Jul. 29, 2003 - 17:46 MDT

THE WONDERING JEW

Ball Of Worms

It is being cussed and discussed and has had repercussions as well, with more to come I think. Vouchers - school - that is.

Sometimes I wonder if public education for all is but an idealists dream being put through the garbage disposal that all good things seem to reach in the end.

A column in The Denver Post, Sunday, July 27 by E.J. Dionne, a Washington Post Columnist and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution comes up with his, "A new idea for vouchers"

He thinks that both Democrats and Republicans have much blame to shoulder in the melee over the whole education shambles. He does say something that should be shouted from the rooftops, "The quality of teachers and curriculums is much higher in wealthy suburban public schools than it is in poor inner-city public schools." If no one knows that, I think they haven't been around very long or haven't seen much.

He says things that most of us agree with, I think, "Like many Americans, I struggle with the voucher question. I admire public school teachers and support unions. My late mother taught in public schools. And so did my sister. They cared passionately about the kids in their classrooms. The often-maligned teacher's unions have fought to bring up the pay of a profession whose importance to our future is not matched by the compensations its members receive."

That said, he goes on further, "But it should also bother us that liberals who send their kids to private schools would tell poor parents who want their children to escape failing: "Sorry, our principles require your kids to stay right where they are."

Then he brings this up, "Kati Haycock, director of The Education Trust, a group dedicated to the proposition that poor and minority kids deserve much better teaching than they are getting. Vouchers she says, "Are a sideline, a marginal issue." "Vouchers could help some inner-city kids get 'tickets into Catholic schools' and those kids would be better off, though not hugely better off." "The problem," she says, "Is that there there's not a lot of excess capacity in Catholic schools or in the non-Catholic school sector, and no excess capacity in the really high-end independent schools." "In any event," Haycock adds, "tony private schools don't want to submit to the requirements that policy-makers are attaching to voucher programs."

"Not to mention that tony schools cost more than most voucher programs would provide." Mr. Dionne says further, "And the notion that vouchers would create a large supply of new schools is nonsense. Yes, a few good schools might spring up. But its much harder to start a good school than a good restaurant. The likelihood," says Haycock, "is that many of the new schools might call forth would have all the quality of the colleges once advertised on the back of matchbooks." (heh or in the spam of e-mail Wondering Jew) "The real issue," she insists, "is that poor kids get less than their fair share of high-quality teachers." Children who are in low-income or predominantly minority public schools "are about twice as likely to be taught by inexperienced teachers. In some states, poor kids can be two, three, four times more likely to be taught by uncertified teachers." Haycock says, "Only about half of the math and science teachers in heavily minority schools are certifed to teach these subjects."

Further on Haycock cites a study suggesting that, "if poor children got five above average teachers in a row, the effect would be so powerful that we could close the achievement gap between rich and poor kids."

"Recent test results in Houston, New York, Boston, Sacramento and San Jose," she says, "show that reforming public schools is a realistic possibility."

Mr. Dionne finishes, "What's required would make both liberals and conservatives uncomfortable. We need to spend money to upgrade the quality of teaching in our poorest schools and to demand accountability from teachers to make sure the money produces results. If conservatives were willing to invest seriously in our inner city public schools in exchange for a comprehensive test of vouchers, I'd take the deal. I'm not holding my breath. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Something pertinent to this subject was in Froma Harrops column of Sunday (last nights entry) "And a 1982 Supreme Court ruling says that the children of illegal immigrants are entitled to public education." She also mentions in her column, "The federal government is charged with applying the nation's immigration laws. But it has little financial incentive to do so, since it pays only about 7 per cent of the cost of schooling. States provide an average of 51 per cent of education funding, leaving local governments with the remaining 42 per cent." Another telling comment by her is, "Who benifits the most ? Rich communities that have pretty much zoned low-income people out of their school districts."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What can be answers to the problems facing us ? To me it is obvious that we do not want our federal government to take over and run our public schools. But it gives me thought that if our states and municipalities do not take measures to insure that any child in any neighborhood shall have the same qualities of buildings, books, supplies, stadiums and teachers and that at least each state take measures to see that the funding is equitably applied to all schools in that state -- then it may be that eventually we will have a federal school system. I wonder if then our federal government shall pay the other 93 per cent of the cost of schooling ? Oh, yeah, I know, our Congress as opposed to progress will probably raise our taxes 20 per cent above that, leaving loopholes for the rich to slide through.

So, immigration and education problems are so complex that Solomon in his prime might not have a solution or even a sensible answer. It is weird, no matter which way you look at it, there it rolls, one big Ball Of Worms . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Blog