Ben DeGrow is a public policy analyst with the Independence Institute, focusing on education labor issues.
After suffering the sting of defeat in last year’s school board elections, Douglas County union officials and a disaffected vocal minority of community members have launched an aggressive campaign to defame the sitting board. It’s perfectly their right to call into questions any actions of their elected officials with which they disagree. But they also set themselves out to be held accountable for the information they purvey. There have been at least two major fronts to union officials’ campaign.
First, their allies manipulated the Denver Post to make it look like the board is callously hoarding district funds to harm students and employees intentionally. Really? DCSD’s clearly laid out budget facts strongly belie the accusation. It would be interesting to review previous years’ fund balances from the district to see the context of current budgetary decisions. I have a hard time believing the opposition wouldn’t make hay of the board’s actions had they irresponsibly spent district reserves into oblivion.
Second, as covered in EdNews, AFT officials and other critics seized on a union-sponsored survey that showed low employee morale to hurl invective at the board. The attacks were sprung in ambush fashion, questioning the lip service some groups give to a spirit of “collaboration.”
Perhaps most telling is this single line from Nancy Mitchell’s story:
[Union president] Smith said Augenblick {the group contracted to perform the survey} is continuing to sort through the responses to the open-ended questions contained in the survey and more details will be available within the next two weeks.
The survey has been assailed for its lack of security, allowing users from anywhere to go online and vote as many times as they want. The non-scientific questionnaire represents a shaky foundation for the claims that district employee morale is suffering dramatically. More than three weeks after the survey’s unveiling, the two-week promised window to release the internal data appears to have escaped down the memory hole. Maybe they’re just interested in flinging random tidbits in hopes that something will stick to the wall.
The showdown has become more than an honest disagreement about the board’s groundbreaking Choice Scholarship Program, currently under legal injunction. We’ve seen union leaders open up the textbook of strident radical tactics in recent weeks. It carries much more the whiff of desperation than the look of prudence. The frontal ambush at the January 18 meeting could cause the board either to: a) Cower in fear from a campaign of misinformation and distortion, or b) Stiffen their spines and press forward.
The second option might include a good faith demand to have the union air its negotiation-room positions before interested teachers, parents and other community members. A grassroots Douglas County parents group is circulating a petition to call for open negotiations, while a bill to require transparent bargaining in Colorado school districts (HB 1118) comes before a house committee in less than two weeks.
Maybe the board could better publicize the hundreds of thousands of cuts they have made from recently discovered tax-funded contributions to employees working on leave for the union.
While neither option that union leaders have forced on the Board promises to make things easygoing in the district for the near future, here’s hoping for a little more balanced presentation of ongoing events in Douglas County.
What a surprise – another attempted hatchet job on unions from a “policy analyst” from the “Independence Institute.” I can’t decide which is my favorite – a conspiracy theory about union “allies” manipulating the Denver Post, which is soooo pro-union…or the part about the poor school board members being “ambushed” (i.e. being asked questions by parents) during a school board meeting. C’mon dude – it’s your full-time job to write this stuff so please at least come up with some funnier conspiracy theories. Thanks.
“Bob Harold,” appreciate the rhetorical “effort” to help prove my “point,” which I “assume” was “unintentional.” Thanks, “dude.”
Frankly, I don’t see what the big issue is, Ben. When I read the article initially and again now, my takeaway is that Superintendent Elizabeth Celania-Fagen is in hot water and the board, not so much. Maybe certain board members are just a bit jumpy considering the really bad press they got over some creative campaigning they did in the last election http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19193959 Just more reasons to get politics and ill-informed party hacks out of overseeing and running our schools.
Jeffrey, It probably looks like a big issue the closer your proximity to Douglas County. Except that national AFT officials have some reason to think it’s a big issue, since they have added boots on the ground. Not sure who is “in hot water” here. The superintendent, who serves at the will of the board, can certainly defend herself. If employees and community members are responsive to her efforts to reach out directly and discuss these serious matters, that will probably help diffuse some of the situation.
“Just more reasons to get politics and ill-informed party hacks out of overseeing and running our schools.” Are you calling for the elimination of government funding of schools? Government funding demands political debate over how those funds are collected and distributed. Or perhaps an elimination of local school boards, replaced by a Central Board of State Planners (I doubt you would subscribe to a more overtly insidious form of tyranny)? As for the “ill-informed party hacks,” dare you to name any names?
Mr. DeGrow,
The DCFT has a long history of collaboration and cooperation with the Douglas County School District despite the efforts of this Board to “bust the union”. While this Board has manipulated the union representatives by giving them public accolades as long as they never wieghed in on the voucher issue. The DCFT did NOT endorse candidates during the School Board election, nor did they get into the candidate debate. As long as the Board manipulated the Union it was OK. When DCFT asked the BOE to accept their survey before the Jan 13 Board meeting Dr Fagan sent out a disclaimer regarding that survey (even though this survey has been conducted for several years in DCSD). The Board of Education was not ambushed when Ms. Smith submitted the results at the BOE meeting at Sierra Middle School they were warned.
Teachers feel manipulated, overwhelmed by student numbers, and disheartened by the commentary berating them and negative public perception. The history of AFT in Douglas County has benefited the citizens of DC by negotiating salary freezes ( and in fact increased personal cost for benefits), providing BEST Practice educational opportunities, and endorsing tenure which only allows for due process (see Colorado law). The anti-union rhetoric has not attempted to find out the real benefits that our local schools and students have received from DCFT, which is unfortunate.
The direction of this board is impacting the very students they are the STEWARDS to. Are you aware that graduation requirements have been reduced and students are discouraged from taking classes in some DC schools? This is occurring while the public decries student preparedness for graduation. The attention to vouchers and union busting has taken the dialogue away from the truly needy…our classrooms and students! Where are they in this discussion? I’m anxious to see the SMART survey produced for and by students, and a continued balanced dialog about our schools, teachers, and Board of Education.
