Last week we’d told you about the unlikely trio touring the country and making the case for education reform. Newt Gingrich, Al Sharpton & Arne Duncan may not agree on many things, but they do agree that education in this country is in desperate need of reform, and they’re joining together to make that happen.
On The Enterprise Blog, Speaker Gingrich shares some more insight into his reasons for joining in this effort, and what it means for our country.
Sadly, 26 years of reform effort have failed to achieve the progress we need. My purpose for joining Secretary Duncan and Rev. Al Sharpton is to bring all of our efforts together to formulate a “tripartisan” plan for arriving at a breakthrough in education.
This is a national security effort and deserves the support of all Americans. If we are going to build that broad coalition, with the support of both parties and Congress and the president, we have to work to work through our differences and come together to help create a brighter future for America’s children.
For more on the tour (which, according to American Solutions, will “include school visits, stakeholder meetings and media briefings, will take the three to Philadelphia on September 29, New Orleans on November 3, and Baltimore on November 13″) and how you can get involved, visit American Solutions’ website.
American Solutions has video up from this morning’s joint appearance by Newt Gingrich and Al Sharpton on NBC’s Today Show talking about education reform. We had mentioned their efforts earlier today, and we applaud their efforts to bring about meaningful education reform.
American Solutions writes:
On most issues, we disagree strongly with Rev. Sharpton and the Obama Administration. But we believe when you can find common ground, it’s important to work together to achieve the common goal–especially when it’s something as important as our children’s future.
To his credit, President Obama supports unlimited charter schools. On this subject, and in other ways that we can work together to strengthen education in our country, we look forward to working with the President.
While we would go further than the President by supporting vouchers, Obama’s support of charter schools is noteworthy because of the strong opposition from many in his party.
At its core, this tour is about our children and their future. If we want to remain the safest, freest and most prosperous nation in the world, our children and grandchildren must have access to schools where they can learn to their fullest potential. And our schools must be accountable for results and be focused solely on learning and achievement.
This is about children, and their (and our) future. And we do agree that it is an area where people can find common ground to make needed reforms reality.
Click here to watch the clip.
Education. More specifically, education reform. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports:
…the Rev. Al Sharpton, Education Secretary Arne Duncan and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich will put aside political differences and come together on a national tour of cities showing promise in reforming public schools.
…
Free workshops are scheduled with experts discussing charter schools, school choice, bullying, the slow-closing achievement gap between minorities and whites, graduation rates and other issues affecting students.
We’ve said it before, education reform isn’t about politics, it’s about kids. And while we certainly have some differences about the kinds of reforms that are needed, we applaud these three for pushing for much-needed education reforms, including school choice and charter schools.
Saxman’s choice pursuit on target
The News Virginian
Editorial
Published: August 11, 2008
In an era when taboos have vanished, there remain third and fourth rails in American politics and opinion. Abortion and public education may yet be touched, but only with care lest their charged elements surge, their juice supplied by select leftist legions. Such people champion choice with regard to the former, but chafe at the concept with regard to the latter. On schools, the currents are losing energy, sapped by unusual suspects, such as the Rev. Al Sharpton, and ordinary thorns, such as Del. Chris Saxman, R-Staunton.
After having turned vouchers legislation into an annual ritual in futility, Saxman last month founded School Choice Virginia, a nonprofit group whose task is to boost awareness of school choice initiatives. Saxman has proposed tax credits for businesses and individuals who give money to foundations to provide scholarships for children whose parents are unable to afford alternatives, such as public charter, parochial or private schools. For five years, his bills have cleared the House only to languish in Senate committee.
Opponents argue that Saxman’s initiatives would drain money from public schools, struggling already in some parts of the commonwealth, our own included, to provide teacher pay competitive with states such as Pennsylvania. Saxman disputes this contention, saying his bills would not cut money to public schools and would slash expenses.
Saxman, it should be noted, is no opponent of public schools. He is a former teacher and sends his four children to public schools. Like Sharpton, who despairs the impact of failing public schools on low-income minorities, Saxman contends that the luxury of choice in education ought not to be limited to the affluent. Saxman’s call is for “the kinds of opportunities where every student has the best chance at success – regardless of parental income – be that public, private, charter or home schooling.”
