Posted on 12/03/2008 5:47:50 AM PST by ReleaseTheHounds
Sorry, Jonah: Your latest column on education merits a failing grade.
In True School Scandal, Goldberg laments the Rights current approach to the school-reform debate. He criticizes those who label President-Elect Obama a hypocrite for choosing a private school for his children while at the same time opposing vouchers. Goldberg recommends using this energy to support reformers like D.C. school chancellor Michelle Rhee, who is trying to shake up the Districts beleaguered public-school system.
Because the [Republican] party supports school-choice vouchers, its simply out of the debate, Goldberg writes. School choice has much to recommend it. But its no silver bullet, and vouchers will never gain full acceptance in rich suburbs. He further argues that supporting school choice has made Republicans largely irrelevant in the education-reform debates that matter, like Chancellor Rhees effort.
Goldbergs argument fails in two ways. First, principled support for aggressive reforms like vouchers has cleared a space for the types of reform policies that leaders like Rhee are advocating. And, second, when it comes to systemic reform, conservatives have a broad agenda of policies that strengthen public education and the results to prove it.
Education reformers from across the political spectrum should give thanks to those who have spent decades promoting school choice. These efforts have yielded only modest (but increasing) enactment of voucher programs. But they have created political breathing room for less aggressive reforms such as public school choice and teacher merit pay.
Any observer of the teachers unions (which Goldberg properly calls the worst mainstream institution in our country today) knows that these special-interest groups are calculating that is, they fight hardest against the most threatening reforms. In practice, this has meant that dollars and lobbying hours spent fighting school vouchers have not been spent opposing less threatening policies, like charter schools.
Absent pressure from vouchers, its easy to imagine the National Education Association flexing its political might to block charter schools. Its just as easy to imagine liberal politicians, who have supported charters, bending under the political pressure, just as they do by opposing vouchers today.
In Washington, D.C., a charter school law that attracted bipartisan support (including Bill Clintons) is now helping 20,000 students transfer out of the Districts broken public schools. More than a decade later, this exodus has created enough pressure on the public school system to make Chancellor Rhees reform efforts even thinkable.
Of course, voucher supporters dont need to justify their efforts just as a tactical maneuver in the larger education reform chess game. Its also the right thing to do. Just ask any of the tens of thousands of children who have better lives today thanks to school-choice programs in Arizona, Milwaukee, Washington, D.C., and other communities.
Facing the imminent threat of repeal in the next Congress, supporters of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program have no choice but to play any card they have (including the hypocrisy card against the president-elect) in hopes of protecting the scholarships of the 1,900 children who participate in the program. And the simple fact is that there is an element of hypocrisy when officials tell parents that choice programs arent needed while pulling their own children from the struggling public schools.
Of course, as Goldberg argues, school choice shouldnt be the Rights only solution for improving education. Fortunately, it isnt. And the pundits who are pushing for the Republican Party to develop new ideas should appreciate the scope and success of conservative reforms in education.
Consider the experience of Florida. The Sunshine State outpaces the rest of the nation in offering parents public and private school-choice options. But conservative education reformers there led by former governor Jeb Bush have implemented a series of effective reforms that have improved the states entire public-school system.
Beltway pundits might be familiar with some of Floridas reforms like testing students, grading schools based on students academic achievement, and measuring individual students progress through growth-model testing. But the state has gone even further.
For example, Florida ended social promotion for elementary students requiring third-grade students to master reading before passing on to higher grades. (It was so successful, New York mayor Mike Bloomberg decided to implement a similar policy in Gothams public schools.)
Florida also implemented instructional reforms focusing more on mastering reading instruction and providing remediation to struggling students.
Lawmakers in Tallahassee also established new policies like alternative teacher certification and merit pay to attract talented teachers and to reward those who succeed. A program to provide bonuses to teachers whose students pass AP exams has led to a tripling of the number of Hispanic and African American students passing these tests.
After a decade of reform, Florida students have made dramatic gains on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. And the greatest progress has been made by Hispanic and African American children. In fact, Hispanic fourth graders in Florida now have higher NAEP reading scores than the statewide average of all students in 13 states. (Matthew Ladner and I presented the evidence in a Goldwater Institute report.)
