tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post6124374050797726598..comments2024-03-28T11:57:21.902-04:00Comments on CURMUDGUCATION: Choice: The New ArgumentPeter Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16511193640285760299noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-1875787968627846612017-03-11T23:20:26.943-05:002017-03-11T23:20:26.943-05:00This is what happens when the twin ogres of ignora...This is what happens when the twin ogres of ignorance and greed operate to destroy the less than perfect rather than remediate and rejuvenate. It reminds me so much of the movie, "The Help". One of the maids wants desperately to help her son achieve an education but needs money. Why? Because her low salary prevents her from earning beyond the basics. The "Christian" boss lady will not lend her maid money because, "It will make her weak." This is repeated over and over to refuse aid to anyone less fortunate however it is that it is manifested--race, gender, country of origin, religious affiliation, socioeconomic status or learning challenge. It's time we grew some empathy. In lieu of that, we need strong laws that protect "the least among us."Shirleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11756613176679057344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-60711641328064236812017-03-08T15:50:07.597-05:002017-03-08T15:50:07.597-05:00(Cont.) Parochial schools would also still be beyo...(Cont.) Parochial schools would also still be beyond my reach, as they certainly would for any middle class parent who wanted to save to help defray the costs of post-secondary education so their kids could have a chance at a fulfilling profession without being saddled by mountains of debt. I also don't understand how a religious school could be a choice for anyone who isn't of that religion, because not only are students required to take religion classes, all their academic classes are also permeated with religion whenever possible. Pondiscio alludes to the Zelman Supreme Court decision, but I think Judge Stevens was right in his dissent that the Court wouldn't have decided in favor of Cleveland's religious voucher system if they hadn't been swayed by the terrible situation of so many of the schools at the time. On constitutionality grounds alone it was clearly unconstitutional. Since then much money and effort has gone into improving the district school system and my understanding is that they're doing quite well.<br /><br />Even if vouchers helped me send my kids to what I consider the best school, I'm not that selfish that it would be fine with me if they didn't help everyone; the same way, just because I have good healthcare insurance, I don't think it's fair that everyone doesn't. For example, I think Maria Montessori's ideas and methodologies should be considered best teaching practices. There is nothing controversial about them, and all of pedagogical science only confirms that her methods work the best for all students. Even a lay person could understand why they work. Her conclusions were discarted because of a book written by William Heard Kilpatrick, a disciple of John Dewey, that disparaged them. Her findings (she was a scientist) went against the factory model of the time pushed by businessmen, but even though they meshed well with Dewey's, Kilpatrick didn't want any credit given to anyone except his mentor, and it was easy for him to discredit her since she wasn't part of the power structure of the time, as she was a woman, Catholic, and a foreigner, not a man, Protestant, and American. Her ideas have filtered into the system anyway, but only in some schools and/or by some teachers, not in a concerted way.<br /><br />We need to do what needs to be done to improve all schools for all students, and the new battle cry of "Parents' values, not accountability!" is not only a distraction, it's clear that its purpose is to help only parents who already send their kids to religious or private schools. <br />Rebecca deCocahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13168718846105012814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-41049706737962312742017-03-08T15:47:27.243-05:002017-03-08T15:47:27.243-05:00So, the reformsters inflicted public education wit...So, the reformsters inflicted public education with their failed "accountability" experiment that's hobbled education for the last 15 years, and now they've decided, whoops, it was all meaningless, now let's grope our way towards something else. Meanwhile we're still having to deal with this juggernaut they set in motion that threatens to destroy everything.<br /><br />Pondiscio now states that the only purpose of public education is to fulfill the "needs, desires and values" of parents. He quotes a book that states that other countries fund and/or operate both secular and religious schools and suggests that the U.S. should too. The book mentions the UK, but I know that this is not true of France or Spain, and I don't know how this is pertinent to the U.S. anyway.<br /><br />A link in Pondiscio's post leads to another article written by him back in December called "Let Poor Parents Choose too". Here he explains that test-driven accountability was to improve schools for other people's children (not wealthy), but since this hasn't panned out, we shouldn't presume to tell them their children would be better off in a school with good scores when what they really want is to attend a religious or private school like the wealthy, and since this is what they really want, government, I guess, has an obligation to enable them to do this.