Jeffrey, what hot water do you think Dr. Fagen is in? As for the campaign, what is there to be jumpy about? They won.would your desire to get “party hacks” out of overseeing and running our schools include having unions and their allies in the Democrat party stay out? And who would you then like to see running our schools? Are there folks out there with no views that can be seen as “political”?
Pam Orr, please tell us what the board has done to warrant the charge they are trying to bust the union?
And how have they “manipulated” the union?
The union survey was not done in collaboration with or input from the district, as has been the case in years past. While Dr. Fagen has said they will consider the results, why should they be expected to sanction a survey they had nothing to do with?
Everyone is sympathetic to what teachers have to deal with, but the board is not to blame for the poor economy driving those issues. Again, how are they being manipulated and in to what? And there has been no commentary from this board berating teachers.
Please provide all the real benefits to our students provided by the union and explain how those couldn’t be provided without the union.
As this piece points out, there is a barrage of anti-board rhetoric, and the union was happy to provide the negative survey results but has yet to provide the explanations for the results. Where are they? What policies has this board enacted to warrant the results? Is it the voucher program? The ending of subsidizing union salaries? Since both policies are beneficial to students, families, and taxpayers, it is unfortunate that they seem to be the only actions that could explain the discontent.
It must be noted, that it was the Union who first went to the press, so who is guilty of rhetoric?
The direction of this board is impacting the very students they are the STEWARDS to. Are you aware that graduation requirements have been reduced and students are discouraged from taking classes in some DC schools? This is occurring while the public decries student preparedness for graduation. The attention to vouchers and union busting has taken the dialogue away from the truly needy…our classrooms and students! Where are they in this discussion? I’m anxious to see the SMART survey produced for and by students, and a continued balanced dialog about our schools, teachers, and Board of Education.
Pam O, I find a few things interesting about your response. Where was the collaboration and cooperation you speak of when the DCFT decided to send out a survey using district resources without district knowledge? DCFT has endorsed candidates in the past so I am not sure what it matters that they did not endorse candidates this time. It would be interesting to see all the correspondence sent to the teachers to their personal emails addresses via the political liaisons. You use the word, “warned” when speaking of the survey results; if collaboration and cooperation were used then a better word would have been informed.
This brings us to another issue. The media. Was the district “warned” by the union, or did they hear about this info from the media? Here comes the lack of collaboration and cooperation that everyone speaks of.
Graduation requirements are being reduced at one Douglas County High School. This particular High School has higher graduation requirements that any other HS in Douglas County. They are lowering them to equal other schools.
SMART has been working WITH the board not against them as the union and this rogue parent group has. Have you seen the videos that SMART has on their Facebook page? They understand the fund balances quite well. Maybe they should hold a meeting and explain it to a certain group of parents.
Pam, from the tenor of the Post article, Dr. Fagen has yet to account for the surplus. I understand there are complexities to budgeting especially during our financial downturn. I am willing to wait to see for all the facts to come out. Ben seems to think it’s important because of apparent AFT interest. I can certainly also understand your and Ben’s reciprocal interest when the union investigates your local board. After all, you and your cohorts at GCDC have shall we say, a rather conservative agenda for what you perceive to be choice and you and Dreyfuss make no bones about your religiosity. Russell has been a Tancredo staffer and Dreyfuss was Exec VP at Valor Christian. Nothing says support for public schools like being an exec for a private religious school.
For your information, it’s not the “Democrat” Party. The real name is the “Democratic” Party. http://www.democrats.org/about Only you know why you typed it but, it’s considered an epithet by Democrats if you were not aware. I favor keeping all politicians out of education as much as possible. I think educators should run our schools supported by ongoing research conducted by non-partisan universities and not by think tanks, non-profits, or other special interest groups. There can be state oversight and regulations but politicians have no more business in classrooms than they have in a hospital operating theater. We need to find a way to de-politicize education. If we don’t, you and I and others will fight over children’s lives forever and the children will lose. Overall, I favor the Finnish model.
Your very query to me about folks without political views belies your worldview and begs the question. You and your allies would save everyone a lot of time if you would just say that you would like the taxpayer to fund schools connected to churches or faiths. It’s tricky, constitutionally to make that demand but I’m guessing your view of the Constitution and the founding of our nation includes the notion that church and state should not be so separate as they are now. If that is your view, then just say it and stop hiding behind the veil of choice–we all know what that is code for anyway. And maybe you just don’t like the government seeming to dictate to you where you can send you children to school. Maybe you have a rather long list of things you don’t like about the government. If so, that’s defines a political ideology.
And Ben, school boards aren’t so bad, so long as they provide oversight and serve as an honest broker. But as we saw in DougCo, the Republican Party actively supported (even with illegal fliers) a slate of choice candidates. O/T, but funny how conservatives are all for choice unless it’s about a woman’s right to choose about her own health. I don’t want to see Democrats involved, either. There are plenty of places in American life where there are oversight boards that don’t try to foist their religion or ideology on others, especially children.
I am a bit confused…is it the union survey you say was not secure…each participant was given a code to participate and that code could only be used once.
The relationship between the union and the board was an amicable and almost friendly one for years. Then roughly 4 years ago, that very relationship started to deteriorate. So much so that we are now in this current vicious circle. There is a complete lack of trust in the board right now. Anti-union statements made on Facebook by a Director certainly only makes matters worse and creates animosity.
The union initiated the survey when the district wanted no part. They knew full well what was going on. There was a need and the union took action. Your statements that the survey was flawed and allowed anyone to access it are false and grossly over stated. Even the survey company that was used (the same company used by DougCo in the past) said that unless you had the specific routing code, the results wouldn’t count and would be disposed of. Interesting how the board is now sending human resources around to each school to conduct their own “scientific” survey. And I can tell you this, almost all of the information HR is receiving from teachers right now is probably worse than what that little multiple choice survey turned up.
