Tolerance and Acceptance?
I’m not sure what exactly it was that made me think about this earlier this morning, but it reminded me about this great post by Matthew Ladner on Jay Greene’s blog last week, “Private Schools and the Public Interest.”
Mr. Ladner writes about a couple of recent reports from the Goldwater Institute: “Private School Students More Tolerant and Politically Accepting.” He notes:
I could fish up absurd quotes from people about how only public schools can teach proper civic values, and how scary private schools under a choice system are certain to indoctrinate children into all sorts of dangerous anti-democratic ideologies. You being a discriminating consumer of education blogs, however, makes the task unnecessary.
(It was probably one of those absurd quotes that reminded me of this blog post… but like Mr. Ladner, I won’t waste my time trying to dig one up for you.)
Anyways, the findings are very interesting- and I know they’ll come as a great shock to some staunch defenders of the public school system.
From the Goldwater Institute’s press release on the survey:
“My school teaches me to value, respect and tolerate differences in others.”
76 percent of students in private school agree with that statement, compared with 51 percent of students in public school.“My school treats all students with respect regardless of race.”
64 percent of students in private high school agree with that statement, compared with 40 percent of public school students.
Anyways, we encourage you to check out the blog and the report. Good reads.
And if you’re looking for some more Friday reading, good article from Louisiana about a relatively civil discussion about educational options.
Education Rankings- How did my school perform?
It’s back-to-school, and lots of folks have been asking recently about state education rankings and how specific schools in Virginia are performing.
You can look up any school in Virginia- or any school system- to see how it measured up last year on the Virginia Department of Education’s “Virginia School Report Card.”
Monday morning updates
Hope that everyone had a nice weekend. A few headlines this morning to start off the week.
K12 Leads the Way Back To School
Virginia-based business, K12 Inc, is “the nation’s leading provider of proprietary curriculum and online school programs for students in kindergarten through high school (K-12), is engaged in the largest back-to-school effort in the company’s history. With innovative web-based courses, over 2,000 online school teachers, and the delivery of more than 1,500 tons of education materials, K12 is bringing school directly to tens of thousands of students in the U.S. and across the world.”
We’ve said it before- school choice is about more than just one “choice,” it’s about innovation and creating a vibrant educational system with lots of choices to meet the unique needs of all of our children. K12 Inc is playing an important role in that.
The K12® virtual school program combines an award-winning curriculum – using engaging online lessons and hands-on education materials – with professional teachers, advisors, and state-of-the-art technology that connect students to a vibrant world-wide school community. This gives K12 students the opportunity to receive a complete education in their home, on the road, or wherever an Internet connection can be found.
DCPS Enrollment at 37,000, charter facility allotment must be restored
Despite Chancellor Michelle Rhee’s prediction that there would be 45,000 students in her system this term, an increase from the 44,681 that attended last year, it looks like the flood gates allowing parents to enroll their children in charters shows no sign of closing. Bill Turque of the Washington Post reports today that DCPS enrollment dropped to approximately 37,000.
These figures represent a decrease 17 percent decrease for DCPS and mean that charters now educate 43 percent of all public students in the nation’s capital at just over 28,000, a 10 percent increase over last year.
There is now no excuse for not restoring the extremely painful reduction in the Mayor’s current budget of the charter school facility fund. Remember that Mr. Fenty proposed cutting these dollars by $24 million in a scheme to pay schools only what they were currently spending on space. The Council put back $16.7 million of the allotment resulting in charters receiving $309 less money per pupil this term.
But it is much more expensive to teach a kid in DCPS compared to a charter.
Jay P. Greene’s Blog: The Special Ed DC Bubble
We mentioned last week the Manhattan Institute’s new study by Drs. Jay Greene and Marcus Winters on the impact of special education vouchers.
Dr. Greene has another informative post on his blog, noting that, “One of the (many) problems with education policy analysts is that a large number of them live in or around Washington, D.C.”
He goes on to elaborate:
The problem is that people tend to generalize from their immediate experiences. If something happens to you, you hear about it from people you know, or you read about it in your local paper, you tend to think that’s the way it is for everyone. So, DC education analysts are always at-risk of drawing policy conclusions based on incredibly atypical experiences.
Which is very true- and not just for DC education analysts.
A few Virginia families getting “choices”
At least in theory.
Failing to make Adequate Yearly Progress for two years in a row, a number of schools across Virginia have to offer parents the option to transfer their children to another school. Of course, “choice” left up to bureaucrats generally means not much choice at all, but it is a start. Sadly, students in schools that failed to make AYP last year for the first time have no choice to switch under the program.
A look at some news on this from around the Commonwealth.
The Virginian-Pilot: Suffolk picks alternatives to schools that fell short
This year, students at Elephant’s Fork, Mack Benn Jr. and Mount Zion elementary schools are being given the option to move.
The choices, Booker T. Washington and Kilby Shores, are both Title I schools that met federal benchmarks. They were selected based on their proximity to the affected schools and their diversity, said Deputy Superintendent Deran Whitney. Transportation will be provided.