<br /><br />I asked myself if I would be for vouchers if it meant I could send my kids to a Montessori school, since there are no charter Montessori schools in my state (and why don't I have that charter choice?), but I couldn't anyway because vouchers would only pay for one-third to one-half of what any kind of private school would cost, and I couldn't afford to pay $10,00-$20,000 a year for tuition for even one child, let alone three. So obviously poor parents couldn't. (Cont.) <br />Rebecca deCocahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13168718846105012814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-30876012748937730312017-03-08T12:42:11.323-05:002017-03-08T12:42:11.323-05:00You make a good point about the money problems rel...You make a good point about the money problems related to education. Maybe we should have insisted that urban schools get more funding instead of relying on the inequity of property taxes. Privatization started because urban schools are neglected and short changed. Why is establishing parallel schools offered as the only option? It is because "reform" is mostly about privatization, not improving schools.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-6520589837365986512017-03-08T10:02:30.144-05:002017-03-08T10:02:30.144-05:00So if you support the poor having the same choice ...So if you support the poor having the same choice as the rich, then vouchers should be roughly $30,000 a piece, right?Diennehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04570040547158789834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-90617908468773527302017-03-07T21:25:12.336-05:002017-03-07T21:25:12.336-05:00Thank you for your clarification. Thank you for your clarification. Kobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16778054056084383752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-19010347769055721752017-03-07T20:56:23.431-05:002017-03-07T20:56:23.431-05:00People usually focus on adults when they state or ...People usually focus on adults when they state or imply that some people deserve crappy lives. However, many of those adults have children.NewarkTFAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11673599595544347180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-91745815688436215822017-03-07T20:54:37.173-05:002017-03-07T20:54:37.173-05:00I have heard it my whole life in the voices of peo...I have heard it my whole life in the voices of people who imply, sometimes indirectly and sometimes very directly, that the poor are poor because they have made bad choices, because they deserve to be poor. They wouldn't be poor if they weren't bad people. It comes through in a hundred little ways-- today's example would be the suggestion that Those People can't afford health care because they are blowing it all on iPhones. It shows in a social safety net that is hugely pre-occupied in making sure that we only help people who are "deserving" of our help (and that's probably very few of them). Peter Greenehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16511193640285760299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-62223511508731481302017-03-07T20:41:02.932-05:002017-03-07T20:41:02.932-05:00I do not understand this notion that you frequentl...I do not understand this notion that you frequently express that there are many people who think some children *deserve* crappy lives. <br /><br />Greed motivates many people to be sure, but how do you definitively know that powerful people behind the reform policies believe some children *deserve* crappy lives?<br /><br />Do they express it explicitly or is this your impression based on their actions? If any person is saying such things, I am very interested in knowing his/her name.Kobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16778054056084383752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-69035787411083155372017-03-07T19:57:50.408-05:002017-03-07T19:57:50.408-05:00You last query is disingenuous at best and mislead...You last query is disingenuous at best and misleading at worst. You equate "choice" with "access" but you miss the forest for the trees.<br /><br />As a lowly paid teacher I can of course walk into any restaurant I wish. I have a "choice". I can and have "access" to all the wonderful restaurants in Philadelphia. However, I can't afford to eat at all these restaurants everyday with my salary - just as "choice" does not, will not 100% guarantee that each of my students in an impoverished North Philadelphia school with get into St Joseph's Prep School with 100% of their tuition and all related expenses paid for. <br /><br />To say that choice is a panacea for my students education is just not true. I'm still waiting for that Superman.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17110781543149987939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6534665086749553287.post-27116730260999836852017-03-07T16:08:41.806-05:002017-03-07T16:08:41.806-05:00Peter, consider that Choice is not a question of Y...Peter, consider that Choice is not a question of Yes/No, but that Choice already exists. The rich can send their kids anywhere they want, and the middle class exercises Choice in their selection of where to buy a home. <br /><br />It's common to hear that a public school must take all comers, but that is not entirely true. They only take in kids who live within a certain geographical boundary. We all know numerous cases where parents filed a fake address for their kid in order to get them into a better school district (boundary hopping). We've also witnessed scores of cases where parents were prosecuted for attempting to get their kid into a better public school (Google Kelley Williams-Bolar).<br /><br />Then there are the private investigators public schools hire in order to identify and expel those illegally (Hmmmm....someone else talks a lot about expelling illegals). <br /><br />Choice exists, for the upper and middle class. The question remains if we should allow it for the poor.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06452330026472110482noreply@blogger.com