NPR Supreme Court Could be Headed to a Major Unraveling of Public School Funding
A FB Friend posted the above link with the comment.
"The attempt to theocratize America continues." And the first commenter wrote. "So sick of religious zealots stealing from the public to fund their indoctrination centers. People want to segregate their children from poor people let them pay to do that."
Then I added the following and we were off to the races...
"As for segregating their children, millions of very Liberal people do that daily by "moving to better neighborhood", enrolling in a magnet / charter school, open enrolling to a different district, etc. Why should Christians who pay a LOT of these taxes be forced to pay even more to attend a school that is aligned with their beliefs? Especially since many of the public schools have been forced to become so sterile / no religion / fewer parties / events? Why again should all of our tax payer dollars only go to support a near monopolistic system that refuses to measure, change and improve?
Well I never did get very much for answers, but the original poster did take the time to write a lot regarding his perspective... And I am curious what you think?
In 1991 I was a college graduate. Stung by the poor job outlook in 1991, I looked into going to work for the Federal Government. They had a program called the Outstanding Scholar program for college grads who met certain criteria, and it put you on a fast track to move up the first few paygrades in federal employment. Shortly after graduation, I was offered a position supporting the CFO for the US Department of Education (ED) In Washington, DC. At the time, I was a young moderate to conservative Republican who thought I knew everything (as is typical for the age) and I was excited to work in and around all the action in DC.
About that same time, Governor Lamar Alexander, of Tennessee, was appointed Education Secretary by then president George H.W. Bush. After a history of conservatives bashing ED and wanting to shut it down (think William Bennett), Bush and Alexander believed that education is a priority and that the Federal Government did have a role in influencing education to make it competitive with the rest of the world.
Around that same time, ED adopted "America 2000", a set of education goals developed in a joint, bipartisan effort including the President and all of the nation's governors. It included six education goals. I do recall a couple of them: All students start school ready to learn, and a graduation rate of 90%. These were goals that the Government wanted to help the nation accomplish by the year 2000. We were all very excited about these goals, and the bipartisan way in which they came to be. And state and local schools would get funding from the Federal Government tied to adopting America 2000 and putting together plans to meet the goals. It seemed like a win-win proposition for everyone.
In 1992, Bill Clinton won the presidency and appointed Richard Riley as the Education secretary. I didn't know what to expect because I had really only known Republican administrations in my lifetime at that point, and I did not vote for Bill Clint on in 1992, nor did I vote for Mike Dukakis in 1988. As it turned out, it was a lot of the same. Bill Clinton had been one of the governors who had developed the national education goals, so they repackaged America 2000 and called it Goals 2000. They were largely the same with some changes.
Over the next several years I got the opportunity to interact with some of the education gurus who came in to help promote the national education agenda, including Diane Ravitch (who was so well respected she was appointed under both administrations), who was appointed by Secretary Riley to serve as a member of the National Assessment Governing Board, which supervises the National Assessment of Educational Progress. She was also an early proponent of "No Child Left Behind", which was the repackaging of America 2000 and Goals 2000 by the new George W. Bush Administration in 2002.
What happened from there, however, is really where problems began to develop. School districts became so focused on achieving the benchmarks dictated by the goals, in order to get the Federal money, that it changed teaching. I had left the Federal Government by then and had moved into working for Federal contractors in various roles. But I knew A LOT of teachers and I was married to one. They made up the vast majority of our social circle and many, many family members and extended family members as well. The joy and passion of teaching became harder for them to find. What they had been educated and trained to do, to inspire students to learn, became less important than meeting test score targets. There was pressure to not fail students who were poor performers because of graduation targets. Teachers, talented and passionate about education and learning and seeing their students succeed (not about pay), began to leave teaching.
Charter schools started to become a big thing, utilizing public education money to, in essence, create private schools where they could admit only the top performers and keep out poor performers. Then they started showing better test results (shocking). So they gained more traction.