These are just examples….If members of the board were ACTUALLY in our schools trying to make them better and not just saying that as a campaign bumper sticker slogan, they would see that the current path we are on as a district is not healthiest. If board members weren’t so busy endorsing presidential candidates and instead spent their time endorsing the great teachers and students of our district, moral might be higher. If board members stopped continuing to publicly support an all be it dead choice initiative, they might have the time to actually talk to the teachers and find out what is really best for our students and where our focus should really be. More kids in classes, dwindling choices (within school) for our students, elective elimination, reduced grad requirements, higher fees…there are all things holding back what could truly be world class education opportunities.
I mistakenly conflated two different surveys in this post. The survey with the security problems was different than the union’s employee morale survey. The fault is entirely my own. The larger points, including about releasing the rest of the survey to determine perceived causes for any declining morale, remain. Meanwhile, the district admin deserves credit for addressing the situation head on. And whether or not the remainder of the survey is released, a similar transparency with union negotiations would help clear the air for teachers and taxpayers alike.
Jeffrey, Dr. Fagen has accounted for the surplus; look at the district website for “budget facts.” Susan Meek and her allies have no interest in informing their followers of the answers to their allegations.
I do indeed think that the union’s (and Susan Meek’s) attempts to smear the board and administration is important, but I am not fooled that they have any interest in the truth; their only interest is in smearing them. Going to the press with allegations and repeatedly sending emails to citizens with bogus allegations, as Susan Meek has, cannot be characterized as an “investigation”.
Yes, Great Choice Douglas County supports school choice, which is the right of parents to direct funds collected for education to the school of their choice, public or private. Limiting that choice to public schools only is not choice and can’t honestly be perceived as true choice. It is surprising that it is largely a conservative agenda, since liberals claim to be the champions of individual rights and choice in other areas, but more Democrats are getting on board, like Democrats for Education Reform (DFER).
The faith of anyone supporting school choice (or not) is irrelevant, as is anyone’s choice to be involved with private religious schools. Neither does that indicate non-support for public schools. You have assumed, and that says something about you. Mr. Dreyfuss has children in private and public school, and Mrs Russell’s children attended public schools only. Her work with Mr. Tancredo is also irrelevant. Nothing says “religious prejudice” like pointing out one’s faith as if it is relevant.
Sorry to offend with “Democrat” vs “Democratic”; I had no idea Democrats were so sensitive . . .
The members of the board are not politicians. I favor boards that are not educators, so as to represent constituents and taxpayers and provide a balance of interests. I value all research conducted well.
Every citizen, including politicians, should consider public education their business. The education of our children is in all our interest, and that is why I fight FOR children, to ensure they can access the best education possible, regardless of where it is delivered. If you insist on limiting choice, children lose.
You could save a lot of time by understanding that we are focused on children and families, and not institutions. We do not have any interest in making choices for families, only that they have the choice they feel best fits their children. If your concern is in protecting the monopoly of public schools, admitting that would make the stakes more clear.
The notion that a violation of the establishment clause does not happen when the choice is made by parents and not mandated by government isn’t tricky at all; there are several court precedents that explain how simple it is. The purpose of the establishment clause is to prevent state-mandated religion, not to prevent citizens from exercising their faith. I completely support that.
I support freedom, liberty, individual rights and small government (as did our founders). It’s strange, but it has become a “political ideology” rather than American values, but so be it, and I freely admit to the ideology. Apparently, you support and join in a desire to dictate where your children are educated, and maybe you have a long list of things you think the government is best equipped to decide for you. If so, that illustrates a political ideology, and you have made my point: who among us is without one?
While these points were addressed to Ben, I would like to respond, too. How did the Dougco GOP’s active support of candidates affect their governance of the district? What was “illegal” about their flyers? I find nothing about abortion “funny” but the opposition to allowing parents to choose the school best for their living, breathing children is contradictory to strong support for a woman’s right to end the life of her unborn child. You don’t want Democrats (or is it Democratics?) involved, either? Not possible, since everyone leans one way or another, and not as long as teachers unions are aligned with Democrats.
One last time: school choice doesn’t foist religion on anyone; the lack of it restricts choice to public schools
Nice, concise, thoughtful response Pam. One idea and question just off the top of my head: I want to start a new private school. The curriculum will include instruction in acceptance and promotion of everyone’s right to marry whom they wish and how to get an abortion or use PlanB. Science will include teaching evolution and global warming as fact. History lessons will center on how Christianity is responsible for child abuse, genocide, and most wars large and small. Social studies will include instruction in demonstrations, how to amend the Constitution, and the advantages of a communist state. Because my school is an expression of the religion of Millerism (a Wiccan coven), I demand tax-exempt status for my land and in all other financial transactions.
Would you be ok with me using your tax dollars for my school?
Actually, I have a very long list of things I’d like the government to decide for me: safe levels of lead in consumer products; how to fight the global war on terror (I’m a bit old and not sure if I could have run down and killed Osama, for example); the number of feet to separate airliners in their final approach to an airport during a heavy thunderstorm with a 20 knot crosswind; where to set fertilizer levels for sod farms so as not to contaminate ground water supplies in floodplains on alluvial soils; the weight limit loads for trucks on interstate highways (I just have a terrible time calculating mass vs. asphalt wear ratios); I’m pretty much clueless about building codes, so I like to have the government decide those; and who has time to decide what levels of hydrochlorothiazide are really effective?; does my burning house require water or foam for it to be extinguished? I have at least several hundred more things I could list but honestly Pam, it looks like I’m needy, dependent, and really need a nanny to run my life. Come to think of it though, I’m already involved in all of those things. I am a citizen of the United States. I pay taxes and I vote. And while corporations have become people by some demented action of partisan judges, “this land is your land, this land is my land, from California to the New York island…” We’re all in this together—that is what a government is all about.
