PTA or its affiliates, and yet half of them are members of school organizations. Many of those groups fall under the umbrella of Parent-Teacher Organizations (PTOs), which work to support a particular local school without asserting a PTO political agenda.

FOR ITS part, the National PTA has an aggressive national agenda of which the average parent may not be aware when he or she forks over dues money on Back-to-School Night in September. For instance, the National PTA walks in virtual lockstep with the powerful teacher unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, even to the point of staying neutral in the face of every threatened or actual teachers strike. No matter how unreasonable or disruptive a strike might be, the PTA will not assert the interests of parents.

Furthermore, the PTA echoes the NEA/AFT in lobbying for a dominant federal presence in education, while adamantly opposing all forms of parental choice. Those inner-city parents who could use a public scholarship (a/k/a voucher) to transfer their children to safe and productive schools cannot expect any help whatever from the PTA.

IN THIS carefully researched, one-of-its-kind book, Ms. Haar examines not only the contemporary politics of the PTA but its late 19th-Century origin as the National Congress of Mothers. The Founding Mothers generally subscribed to the philosophy of the day that "a woman's place is in the home," but they extended the definition of home to encompass the community and carved out their own role as civic housekeepers.

The feminine influence was the civilizing influence thought to cure just about every social ailment. A little more than a century later, the National PTA promotes a welfare-state agenda that would make government the Big Mama of us all.

Robert Holland is a senior fellow at the Lexington Institute in Arlington.

RTD