That sounds like a sanguine argument, like advocating for peace and justice. Who opposes this? Still, even as many Democrats step to Saxman’s side, resistance remains thick as bedrock, founded on the impermeable core of fallow arguments. Fewer students in public schools would strengthen not weaken them, particularly considering that those many likely to opt for alternative education would figure to be students on the lower rather than upper rungs of the achievement ladder.
Opponents of vouchers dismiss Saxman’s claims to the contrary and fret over the prospect of reduced public school funding, but why should we? Virginia’s direct aid to public schools has increased by 45 percent since 2000-01 to $6.4 billion this school year, but high school graduation rates decreased from 79.3 percent in 2003-04 to 77 percent in 2006-07, according to the latest data from the National Center for Education Statistics. More money for traditional public schools does not translate to better performance in the classroom. Those who insist otherwise accept a myth and perpetuate it.
Saxman’s ideas do not promise to repair public education but neither will it be harmed. Principally, the issue is about parents being given latitude to determine the best course for their children. The delegate’s vision, one that he has doggedly pursued through five years of Senate rebuffing, is for those who can afford it to voluntarily invest their money in the creation of more education opportunities for those who lack the means. This strikes us as being precisely in keeping with the American spirit of philanthropy and free enterprise.
It is no wonder that Sharpton and others of his political persuasion support the concept. The real question is, why should anyone oppose it, except for ulterior motives? We urge Saxman’s fellow lawmakers to give him and School Choice Virginia a fair hearing, both in adherence to the principles of individual liberty upon which our country was founded and for the good of those currently proscribed from pursuing alternatives available only to a privileged few.
August 3, 2008
Campaigning at town halls across America, I am often asked about my plans to reform our public schools. And the answer begins with two points on which most everyone agrees: Every public school child deserves a first-rate education. And too many of our schools are producing second-rate results.
Beyond that, the education debate divides quickly into two camps. Some say all that’s needed is more taxpayer money, along with more prekindergarten and after-school programs. Others believe that the basic structure of the education system is flawed, and that fundamental reform is needed. You can put me squarely on the side of major reform.
These days, the cause of education reform crosses all boundaries of party, race and financial means. In New York, Mayor Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein have taken up the cause of reform, as have many others, including the Rev. Al Sharpton. These men are strong supporters of the Education Equality Project, a group dedicated to finally changing the status quo in our education system.
This group of leaders is no longer willing to accept a public school system in which many students never even graduate or learn the basics of math, science and English. As Chancellor Klein puts it, “In large urban areas the culture of public education is broken. If you don’t fix this culture, then you are not going to be able to make the kind of changes that are needed.”
The chancellor speaks for many, and especially for parents who cannot afford a private school. Consider the example of the Opportunity Scholarship program in Washington, D.C., which serves more than 1,900 children from families with an average income of $23,000 a year. More than 7,000 more families have applied for that program. What they all share is the desire to get their kids into a better school.
Yet Democrats in Congress, including my opponent, Sen. Obama, oppose this program. Not long ago, addressing the American Federation of Teachers, he dismissed public support for private school vouchers for low-income Americans as “tired rhetoric about vouchers and school choice.” That went over well with the teachers union, but where does it leave children who are stuck in failing schools?
Parents ask only for safe schools, competent teachers and diplomas that open doors of opportunity. When a public school fails, repeatedly, to meet these minimal objectives, parents ask only for a choice in the education of their children. No entrenched bureaucracy or union should deny parents that choice and children that opportunity.
If I am elected President, school choice for all who want it, an expansion of Opportunity Scholarships and alternative certification for teachers will all be part of a serious agenda of education reform. We will pay bonuses to teachers working in our most troubled schools because we need their fine minds and good hearts to help turn those schools around.
We will award bonuses as well to our highest-achieving teachers. And instead of measuring teacher achievement by conformity to process, we will measure it by the success of their students. Moreover, the funds for these bonuses will not be controlled by faraway officials. Under my reforms, we will put the money and the responsibilities where they belong – in the office of the school principal. One reason charter schools are so successful is that principals have spending discretion.
I am proud to add my name to the growing list of those who support the Education Equality Project. But one name is still missing: Barack Obama. My opponent talks a great deal about hope and change, and education is an important test of his seriousness. The Education Equality Project is a practical plan for delivering change and restoring hope for children and parents who need a lot of both. And if Sen. Obama continues to defer to the teachers unions, instead of committing to real reform, then he should start looking for new slogans.