Your interpretation of school choice imposes an expectation that some of my tax dollars go to support religion. It’s bad enough I have to subsidize churches and their real estate holdings with government services such as fire and police. When the state sanctions public monies to pay for private faith matters, it places that faith under the purview of political control. Think about it: if you are allowed to have your way and my tax money goes to your religious school then, your school like all other state-sponsored entities should be subject to the statehouse and its political rules and machinations. Deal or no deal?
I am for public schools. I admit it. It’s not a monopoly, however. You can have your Valor Christian. Heck, you can even be Amish and only go to school until the 8th grade. Why can’t we just learn from Finland?
Most other Western, industrialized countries put this debate we’re having behind them decades ago. I thought we had as well. Guess I was wrong.
Jeff, I’d be a lot more OK if parents selected that kind of school through a voucher mechanism than to have that kind of school provided as the default tax-funded government option. It’s a more creative red herring than the typical reference to a hypothetical KKK School or Bin Laden School of Jihad, though. I’m sure you know a lot of people still pay taxes to fund public schools though they disagree with some of the same sorts of values & issues you described above and send their kids to a private religious school or educate them at home. Do their concerns matter? What would Finland do?
Wouldn’t expanded school choice help diffuse these cultural issues rather than having sensitive debates over such issues before state boards, legislatures and textbook commissions (not to mention federal authorities, including courts)? If the dominant public school system promoted the pro-life movement, traditional marriage, Intelligent Design, global climate change skepticism, free market economics, Constitutional originalism, and old-style American patriotism, would you still have the same position vis a vis school choice? I would.
Ben, people pay taxes for a great many things with which they disagree. That’s part of the social contract. We all make compromises with our ideals to live together. Another way to look at it is we understand that we are actually not compromising our ideals but making accommodations for other points of view or ways of being. Private schools and homeschoolers have their tax burden offset by enjoying relief from the regulatory environment of public schools. Finland has almost no private schools and they get money from the government. That’s not the part of Finland we need to adopt–the part about eliminating high stakes testing and trusting the professionalism of teachers is what we should adopt.
Expanded school choice would only create more chaos. It would encourage a cafeteria approach to schools (and knowledge itself), raise costs, and eventually balkanize American society more than it is already. If the dominant school system actually promoted what you suggest, our society would have already collapsed into a failed state. Seriously. But if I play by your rules, I would send my kids to a private school or leave the country if my political action was ineffective. Public schools may not be perfect but in the hundred years or so they have been around, the American experiment has done pretty well. I mean, it’s hard to top being the world’s only superpower with the dollar the global currency of choice and English the lingua franca. Stop and smell the roses. We’ve had a good run. Sure, we’ve got some competition now but don’t freak out, it’s time other countries paid their way, right? And besides, we’re Americans. We defeated the Axis and the Soviets while wrestling with a meltdown of our economic system and a crippling dust bowl–what are we so worried about? Me, no matter how messed-up we get with misunderstanding our heritage, our economic system, and our blessings, I trust Americans to do the right thing in the end.
Overall though, I think you and Pam and even left-wingers (I don’t care for DFER btw) place too much faith in the ability of schools and districts and curricula to influence children as they move along their life-path. As it is, why can’t parents use the dominant paradigm to teach other lessons at home? Family is stronger than any school.
Adam, myself and others keep asking if there are policies enacted by this board to warrant the survey results. The flyers is the consistent answer, but they did not change the employee contracts. The comments by the director were made after the spectacle created by and encouraged by Union President Brenda Smith and Susan Meek; their comments at the BOE forum can be seen as indicative of animosity, and what is the source? Again, we do not have the rest of the union survey results to explain it nor any other answer other than the flyers. If the BOE has made policy to warrant it, please tell us what they are.
I understand that the district wanted the survey to be expanded to gauge opinion on issues being worked on in the district, and the union wanted no part of that; seems they were in a hurry to survey non-specific opinions on the board and administration and when they got them, rushed to the press with them; that isn’t a great way to work with the BOE and district.. I hope the information HR is compiling is more explanatory than the union’s.
What would constitute trying to make our schools better? I have been to nearly every board meeting since November 2010 and read and watched everything in the media on this board, and they have ALWAYS endorsed our district, our teachers and students. Despite that, their opponents continually paint them as you have. You cannot come up with proof that the board members have spoken ill of our teachers or students, so what explains the low morale? Perhaps it is their support of school choice?
How ironic that you oppose an initiative that would benefit district students financially and by freeing up seats in the classroom. Revenue is a problem for school districts (and everyone else) across the country; this board and administration cannot magically provide it.
Jeffrey, thank you; I try. If your private school had some record of successfully educating students in the subjects measured by CSAP or other tests, the ACT and SAT, I would not be opposed to it., although I would be surprised if there was much of a market for it, since much of this is already available in public schools. The tax dollars should benefit students, not schools, and if parents think that’s the best choice for their child, I respect their right to choose it.
All your examples of what you want to government to decide for you is, IMO, indicative of needing a nanny. Business, military and agriculture are capable of figuring it all out without government, but a desire for government to control is in line with your ideology. Love the song you mention, and characterizing it as about government is inventive.
Tax dollars go to all kinds of things we may not support, but the legal issue here is does taxpayer dollars going to religious schools violate the establishment clause. Several courts, including the USSC, have said it does not, when the choices are religion-neutral and when parents, not government, make the choice. Further, courts emphasize that the beneficiary of school choice is the student, not the schools. I don’t like my tax dollars going to planned parenthood, but I’m sure you would argue it’s reasonable because they “provide services” to women. Private religious schools provide an education. I am aware of the tendency of state to try to control faith-based institutions, such as Obamacare requiring religious institutions to offer free contraception to employees. DCSD’s program didn’t infringe on religious schools practices, and I would join efforts to prevent any such intrusions. At this point, deal.