Floridas experience shows that conservative education reforms arent irrelevant. In fact, the Rights broad reform recipe (including a healthy serving of school choice) can deliver real progress.
Dan Lips is senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
This either tells us something about the residents of "rich suburbs," or it tells us what Jonah Goldberg thinks about the residents of "rich suburbs." (My ugly class-warfare side agrees, btw.)
Another thing that helps is charter schools. In Arizona we have a very strong charter school system - and because of the competition, the public schools have had to clean up their act. In Ohio, the teacher’s union successfully managed to keep charter schools out. And the schools at least in Upper Arlington - which is supposed to be a good system - are awful.
When you consider that in some districts only 20% of students are proficient in math or science at their grade level when they graduate, it costs $150k/0.20 = $750,000 to graduate a single student who is proficient in those subjects.
For the amount of money we are spending, we could hire a private, graduate student level, tutor for every two or three public school students.
The public school model is broken, and like the Big 3 auto makers with UAW union contract obligations, no amount of money is going to fix it. The only way is to use a different model. So far it seems the single thing that no public school official nor politician can suggest is to try the LIBERTY solution: allow parents to choose where to send their children even if this means a private school.
We now have a comparison group, for millions of homeschooled children are, on average, putting public school students to shame in academic performance.
Your solution would put too much control in the hands of people that the left thinks are incompetent to make decisions about their own lives,
so it won’t happen if they have any say about it.
Well since it seems like we are on our way to a depression and record unemployment, families are gonna have to tighten their belts, and since there will probably be at least one parent at home, home-schooling should really take off. With the accompanying reduction in income tax revenue there won’t be a lot of money to support federal churches (er, ah ... schools) anyway. It would be kind of like a stock market correction in the educational sector.
I believe a major factor in this phenomenon is the fact that parents who actually care enough to homeschool are intelligent enough to educate their own children. The sad fact of the matter is that so many parents love the schools in that they provide free childcare services for them that they do not give one rat's a$$ how well or poorly their children perform as long as they are out of the parents' hair.
“The sad fact of the matter is that so many parents love the schools in that they provide free childcare services for them...”
It sure as heck ain’t free.
Does Dan Lips understand the enemy? Does he even know who they are and what to call them?
MARXISM IS OUR NATION'S **MOST** SERIOUS THREAT!!!!
GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, AND UNIVERSITIES ARE THE MARXISTS’ **MOST** IMPORTANT WEAPON!!!
Yes, I am shouting!! American conservatives are asleep! Yes, it is that serious!!!
First of all “strengthening public education” ( as Dan Lips suggests) is the last thing any conservative should be doing.
I suggest the following for all conservatives:
* Get your own children out. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.
* Organize with your neighbors to oppose all new government school spending. Make it one of your highest priorities to elect representatives who are hostile to government education.
* Use what the government now offers against the Marxists. Open as many **conservative** charters as possible. Push the envelope. If Muslims can have Muslim dominated charters, then Christians should as well.
* Continue the fight for vouchers. Target very small groups such as those with disabilities. Then gradually push for expansion of those vouchers to include more and more categories of children. ( This is the tactic that the Alisky’s have used with their socialist programs.)
* Do as the Alinsky’s and widely publicize on the Internet and elsewhere every government school outrage. Undermine the confidence that your neighbor has in his government school.
* Begin to make your neighbor ashamed to be using the government schools. Get him to explain why he would be doing that to his precious child.
* Finally, conservatives need to offer **free** alternatives. Conservative foundations should sponsor conservative teachers willing to open mini-schools, one room school houses, and run homeschool cooperatives.
* Work to close down the government school monopoly on team sports. Sports generate community support for the government indoctrination camps. Work to move team sports to the county parks and recreation departments and/or start conservative sport leagues.
School choice is good. But aggressively promoting a “back to basics” approach instead of the high-affect feel-good discovery methods so popular among the Teacher’s College lemmings is also good. See ‘The Schools we Need and Why We Don’t have Them’ by E.D. Hirsch for a great summary of the research.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Ping
This is the way to go about it. When one child on the block (who does not seem to be disabled in any way) is going to the private school on a voucher, then the neighbors soon pressure their legislators for vouchers so their child can go to a private school.
Perfect Alinsky tactics in my opinion!
