Posted on 03/14/2008 7:12:51 AM PDT by raybbr
Public boarding schools where homeless children and those from troubled homes could find the safety and stability to learn are being pursued by Chicago Public Schools officials.
Under the plan, still in the nascent stages, the first pilot residential program could open as soon as fall 2009. District officials hope to launch as many as six such schools in the following years, including at least one that would operate as a year-round school.
The proposal puts Chicago at the forefront of urban school reform, as cities struggle to raise the academic achievement of students hampered by dysfunctional homes and other obstacles outside school.
Some districts, including Chicago, have looked for solutions from small schools to single-sex campuses. But residential schools are a bolder -- and far more expensive -- proposition. Long an option for the affluent, boarding schools are virtually unheard of for the disadvantaged.
Chicago Public Schools chief Arne Duncan said he does not want to be in the "parenting" business, but he worries that some homes and some neighborhoods are unsafe, making education an afterthought.
"Some children should not go home at night; some of them we need 24-7," he told the Tribune. "We want to serve children who are really not getting enough structure at home. There's a certain point where dad is in jail or has disappeared and mom is on crack ... where there isn't a stable grandmother, that child is being raised by the streets."
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
I don't know where this gang culture came from in the US.
What do you think the tax code is?
If you think the US Tax Code is unConstitutional, feel free to refuse to pay your taxes. Let me know how that turns out.
“The only way that could happen is after a complete and total abridgement of the Constitution. “
The compulsory school laws are unconstitutional.
There is NO provision for the education of children, that is unenumerated and therefore reverts back to the people. The feds and the states schooling laws are unconstitutional.
And just WHERE does that shadow come from that allows for abortion? Hmm? Killing babies is constitutional, really?
The slippery slope moves on. Ping!
This list is for intellectual discussion of articles and issues related to public education (including charter schools) from the preschool to university level. Items more appropriately placed on the “Naughty Teacher” list, “Another reason to Homeschool” list, or of a general public-school-bashing nature will not be pinged.
If you would like to be on or off this list, please ping Amelia, Gabz, or SoftballMominVa
Remind me again of who’s going to oversee this and protect all those kids from the sexual predators who are going to be applying for those jobs.
This will be just like JD. The meanest, toughest among them will rise to the top and terrorize the rest. It’ll be no different than being in jail.
Animal Farm.
Exactly my thought, that these are just modern day orphanages.
It IS unConstitutional, but that never let the IRS get in its way of collecting money.
FYI. This isn’t exactly a reason to homeschool so I’m not pinging the list in the typical way, but this is an interesting development concerning public schools that could have far reaching consequences. I thought it is something you all should be aware of.
We have teen boys raping 14y/o girls who for some reason stray alone in parks at 12:30am
Teen held in sexual assault
Teens brutally killed an placed in garbage cans
Body Found In Trash Identified As 15-Year-Old
This is a little outside the box thinking.
Do you think this might be of interest to the Nanny State ping list?
Right now this concept is for kids with virtually no parents, and it sounds all benign and good, but the potential exists for all kinds of abuse of the system as the definition of inadequate parents expands.
What next? You don’t like how they discipline? Your religion isn’t approved of? Any other thing they can can get your kids on?
I have often thought that we have two choices for inner city kids. 1) Accept poor performance because home is too chaotic or 2)Get those kids out of their homes.
I honestly never thought it would come to that. I assumed more and more interventions would be offered to families and we would continue generation after generation to accept failure.
Is this closer to the "old days", before we did everything we could to keep families together? Foster care and group homes are notorious for bullies and uncaring adults.
I think I'd rather accept failure. The idea of this gives me a sick feeling in my stomach.
The United States in general, and American education in particular, seems to have a history of pendulum swings---we never seem able to stop at a "happy medium" or realize that the optimum lies somewhere in between the two extremes.
This might be, as some posters have pointed out, a swing back toward orphanages.
I'm with you on that. I've seen welfare cases that aren't as bad as what they're talking about, and I think even THOSE kids would have been better off in an orphanage.
It's the long range potential for abuse of the system that concerns me. Right now, saving kids from crack addict parents is not a bad reason. Saving them from Christian parents because the though police don't like what they're being taught, that scares me. This sort of thing happened in the Soviet Union. It's not out of the realm of possibility.
This is a tough call. If the home is so dysfunctional, there could be a case for this. But the potential for abuse is there, too.
For those in their teens in that situation, maybe enrollment in a vocational school would be a better idea.
Can anyone here spell *t*e*a*c*h*e*r***s*e*x***a*b*u*s*e*?
Government boarding schools? Sounds to me like a pedophile and homosexual “Magnet” School!
I’m not a fan of Newt Gingrich, but remember when he was ridiculed for his idea of orphanages in the 1990’s? I’ve always believed orphanages were a better option than the foster care system where orphans are divided up and shifted from family to family.
However, Gingrich was pushing for a return to privately-run orphanages (I believe). Hillary Clinton had the idea of government-run boarding schools. Two very different ideas.
DugwayDuke’s argument is a good one. Here’s the problem: This orphanage would be government-operated, like Clinton’s idea. That means:
(1) The government would be policing itself. Expect coverups.
(2) The state could end up inventing more and more reasons to place more and more children into orphanages.
I’d rather orphanages were run privately with the state acting as watchdog. So, I hope they instead decide to create incentives for private charities or churches to open “boarding schools for low-income students” where needed. Parents should not be required to send their children to them; rather, they’d have the option to place their children into these schools willingly. And, most importantly, parents/guardians should be granted access to their children at all times and be permitted to remove them immediately without notice.
My same thought - it’s basically a state-run orphanage. Not necessarily a new concept, and it is needed for SOME few children; but the idea of the state as “foster parent” is chilling on so many levels...
My greatest fear would be that parents simply abandon their children on the doorstep of the school - or that other families may have their children unwillingly forced into these 24-7 institutions by the state.
It would be far better for abandoned children to be in loving families, rather than warehoused in orphanages. But there are so few families who are fostering nowadays, thanks to red tape and regulations. How very sad that this is even being considered... and how frightening for those who fear losing even more parental rights!
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.