I’m for education, and the freedom of parents to make the choice for their children. School choice would make this argument unnecessary; if you could allow parents to take their child and the dollars to the school of their choice, schools will rise to meet the demand, and everyone benefits. Unless you fear that public schools can’t compete, where is the downside? I’m certain plenty of parents will still choose their neighborhood school in Dougco. .
Interesting that supporting some of the things we disagree with in public schools is required by our social contract, but allowing dollars to go to religious schools is just a bridge too far. BTW, your tax dollars already go to religious institutions, via Pell Grants, the GI Bill, and Medicare and Medicaid; isn’t that an accommodation of other points of views and has that caused some harm?
I am supportive of treating teachers like professionals, and maybe adopting the practice of other countries that recruit the best and brightest in their fields of study, rather than having “education” degrees would be a good thing and would probably improve our international standings. I also support eliminating tenure and paying teachers as professionals, but alas, the unions prefer the one size fits all, paid the same based on years in the profession model.
I like the cafeteria notion; we enjoy it in almost every other area of our lives, why not education? How would it raise costs? Balkanize? Do you argue with your neighbor about what he chooses to eat at a cafeteria? What cell phone company he uses? The problem with your argument is it assumes government needs to be in control, but what has that done for education? Tripled spending and flat or lowered results. Put the customer, parents, in charge of choosing schools and you will see more choices to fit more needs/wants, and schools will improve or fail. With such demand, it will be met.
I am eager to hear your theory on how the values Ben mentioned would have collapsed our society. Seriously. Wasn’t most of that actually happening prior the the establishment of the Dept of education and didn’t we then enjoy the ranking of one of the best education systems in the world?
Maybe you should trust American parents to do the right thing for their kids.
Too much faith in schools isn’t the problem; it’s having to let their judgment override ours. We do all we can to provide the balance they don’t get in public schools, and that, as well as the ability of those who can afford it to send their children to schools that align with their educational needs is, IMO, the only reason society hasn’t collapsed.
Jeffrey, you keep mentioning Finland. Do you know that they teach religion in Finland’s public schools?
Interesting, isn’t it Becky? As I said above, I wouldn’t take everything from the Finnish experience. But come to think of it, I am often met with blank stares if I use an allusion in the classroom to something Biblical. I wouldn’t mind seeing comparative religions classes. In Finland, their cultural history is a bit different and they are experimenting with trying to meet the needs of all. I predict their current system will eventually be curtailed to a large extent because after awhile, it just gets to be too complex to satisfy everyone. And like I said above, probably the strongest instruction in faith comes from the home–I’m not sure respect for the Almighty would go up if kids had to study for a religion test like some kind of mathematics of morality. I’m pretty sure loathing for religion would set in if personal faith becomes seen as just another subject to pass. And if you were the parent of a child at a school with religion, how do you know that every single thing they are instructed in squares 100% with your family faith anyway?
The important thing about Finland is how the teaching profession is regarded and how the accountability and testing systems Americans are creating simply don’t exist over there. And why are Americans so prickly and so easily offended about religion anyway? Why, one would think that’s the only place humans could get their sense of morality and ethics from…
http://the-diplomat.com/china-power/2012/01/03/what-finland-shows-china-u-s/
It isn’t possible for public schools to be everything to everyone. School choice makes sense because parents can choose the best fit for their child.
School choice supporters aren’t concerned about teaching religion or the merits of it. We don’t care if parents choose public neighborhood, public charter, or private (religious or not); we just think parents should have the right to choose.
Pam: “Business, military and agriculture are capable of figuring it all out without government, but a desire for government to control is in line with your ideology.” No, it’s not in line with my ideology; it’s in line with reality. Are you old enough to understand what air quality was like before the Clean Air Act? (I actually thought I was listing some commonsense things about government). Do you remember Denver in the Brown Cloud?
About my tax dollars going to religious institutions–I thought I was clear in saying I didn’t like the tax breaks. That some provide services to people is fine so long as the Establishment Clause is not crossed. You see, the big deal with schools and my taxes is one of indoctrination as well as the government being viewed as endorsing one religious view over another. One big reason we even have public schools goes back to the notion of socialization to a wider American culture and political system. Schools do represent the state and the authority WE allow the government to have. And we should not allow schools to even seem to favor any faith with tax dollars or subsidies. That keeps the education playing field fair for all.
It’s not about whether or not public schools can compete–competition already exists, as there are private schools and charters. You have your choice as it is. What more do you want? You and your compatriots seem to want public schools now to bend to your personal whims. Belief in the power of competition is misplaced and has never worked in education because teaching and learning are not like a marketplace or a sporting match. See my link above in my response to Becky. I don’t disagree unions need to adjust, perhaps not as far as you do and I have never joined a union because of my own disagreements with their approach.
Here’s the reason the cafeteria approach to schools would raise costs: there are efficiencies of scale in larger numbers. Placing the government (aka, the people) in charge of education (which is really the transmission of knowledge) provides for accountability and safeguards against any one group, ideology, point of view from dominating everyone else. Already with Citizens United decision, we see the rise of the SuperPacs where majority of the hundreds of millions already raised has come from the coffers of just a few hundred people. That should scare the living daylights out of you AND me. It will happen to education as well if we allow unfettered markets. Government (you and me) exists in part to control the marketplace yes, and if you don’t like that you are welcome to try change it.
Finally, I’m not sure what you mean about Ben’s values, etc. There was a decline in SAT scores but it happened before the Dept of Education and btw, is EVERY federal department some kind of evil in your estimation? Anyway, global rankings are a more recent phenomenon. And besides, the SAT scores could correlate more with economic conditions than some perceived failure of the schools. I get the latter is what you may prefer to believe but there the issue of how American kids score on standardized tests is fraught with many variables and you can’t just say the fault lies with unions and government schools. We are still the world’s superpower, like I said. I really don’t know where some folks get the idea America is on the ropes. Our economy tanked because of conservative/neoliberal economic policies of deregulation in the financial and housing markets and we are on the comeback. The rest of the world is finally catching up. Don’t panic. While I very much doubt we have ever had the best schools in the world, we do have the very best university system on the planet which would be hard to have without successful public school graduates.