>>We now have a comparison group, for millions of homeschooled children are, on average, putting public school students to shame in academic performance.<<
Not that I disagree, but where is the evidence of this?
>”We now have a comparison group, for millions of homeschooled children are, on average, putting public school students to shame in academic performance.”<
>>>I believe a major factor in this phenomenon is the fact that parents who actually care enough to homeschool are intelligent enough to educate their own children. The sad fact of the matter is that so many parents love the schools in that they provide free childcare services for them that they do not give one rat’s a$$ how well or poorly their children perform as long as they are out of the parents’ hair.<<<
Again, what evidence is there of this “phenomenon”? A large number of homeschoolers do so because their children were not doing well in the public school due to their being identified with learning disabilities. Another group homeschools simply because it is a way for the parents and the school to handle a situation where a belligerent older child just won’t accept the rules at school any longer. The weak homeschool laws in many states, including mine, allow kids who would never graduate to avoid the last year or so of school altogether. No effort is made to educate them at home.
Both of these groups end up in the statistics and the first one is probably quite large, so I’m wondering what the source is for the statement that homeschooled children outperform those in public schools. (Again, I don’t doubt that they might, but what is the evidence?)
As for parents “loving the schools” because they “provide free childcare services” and that they don’t care about how their children perform academically, this is probably wrong.
True, when faced with a choice of sending the child to school and going back to earn a living, or staying at home another year, many parents decide to send their child to school. They never consider the option of homeschooling because they don’t feel qualified to do the teaching themselves, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t care. They make their decisions based on the choices offered them, and school choice is rarely one of those options. If it were, you would see some serious consideration of academics once again.
The vast majority of parents do want what’s best for their kids but pursuing academic excellence is not, unfortunately, one of the viable options available today for most of them.
Sure it’s free...many of the parents of my students proabably don’t pay much, if anything, in taxes anyhow, so for them it’s free.
I suggest the following for all conservatives:
* Get your own children out. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.
(You will quickly become the neighborhood “nut case” with this approach.)
* Organize with your neighbors to oppose all new government school spending. Make it one of your highest priorities to elect representatives who are hostile to government education.
(This, combined with your first suggestion, will convert you to a “dangerous nut case” in their eyes.)
* Use what the government now offers against the Marxists. Open as many **conservative** charters as possible. Push the envelope. If Muslims can have Muslim dominated charters, then Christians should as well.
(More evidence of a nut case....however, if you would change the religious emphasis to an emphasis on a classical liberal education, you would get plenty of listeners—once you explain what you mean.)
* Continue the fight for vouchers. Target very small groups such as those with disabilities. Then gradually push for expansion of those vouchers to include more and more categories of children. ( This is the tactic that the Aliskys have used with their socialist programs.)
(Agreed)
* Do as the Alinskys and widely publicize on the Internet and elsewhere every government school outrage. Undermine the confidence that your neighbor has in his government school.
(If your name becomes associated with an effort like this, you will add to your “nut case” credentials.
* Begin to make your neighbor ashamed to be using the government schools. Get him to explain why he would be doing that to his precious child.
(More nut case-—making your neighbor ashamed of what he is doing to his child will be much more difficult than making him ashamed of your efforts to tear the community he lives in apart.)
* Finally, conservatives need to offer **free** alternatives. Conservative foundations should sponsor conservative teachers willing to open mini-schools, one room school houses, and run homeschool cooperatives.
(Agreed—See comment about classical liberal education above.)
* Work to close down the government school monopoly on team sports. Sports generate community support for the government indoctrination camps. Work to move team sports to the county parks and recreation departments and/or start conservative sport leagues.
(This absolutely has to be done, as sports is one of the linchpins of support for smaller public schools. However, it is best done after academic options have been established, as a way to provide similar sports opportunities for those in the alternative schools. Doing it first will again classify you as a nut case.)
I agree in principle with your assessment of the situation, but trust me when I tell you that this is how you’ll be perceived if you decide to follow your own advice on this matter. You will lose all respect in your community and they will band together to ostracize you and your “dangerous” thinking. Ask yourself if Alinsky would advocate going the routes I’ve labeled “nuts” since you seem to respect his tactics. I suspect not, though I’ve never read him directly; only what others say of him.
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.