TheSmithViewpoint

27 April 2006

Rumsfeld is dumbfounded

I love this. The Washington Post reported today from a press conference held for Condi and Rummy on the second day of their top-secret excursion to Iraq:

A full 10 seconds of silence passed after a reporter asked Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld what the intense
secrecy and security surrounding their visit to Iraq signified about the
stability of the country three years after the U.S.-led invasion. Rice turned to
Rumsfeld to provide the answer. Rumsfeld glared at the reporter. "I guess I don't think it says anything about it," he snapped. <Link>

It thrills me when journalists take it upon themselves to confront world leaders with the same questions that frustrate the entire world. What also frustrates me is that people like you and me who are really concerned about these issues are not able to stand up to these world leaders and ask them these questions as well.

I'm fed up with the excuses the Bush Administration continues to give for the calamity they've made of the world and the mess they're leaving for everyone else to clean up (or perhaps never to be cleaned at all). I'm fed up with those ignorant people who believe their bullshit and continue to live their lives thinking that their "divinely appointed" government leaders know what's best for the world.

I don't know what will become of all of this, but I'm still concerned. I'm concerned because I have a son who will one day be an adult living in the world that's being shaped for him right now. What kind of world will that be? Some see it a problem to dwell on the past--maybe it is a problem--so they focus intently on living in the present with all the mantras and slogans that come with it. But what about our future? Isn't that as important?

posted by Smith @ 4/27/2006 01:08:00 PM 1 comments

21 April 2006

School Vouchers: The Problem with the Solution

An issue of dire importance to every American is currently being debated by policy-makers in the political arena. The outcome is going to determine the future of public education. Even if you do not currently have children or family members attending public school, it’s almost certain that one day you will. Elementary and secondary schools all across America are filled with dedicated teachers diligently working to improve the quality of teaching they give to their students. Many of those schools, particularly in urban areas, due to lack of funding, overcrowded classrooms, and bureaucratic obstacles, are left without the resources necessary to give each child the high standard of education he or she deserves. Poor performance and lower achievement rates are the results.

Instead of working together with parents and teachers for improvements, conservative political groups are advocating the use of federal funds to issue vouchers to students from low-income households attending poor performance public schools. These vouchers would be used to help pay for part or all of tuition at a private, for-profit or religious school. The funds for this program would be deducted from the Title I funds that schools receive for improvement programs. In effect, public schools in need of improvement are penalized by depriving them of the funds needed to make those improvements. To me, this seems like a backward solution.

The idea for privatizing education through the use of school vouchers has been around since the sixties. They came back into the mainstream spotlight in 2001 when President George W. Bush proposed No Child Left Behind (NCLB), based on his framework for education reform he had implemented during his tenure as governor of Texas. The U.S. Department of Education insists that NCLB was fabricated to “improve student achievement” and “change the culture” of elementary and secondary schools, offering the four strategies implemented to serve its purpose: state accountability systems with high standards, “greater flexibility” in spending federal taxpayer funds, “more choices for parents” with low incomes, and implementing proven teaching methods (“No Child”).

Woven tightly within Bush’s proposal were provisions for school vouchers. However, Barbara Miner, who has followed the vouchers issue for over fifteen years, explains that “congressional opposition” caused the administration to “backtrack” from that provision (“Seed Money”). In addition to congress, vouchers have never been publicly supported either. In fact, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and National Education Association (NEA) both maintain that for over 30 years voters have “consistently rejected” school vouchers “every time they’ve been proposed” (“School Vouchers”; “Vouchers”). The Message: the American public is not interested! However, lack of public support as well as legislation is not deterring the Bush Administration and fellow conservatives from continuing to fiercely advocate vouchers. Besides, NCLB still works in their favor; Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose allow that NCLB utilizes a “mechanism” that withdraws funds from public schools and deposits them into private “supplemental-service providers” (“Bushwhacked”).

At first glance, vouchers may seem like a great deal to low-income parents who decide to use them. As Barbara Miner acknowledges, “By and large, parents do what they think is best for their children without concern for the broader policy issues involved” (“Dispatch”). However, they must at least consider that the funds used to provide those vouchers drain resources from the schools that need them, and from the students remaining at that school.

Furthermore, vouchers would not necessarily cover the full cost of tuition. For instance, if the voucher provides $3,000 for a year of tuition and the private school charges that amount or less, the transaction works nicely. But how likely is it that the private school chosen will only charge that amount? Especially if and when voucher programs gain ground and the number of students applying increases, driving up demand. Parents will have to pay any costs above the value of the voucher. How does this help low-income families? Maybe the school will help those parents out by offering automatic monthly payments with a credit or debit card to save them the hassle of mailing in their payment.

Indeed, it’s possible that some parents who transplant their children to private voucher schools may see improvements in their performance. However, despite popular assumption, no consistent evidence exists that shows that children’s grades improve when transferred from a public to a private or charter school. A study by the National Assessment on Educational Progress compared results of a math evaluation given to students of similar backgrounds and concluded that scores from private and charter schools were no better than those at public schools (Schemo).

Accountability is necessary in any public institution, including the public schools. Public schools employ systems of monitoring and evaluating the proficiency of teaching methods and the results of those methods helps to maintain a standard of achievement. As seen in current “improvement” schools, the results of their student evaluations have brought them to examining other teaching strategies in order to improve student performance. Teachers are up to the challenge of their mission; that’s why they became teachers.

Private schools, however, do not have this standard of accountability. Barbara Miner emphasizes that private schools “operate by different rules”: they are not required to make performance information available to the public, to “hire college graduates” or even “certified teachers” (“Dispatch”)! Private schools are not bound by the same regulations and standards under which public schools operate. For example, unlike private schools, the public schools system is required to accept and educate everyone within their district. Private schools can accept or refuse any student on the basis of race, nationality, gender, religion, socioeconomic status, or whether the student has freckles. Who then has the “choice”? Who then will be “accountable”?

A few states have already implemented experimental voucher programs funded by conservative proponents. Despite consistent opposition to vouchers by both congress and the American public, these supporters and their corporate opportunist buddies are finding ways to drill their agendas state by state and passing it off as a way to better our nations education. The ADL advises, “Implementation of voucher programs sends a clear message that we are giving up on public education” (“School Vouchers”). Our public schools unite our children by allowing them to experience the variety and diversity of cultures of which America is made. Instead of undermining American’s system of free public education, we need to use our resources, our heads, and our hearts and work together to improve and preserve them.

SOURCES:
Ivins, Molly and Lou Dubose. “Leave No Child Behind.” Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush’s America. New York: Random House, 2003. 72-96.

Miner, Barbara. Rethinking Schools.
“Dispatch from the Front Lines of the Voucher Wars.” Spring 2006. 5 Apr 2006. <
Link>
“Seed Money for Conservatives.” Summer 2004. 7 Apr 2006. <
Link>

“No Child Left Behind: A Desktop Reference.” U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. Washington, D.C.: 2002. 9.

Schemo, Diana Jean. “Program on Vouchers Draws Minority Support.” New York Times. 6 Apr 2006. 12 Apr 2006. <
Link>

“School Vouchers: The Wrong Choice for Public Education.” Anti-Defamation Leage. 2005. 18 Apr 2006. <
Link>

“Vouchers” NEA: National Education Association. 2006. 9 Apr 2006. <
Link>

posted by Smith @ 4/21/2006 11:32:00 AM 0 comments

My Photo
Name:
Location: Elmhurst, Illinois

husband, father, son, brother, friend; curious, skeptical, cognizant, reasonable, liberal, freethinker

Google