Are you to be trusted to make the best decisions for your children? You have that right. Does that mean you always make the best decision? No. Neither do I. If my child has a disease, she goes to a doctor. If my child has dyslexia, he goes to a reading specialist. I place my trust in experts unless I have reason to believe otherwise but I would never pretend to be able to take the place of an expert.
@ Pam – It seems you and Alanis Morissette have the same understanding of the word “ironic”.
Public schools are not supposed to be everything to everyone. That’s why you have Sunday school, youth group, club sports, voice lessons, piano lessons….shall I continue.
Someone tell me what private schools offer students that public schools do not, excluding religion and the ability to say who is allowed to stay, and who has to go. Let’s even the playing field a little, and before anyone says smaller class sizes, that falls under the realm of who stays and who goes (or doesn’t even get in). If you want those luxuries, then whip out your checkbook. Public school are absolutely not intended to be everything to everyone. They are a guarantee that every child in this district has access to a quality education. You want the frills and the bumper sticker announcing your kid is something “special”? Will that be cash or credit?
Yes, Jeffrey, I’m old enough to remember Denver’s Brown Cloud. I still believe a free market could figure it out without government.
You said school choice imposed an expectation that some of your tax dollars go to support religion and added it was “bad enough” you had to subsidize churches and their real estate holdings. I took that as opposition in principle to tax dollars to private religious institutions.
Your statement that religious institutions providing services so long as the Establishment Clause isn’t crossed is in line with court precedent: these institutions provide education and health care. If a religious education is the choice of parents (and students in the case of GI bill and Pell Grants) and they could also choose non-religious education, then it is a matter of individual choice and not government endorsement. The only thing government is endorsing is the right to choose. Your “indoctrination” is another’s “truth” and vice versa. As mentioned before, many parents see what is taught in public schools as “indoctrination” as well and consider it as harmful as you seem to consider religious education.
School Choice doesn’t favor anything other than the right of parents to choose the best education for their children. The fact that some will choose religious schools speaks only about the parent choosing.
I approve of public education embracing and promoting American culture. Unfortunately, confusion about what the Establishment Clause means and increasing acceptance of prejudice against religion has prevented that for decades. Our own Blaine Amendment was an expression of anti-Catholic bigotry and is relied upon by those opposed to the program, including the ACLU.
Choice exists only for those who can afford it or obtain aid, so the public schools enjoy a monopoly and therefore do not have to compete. I want the funds collected for the purpose of education to follow the child to their school of choice. Competition requires schools to supply to meet demand, but most parents and taxpayers just want improved education from all of our schools, so that our children can again compete internationally. There is evidence that choice and competition indeed work in education and an expansion of the experiment makes more sense than doing the same thing we’ve been doing for 30 years hoping for a better result.
Efficiencies in government? You didn’t really just make that argument, did you?:) Accountability? When school boards and administrations are forced, via union contracts, to spend years and money providing “due process” to teachers who are everything from bad to criminal? I agree that provides safeguards, but to teachers, not children; aren’t they our concern? Private and charter schools are able to be much more efficient and educate children for less in large part due to their freedom to hire and fire absent costly, time-consuming “protections” for teachers. Who is safeguarding us from the ideology of the left, so prevalent in our public schools? I completely agree with the Citizens United Decision and wealthy individuals and corporations lobbying government; doesn’t scare me a bit. What does scare me is government choosing winners and losers. If we say, “show us what you got” to educational institutions, public and private, and those who would start new schools, the market will lift the good and weed out the bad. It’s just like Ma Bell; take away her monopoly and we all have more choices at better cost. There is no credible reason to claim education is somehow unable to do the same; as you said, they provide a service: education. We can determine whether they are providing it, instead of letting the education bureaucrats and teachers unions keep insisting they are, despite the facts. The founders didn’t intend government to control the marketplace, and I am trying to change that.
I was referring to your statement “If the dominant school system actually promoted what you suggest, our society would have already collapsed into a failed state. Seriously.” I assumed you were referring to Ben’s query if you would still oppose school choice if the public schools promoted the pro-life movement, traditional marriage, intelligent design, climate change skepticism, free-market economics, constitutional originalism and old-style American patriotism). I’m still interested in your explanation of that theory.
Scores and rankings, quality and quantity of knowledge of our students has declined for decades, and I do not see the DEA (nor most other federal departments) as “evil”, just unnecessary, ineffective, and detrimental. Global rankings are recent? Well, that’s a relief; if we just keep doing what we’re doing, we won’t be able to say it’s been an issue for decades for, well, decades. The “economic” excuse is very popular recently, too; how did we manage to overcome it in past economic crises? And haven’t we continually raised the bar on what is defined as poverty, as well, so that citizens with big-screen tvs, cars, cell phones, air conditioning and enough to eat are considered in poverty? How did we manage to educate children in far more dire economic positions in the past? How are charter schools across the country catering to low-income and poor successfully educating them? Apparently, it can be done; competition might incentivize neighborhood public schools to adopt their practices, and wouldn’t that benefit all of us?
Again, continuing to do the same things expecting a different result is insanity, and the “economic excuse” is an excuse no one should accept. Not to mention the problem of our best and brightest struggling to compete internationally. I don’t “want” to believe our public schools are failing. I attended very good public schools and so did my children. I won’t lie to myself about their decline, though, or take comfort that the bureaucracy have come up with an excuse. The fault lies with all of us, for doing exactly that and continuing to trust that the status quo model and more money will fix it.
No panic here. School choice is on the march across the country and I believe it will prevail. You are correct parents don’t always make the best decisions, but neither do experts; the problem is when parents have no choice but to defer to the public school “experts.”