Letters were mailed home Thursday to inform parents. The decision to transfer – which must be made no later than Aug. 31 – is optional, and priority is given to the lowest-achieving students, Whitney said.
Staunton News Leader: Federal ‘No Child’ mandates leave limited options for parents
Although 13 area schools failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress in No Child Left Behind standards, only one is eligible to allow parents to transfer their children to higher performing schools.
Stafford County Sun: Sixteen county schools fall short
Fifty-three percent of Stafford County’s public schools have failed to meet Adequate Yearly Progress standards.
…
Kate Waller Barrett Elementary School, which did not make AYP for 2009-2010, will be offering “school choice” — essentially a transfer option to a school better-scoring school — for the 2009-2010 school year. Falmouth Elementary School, which did make AYP for 2009-2010, will continue to offer school choice for the 2009-2010 school year. This is because sanctions are imposed on schools that receive certain federal funds, but don’t make AYP for two or more years in a row in the same content area.
Suffolk News Herald: NCLB letters in the mail
For the second year in a row, these three elementary schools did not meet the “Adequate Yearly Progress” standards spelled out in the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Since the schools did not meet the mark, they are subject to several sanctions, including allowing parents the choice to switch schools.
Alexandria Gazette Packet Two-Year Itch
JEFFERSON-HOUSTON is now in “year-four” improvement for English and “year-three” improvement for Math. That saddles the troubled elementary school with a host of sanctions, including waivers that allow parents who live inside the district to ditch the school for one with better tests scores.
Petersburg Progress-Index: School test results are mixed
J.E.B. Stuart Elementary and Peabody Middle are in year five of improvement and Vernon Johns Junior High is the only school in the state to be in year seven.
These schools are required to implement restructuring or alternative governance plans because of their repeated failure to make AYP.These schools must take one of the following actions: Reopen as a charter school; Replace all or most of the school staff relevant to the school’s failure to make AYP; Turn the management of the school over to a private educational management company or another entity with a demonstrated record of success; or Any other major restructuring of school governance.
The city has already attempted several of the state mandated plans. The school system supposed to open a school-within-a-school alternative program this year. However, trouble finding a qualified vendor has delayed that.
Whose side is the government on?
Debates over school choice aren’t just taking place here in the US, but countries all around the world are looking at reforming education by injecting school choice into the equation.
An interesting read about some of the debate in the UK appeared in today’s Spectator blog, Responding to the opponents of “Swedish schools.”
While the whole piece is worth a read, I particularly liked this line:
Existing schools have a tough enough job as it is without losing pupils to new entrants. Yes, and we have to ask whose side the government should be on: that of the parents, or the local authorities who fear competition?
It raises a really good question. Indeed, whose side should government be on? The side of parents (and taxpayers), or the side of entrenched bureaucracies? Politicians love to talk about being “for kids” or “for families,” but are they really?
Whose side is government on, really?
CNN reporter: “U.S. ‘Soviet-style’ education system not cutting it”
CNN Reporter Clark Howard reports:
Our educational system is essentially a Soviet-style government-run monopoly that could only be loved by the likes of Lenin and Stalin.
Now, I know that’s a strong opening statement, but consider this: The government decides where your kids go to school; what curriculum they’ll study; and even develops long-term educational plans just like the Communists devised five-year plans.This kind of “one-size-fits-all” approach really punishes kids.
We’ve said it before- trying to fit all kids in one model of education just doesn’t make a lot of sense. And the results are telling.
And the United States? We come in at No. 29 in science, No. 35 in math, and a recent U.S. reading score which wouldn’t even track in the top 10 countries in the world.
Funding schools or funding education?
Yesterday we shared with you the article, “A parent’s right to choose,” from The New Dominion Magazine. Over the next few weeks, we’ll be taking a look at the various arguments made by opponents of parental choice in education - namely the VEA.
The article states, “The VEA opposes public-school-choice initiatives, Boitnott said, instead preferring to see resources are put into individual schools “so that they can be successful, and kids can achieve.”"
We’ll agree with Ms. Boitnott (head of the teacher’s union), in part. We also want schools to be successful and kids to achieve. That’s the easy part. Who doesn’t want that? But to use this as an argument against school choice? That just doesn’t make sense.
Ms. Boitnott argues that “resources” should be put into schools – and by resources we are guessing she primarily means money (based on her other comments). Here is where we start to disagree with her position. Should our focus be on funding “schools,” or on funding “education?”
Now some will argue that they are one and the same or that we’re just splitting hairs. But there is a difference. As taxpayers, what are we investing in with our hard-earned money? Do we want to be simply investing in a bricks and mortar school, or would we rather be investing in a child’s education? I think most people would believe that education is the goal. We want well-educated students who can grow up to be successful, productive members of society. We want a highly trained and qualified workforce to run our businesses and build our economy.