Now what do we have? Schools still failing, still too may children being left behind. National standards that have bastardized and corrupted real education, the politicizing of education funds by far right interests who believe in this farce of "liberal indoctrination" (I can assure you that if it's not tied to the national education standards, it's not being taught).
And, if you take the time to read any of Diane Ravitch's retrospective (she has written and blogged a lot on this subject) on the national goals and standardized testing she helped create and promote, you will see that she now regrets it. She regrets what it has become, and regrets school choice, too. All things she promoted and was considered instrumental in starting at the federal level. She recognizes now that the best predictor of poor school performance is poverty. She now focuses her efforts on addressing poverty and racial segregation.
The attacks on teachers, teacher unions, etc. that you have bought into John, are all done for political gain. The real "fix" is all about having schools where all children have the same opportunity to learn, regardless of their socioeconomic status or their race. The national standards have failed to address those fundamental causes of poor achievement. Attacking teacher unions doesn't address those either.
Addressing the causes of poverty and racial inequality are likely going to gain the best traction toward improving educational achievement. If you want to really "Give to attain", John, then work toward influencing people to take up the cause of poverty and racial disparity in our country. Vote for the candidates who have plans to do this. Look for constructive solutions instead of looking to blame those who are in the trenches fighting the good fight every day. Vote for politicians and support organizations who are most committed to addressing poverty and racial inequality.
Here were my initial thoughts in response:
As for brief immediate answers... You now have stepped into the chicken vs egg problem because correlation does not mean causation... Poverty in and of itself does not cause failure in school, therefore giving people more money will not necessarily yield better results...
It is the things that cause poverty that often drive poor academic results. Un / undereducated parent(s), irresponsible / neglectful parent(s), single parent, high crime neighborhoods, cultures that do not value education, addicted parent(s), racism, etc.
I know many low income folk who's kids did great in school, but that was because they had 2 parents who were serious about their child learning. (much like my friends in China and South Korea)
The US Education system was created to lift people out of poverty. To say that we must eliminate poverty to make it work is very counter-intuitive and counter-productive.
As for "the teachers are stressed" because their kids must learn... Halleulia !!! I am stressed because I must deliver everyday or my bosses will give me the boot. That does not mean that I hold it against my bosses that performance is why I am paid each month. It is nice to enjoy one's job, but it is also healthy to be pushed to learn and perform even better!!! Don't the kids deserve to learn each day and to be ready at 18 to be independent capable citizens?
In summary, the folks commenting in opposition to me believed the answer to closing the achievement gap was to go back to 1990, stop the testing, give the Publics Schools ever more money, get rid of the public charters and stay out their education system. In fact, I was in essence berated for even weighing in on the topic since I am not a teacher. Here was the list from one of them.
If you want to build a better education system in this country.
- pay teachers better and support them 100%
- hire people that actually have experience in education that make policy for education.
- treat every school equal, and give every student the same opportunities.
- poor people vote to. Stop making policy that rewards the rich families.
To that my response and questions were. In MN we do not treat every school equally. The schools that get the most money by far are the schools with the most challenging student demographics. It may still not be enough but it exceeds $20,000 per student. And they still have the worst academic results.
- So how much should we raise that amount to?
- How much will the achievement increase?
- What should happen if the money is spent and things do not change substantially?
- Do we just keep increasing the funding or do we promote competition?
Thoughts on this chaotic long piece?
Here are some of the many links from these and other parts of the exchange.
Politico History of NCLB
NEA's Response to Race to the Top
G2A Blame vs Contributions
G2A Why are Poor People Poor?
MW Definition of Teach
BTA Economists Ate My School
G2A How to Win the War on Poverty
G2A AYP, NCLB, PDCA
MinnPost MPLS Data Teacher Equity by School
Wiki Public Employee Union History
VOX SCOTUS on School Funding
CSM SCOTUS on School Funding
Diana Ravitch Blog
Forbes Texas vs California