Phil, there is no need to continue your list; there was no need to begin it. School choice is for parents who might want those things infused in their child’s school day and don’t wish to be constrained by your choice of what is enough for them. And I’m pretty sure those things don’t exist just because they aren’t available in public schools.
I would say no one has to explain or justify what private schools offer that public schools don’t, but I will indulge you in listing some of what they offer. Religion, small classes, expanded courses, more rigorous academics, more rigorous discipline, uniforms, arts, less “political correctness”, less or no left-leaning indoctrination, traditional family values, more civic education and special needs. Private schools offer one r more of these and others I haven’t listed.
And public schools can still expel or outsource students. Your claim that public schools guarantee every child a quality education contradicts reality; they don’t. School choice won’t guarantee that, either, but it will improve the chances.
I want a quality education to be standard, not a luxury.
Well Pam, your attitude towards air pollution and Citizens United kinda tells me we will have a tough time finding much if any common ground for discussion. I thank you and hope we both feel we have aired our thoughts to our satisfaction. I trust that our readers feel likewise and have been enlightened as to the ongoing debate.
I would like to respond to your personal query about Ben’s post. I see what you were referring to. OK, I do in fact think that the USA would become a failed state if we adopted all those ideas. I don’t really have a theory as such, about it, more of a hypothesis. See, if for example Intelligent Design were to be taught as a legitimate scientific theory as robust as evolution, that alone might fail us as a nation. No technologically advanced society can survive if the process of science is ignored. Heck, one reason the USSR beat us into space is because for all the myriad failings of the communist ideology at least they accepted the fundamental tenets of empirical scientific investigation. Constitutional originalism? Yeah, I know it’s all the rage these daze but personally, I like all the amendments and the Bill of Rights. I also like the notion that we can change it over time, that the Constitution evolves as do we. I confess, I rather like the 21st Century, I like it that women can vote and everyone is 5/5ths of a person. I just don’t think our country would survive if we tried to live like 18th Century people.
My desire for small government says nothing about my feeling about air pollution; it’s just that I don’t think government is necessarily the best regulator of anything. I thank you for the discussion and think it is good that readers see the debate.
As for your thoughts on such values collapsing the state, I see no harm in presenting Intelligent Design and Evolution and pointing out the flaws in both. I have no interest in eliminating the scientific method; I am concerned that it’s all the rage these days to shut down inquiry with claims that science is “settled.”
I too like the amendments and Bill of Rights. I’m just opposed to inventing new interpretations of the constitution to bend them to the will of those who don’t really like them as they stand (like President Obama, who has pointed out it gets in the way of what he wants to do). And I’m not opposed to amendments, either, but see no need for any evolving of their original intent; they are nearly perfect as is, IMO.
I love this century, too. And the right of blacks and women to vote are fine examples of originalism, and originalism doesn’t require living like we are in the 18th Century.
Best to you!
Pam- i have to agree with Jeff on the broader idea that our tax dollars are for the good of all not for the one. In this case, the needs of the many out weight the needs of the one. Our tax dollars go towards everything we take for granted. Plowed roads, park upkeep, bridge repair and maintenance, road building and maintenance, schools, libraries, as well as any new state wide construction…like a sports stadium for example. Schools are a large part of that. Its a unique part of what makes America great. We educate all.
I attended both public and private schools in my up bringing. In fact, I attended 2 of the best private schools in the state of colorado from middle through high school. In all, most of my life was spent in or around private religious schools. From the perspective of someone from both worlds, I disagree with a lot of the assertions on your list. I do find it “ironic” how you downplay the Religious piece but it is the first on your list. Freudian slip…who knows. But I digress.
Yes my school had religion as a large part of my education. It was a very important piece no doubt. It was an integral part of my overall education as a christian and a man. But ALL of the items on your list except 2, are shared and provided in the public schools as well. I will extract the left leaning indoctrination and traditional family values items you threw in there mostly because they insult my intelligence. One is a complete falsehood and something members of my party (yes my party) love to throw around without evidence mostly due to the union connection to teachers. The other is just code for close-minded and prejudice. Talk about indoctrination, but my private religious school “indoctrinated” me to think for myself, don’t just be a sheep, and “evolve” my views as society continues to grow….gasp!
Public schools can expel students or outsource students you are correct. But, public schools can not without paperwork after paperwork and meeting after meeting and documentation after documentation and weeks upon weeks of run around and court. You have no idea how much work it is to expel a student from a public school. Why is it so much work? Because public schools have failsafes in place to constantly try to reach the child and their parents through chance after chance after chance. Private schools can and do expel, kick out, or ask leave of any student anytime/all the time, usually for behavior or not meeting minimum academic standards. That is their luxury and they can whenever they please.
Public schools HAVE to guarantee every child a quality education. DougCo is certainly a place where quality education is offered at every corner. Private schools don’t have to guarantee anything.The assertion that teachers in DougCo are not providing a quality education to students in our county is both insulting as well as revealing. What did DougCo teachers ever do or not do for you that has made you so angry all the time..enough to make you want to get away from us?
If i placed my faith in the lottery like you place your faith in school choice, I’m SURE I would have been a winner by now! I guess buying more tickets will just exponentially increase my chances right?
Quality education is the Standard in DougCo along with Quality teachers. If you want the luxury of uniforms and religion, by all means pay for it yourself, sacrifice, scrimp, save, and work for it. That’s what my parents did.
Adam, I agree that our tax dollars are meant to be for the good of all of us; not sure why you are making that point?
I also agree that education is one of those purposes that is good for all of us. I don’t know what I said that caused you to say I am downplaying the religious piece. I will repeat that those of us who support school choice are not concerned with whether or not parents choose religious schools or not; we are only concerned that they be able to choose the school they think is the best fit, religious or not. No Freudian slip.