Yet somewhere along the way we seemed to lose sight of that, instead allowing politicians, bureaucrats and unions to convince us that the debate should be about schools, not education. You’ve heard the arguments. Ms. Boitnott does not disappoint here again arguing “But until and unless the Commonwealth of Virginia is able to fully fund public schools in the way that they are required to do by the Virginia Constitution, there is no wiggle room for allowing taxpayer dollars to go toward funding or supplementing funding for private-school educators, because their first and primary responsibility is to the children in the Commonwealth of Virginia’s public schools...”
Again, for her it’s all about the public schools, not about education. (This isn’t really surprising because her primary concern is to protect her union members.) But shouldn’t our “first and primary responsibility” be to ensure every child has access to a high quality education that meets their needs?
Opponents of school choice are fond of using the Virginia Constitution to try and prove their point, yet the Constitution has this to say:
The General Assembly shall provide for the compulsory elementary and secondary education of every eligible child of appropriate age…
While it also establishes a public school system, it is clear to point out that the state has an obligation to provide an education for all students- not simply a public school.
But back to Ms. Boitnott’s first argument about investing in schools to make them successful and help students achieve. Perhaps she should take a look at the American Legislative Exchange Council’s research on the relationship between money and academic results. For the 15th straight year:
The Report Card on American Education clearly shows there is no correlation between educational dollars spent and student achievement in our traditional public school system.
While states continue to invest more and more dollars into existing public schools, they are receiving no added return on their investment. So the VEA’s argument seems to be rather flawed from the start.
So next time a politician or a bureaucrat starts telling you that they are “for education,” ask them what they really mean. Are they really for education- for ensuring every Virginia child has access to a quality education to give them the best opportunity for success- or are they really simply for the existing public school system and preserving the status quo?
School choice… for athletes?
The Winston-Salem Journal takes a look at student transfer policy- essentially public school choice- in “A Matter of Choice: Policy that lets athletes pick their high school generally scores well.”
While the article does mention that transfers are not simply limited to athletes, the basis of the article is that athletes are often the ones taking advantage of this provision in order to compete on better sports teams- and how this transfer policy has improved the quality of those sports teams.
In the 12 years before the policy was implemented, the system’s high-school teams combined to win 12 N.C. High School Athletic Association championships. In the 12 years since, they have combined to win 36…
Folks recognize that this competition benefits the students and the sports teams- helping make them better. Even a school board member acknowledges:
“I do think it made teams better,” he said. “The coaches worked hard before, but I think they have to work even harder to make sure teams are competitive and that their players are happy in the school. To that extent, I think it’s made everybody better.”
Exactly. Competition makes coaches work harder to attract athletes. The schools work harder to keep athletes happy in school.
It’s just too bad this article just focuses on athletics. How about academics? Shouldn’t schools also focus on the academic side- working harder to attract students for the academics, not just their athletics? Shouldn’t schools want all their students to be happy in school- not just their all-star athletes? Can’t competition help schools to work harder and do better?
Just asking….
Friedman Foundation: Dramatically higher parental satisfaction in Florida tax credit scholarship program
The Friedman Foundation has released a study of parental satisfaction with the Florida tax credit scholarship program, and the results speak for themselves. Parents are report signifcantly more satisfaction with the schools that they are able to choose versus their prior public schools.
From their press release:
Parents participating in the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship program report dramatically higher levels of satisfaction with academic progress, individual attention, teacher quality, school responsiveness, and student behavior when compared to the public schools their children previously attended, according to a study released today by the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.
Some of the highlights of their finding include:
- 80 percent of the parents are “very satisfied” with the academic progress their children are making in their current private schools, compared to 4 percent in their previous public schools.
- 80 percent are “very satisfied” with the individual attention their children now receive, compared to 4 percent in public schools.
- 76 percent are “very satisfied” with the teacher quality in their current schools, compared to 7 percent in public schools.
These is good news- especially for these families who seem to be much happier with the schools that they are able to select for their children. We think that all families deserve to have the chance to feel “very satisfied” with the education their child is receiving. To take a look at the rest of the findings, the full report is available on the Friedman Foundation’s website.
“Charters need accountability? They supply it”
Charter schools are one piece of the puzzle when it comes to comprehensive education reform and school choice. Here, the Redding Record Searchlight takes a look at charters and the issue of accountability.
…charters have a built-in accountability. Parents choose to send their children to a particular school for a unique reason. That decision often involves long morning drives and an extra commitment of time, as many charters demand heavy parental involvement. If the school is not accomplishing the mission, the students will go elsewhere.
What’s more, even a handful of alternatives – and charters serve only a small fraction of public school students – makes every school more accountable. Track meets and spelling bees can motivate students to do their best, but competition for students can motivate educators themselves.
Are charters perfect? No. And with fewer regulations governing the startup schools, parents must pay extra attention to weighing whether their children are getting the education they need.
But should districts be shutting down more of what are already the most accountable schools? That just doesn’t add up.