Religion is promoted in public schools? You are correct that expanded courses are offered in public schools, but I put “more” in front of academics, discipline, and civics. That statement wasn’t intended to imply all private schools offer all of any on the list or that some public schools don’t also offer them. The point is that there are private schools that offer “more” and “less” of what is available in public schools, and some parents want that. I think we are fortunate in Dougco that left-leaning values are not rampant and traditional family values not regularly criticized, but in general, public schools do lean that way, and even occasionally here in Dougco. I don’t know why the truth would insult your intelligence and no insult is intended. And yes, unions deserve much of the credit; just take a look at what the NEA and AFT promote as education and tell me there is no evidence.
I’m disappointed at your use of the term “code for” to portray those who don’t share your values as prejudiced and close-minded; it’s a common charge by those on the left. How can students “think for themselves” if they are only presented with one view, or worse, called “prejudiced and close-minded” if they disagree? The notion that views need to “evolve” illustrates yet another view of the left that many parents do not want promoted in school. What does “evolving” your views mean? If one becomes convinced their view should change, fine; it happens all the time. But if one doesn’t change their views, because they are convinced of them, are they then not “evolving” in your mind? And what does “as society grows” mean?
My comment about public schools being able to expel or outsource students was not meant to address how difficult it might be (and I’ve heard of at least one instance where it wasn’t so difficult); it was only meant to answer the notion that private schools have a corner on that. Yes, private schools have much more flexibility in all arenas; that is also attractive to parents.
Yes, public schools generally have to take all comers, but where is the guarantee of a quality education? I’m not aware of any rebates being available. And Dougco is a good district, but to claim every child gets a quality education is an exaggeration. Dougco does well, but still fails some students (doesn’t every district?), and college remedial rates are higher than they should be; 21% I believe. Private schools have to satisfy their customer. Their only revenue stream is the parents who send their children there. If they don’t satisfy their customer they go out of business.
I have not asserted Dougco teachers are not providing quality education, so I don’t know why you are insulted. My children went to Dougco schools and had many good teachers; I’m not angry.
My support of school choice isn’t based on opposition to public schools. I’m a product of public schools, and my children attended public schools K-12. I am opposed to the monopoly of public schools. I want every family to have the ability to take the dollars collected for education of their children to the school of their choice: public neighborhood, charter, or private, religious or non. And yes, I prefer more choice to less.
Many parents, likely most, will still choose their neighborhood school, because Dougco does have good schools. But for those who want something “more” or “less” or “different” than the public schools offer, let them have it; it’s beneficial to the district and the students. I appreciate that your parents sacrificed to give you the private education they wanted you to have. I want to make that possible for more parents without the means.
I think my list should be started again, and certainly completed. You want the school of your “choice” to teach exactly what you want. Nothing more, nothing less. Are you a highly qualified educator? Are you licensed in ANY content area? No? Then I’m afraid you are not qualified to teach children in our school systems, and you are certainly not qualified to talk about what students should and should not be taught overall. You are most qualified to be a parent, and that takes work. You WILL have to supplement your children’s activities, you WILL have to make sure they make educated and intelligent choices, and you WILL have to let them fail if they are to ever succeed. If you are so terrified of the “left”, then I suggest you home school your kids. You seem to want to keep them in a bubble so they are safe from all the “bad guys” out there. The very idea the the “left” are the bad guys says a lot about you. You want small government, but you want it there to protect you and YOUR rights, and to give you a handout in the form of “education”. Public schools do a great job of educating children. I find that children’s parents do a far less spectacular of supporting the educational process. Remember, children are not given grades, they earn them. It is the parents job to make sure they are doing their work. Private schools should not be paid for by public tax dollars. Claiming that kids are being brainwashed, turned gay, turned democrat, or whatever else you can dream up, is simply not the case. Okay, some people don’t agree with you. Get over it. Public schools do exactly what they were intended to do. Either put up the cash for your private school, or for the love of God, sit down and stop terrorizing this community with your circular conversations.
I think every parent should be able to choose the school that they believe is best for their child. I have made no demands on any schools.
I am not an educator and certainly not qualified to teach, but I reject your apparent view that only educators are qualified to opine about education. This may surprise you, but I did all those things you say parents should do without ever talking to you. My youngest is nearly 22, both of my children attended public schools, and I was never interested in keeping them in a bubble; I hope you are not among those who think homeschooling parents largely do so to isolate their children . .
“Terrified” of the left? Is disagreeing with the left now “code” for being “terrified” of them?
I want small government to protect all of our rights. I think we agree that taxpayers funding education is a good use of funds. I don’t think the education has to be delivered in a public school and I think parents should make the choice of where it is delivered with those funds. As you say, parents have to teach their children to make educated and intelligent choices, so surely you agree they can make educational choices for their child.
It’s not a hand-out; it’s more of a “hand-over” to the people best qualified to decide: parents. And for low and middle income families, it’s a “hand up,” providing choice they would not have otherwise. And why do you put education in quotes? That’s what the funds are for.
I don’t understand “Public schools do a great job of educating children. I find that children’s parents do a far less spectacular of supporting the educational process. Remember, children are not given grades, they earn them. It is the parents job to make sure they are doing their work.” Are you saying that if students or parents have problems with public schools it is because they don’t support the educational process, that grades are earned, or their responsibility to make sure the work is done? If so, I hope that was a not so well thought out statement due to emotion and that you meant to say “some” parents.
In higher education, students do use public tax dollars for education at private schools, via the GI Bill and Pell Grants. They have for decades; has anyone been harmed?
I’ll try again: School Choice isn’t about which schools are better; it’s only about letting parents decide that. I get that you like public schools. My point is that some would like a school that is “more” something, “less” something or “different.” As Ben noted earlier, if public schools promoted the values of the right, would you support choice so that you could take the funds for your child’s education to a school that fits your values? He would. I would.
School choice removes the argument. You love public schools? Send your kids there. Allow other parents to make a different choice. No one is harmed and everyone is satisfied.
I “get” that you want me to shut up, but “terrorizing,” Phil?