Re: [Phys-l] Glass's "The Fate of Public Education in America"; an Alternate View

[Marty Weiss <martweiss@comcast.net>]

On Jun 15, 2010, at 6:26 PM, Ann Reagan wrote:

> > So, quote all the studies you want. All the studies are meaningless in the present system and the changes you cite will only
> > make matters worse by eliminating the kids who are interested in education leaving behind the masses who are not
> > interested in being there. 
>
> So is your solution to leave the status quo so everyone is as (un)educated as the least common denominator; i.e., those who want to learn least? Why must you make it an "either-or" situation? The public education system as is can remain as a safety net like social security or public housing or food assistance, but let those who want to leave GO. Do not deny them the opportunity to achieve to their highest potential just because they were born into inner city poverty.

       interesting decision...  the ones who want to learn go to the school of their choice leaving the others behind.  You, and others who don't have to do it, or fund it, make it sound like it is an easy task and one that could be implemented easily.   Everyone who advocates for complete choice makes it sound like there are only a few students involved and money would be easily transferred from the sending district to the receiving schools.   How many would jump at the opportunity to leave and what districts have the capacity to take them?   Let's say education in this state is suddenly open for choice.   In my city district there were about 19,000 students.   Let's say, for argument's sake, that 5000 applied to go elsewhere next September.   Where would they go given free choice of districts?  Which private schools would open their doors for vast numbers of new, unprepared students?  Now, a few private schools nearby offer scholarships for the city kids, and a few hundred take advantage yearly, some to the three large Catholic high schools we have locally,  and a few to the local Friends' school.  But, suppose that suddenly thousands apply to the private and parochial schools nearby.  How many new buses do they need?  Who pays for bussing, books, and uniforms, etc?  Suppose many of these kids apply to the fine suburban districts within 5 to 10 miles.  How many neighboring suburban districts have the capacity to handle a few hundred new kids, and how many of these districts have the teachers with the ability and the counselors to take on a new influx of kids who may not meet the standards which are much higher than the city these kids came from?   Who will pay for all that is required to provide a "thorough and efficient" education given the dire state of education funding?   Who among you calling for total choice and competition has thought this out?  You think the *Tea Partiers* are active now?  Wait until the suburban taxpayers get wind that a hundred new city kids are enrolled in their local schools!   You would have a taxpayer rebellion beyond all belief!  
 
	Let's consider the social costs of this new enterprise of choice?  How many of these new kids could fit into their new school with little problem?  How many years would it take to integrate them into the standards given that they still live in the inner city and have to go back nightly to the conditions they wanted to escape from?  The local kids have the advantage of going to a good school, live in a safe environment, come from good homes, and have the facilities to do their homework nightly.  How would the city kids get there?  How much does it cost to bus them eight to ten miles away every day?  Where will the buses come from, given that the city schools have few buses of their own and the suburban buses are already loaded to capacity and make four or five runs every morning and then again in the afternoon.    What happens when they need tutoring or want to join a club or activity after school?  The local parents are always available, as I wrote earlier, to pick up a group and take them home.  We used to car pool for drama club, debate, mock trial, intermural sports, etc.  But, which city parents can drive the distance to do the same?    

	I have already seen *choice* in action... illegally.  Here's a specific example of how illegal *choice* works now.  My friend retired from our suburban district as a social studies teacher in a very good nearby elementary school.   Every year his school would receive four or five new students who seemed somehow to be way behind in reading and math and needed help on a grand scale.    In addition, some of them act out and behave in ways unfamiliar to my friend and his colleagues.  They brought in several counselors and tutors at our expense.  The township got suspicious and sent officers to the bus stops who soon noticed that these *new* kids (who had given local addresses of some relative who often claimed that the child was living there) would be dropped off each morning by adults and then picked up each afternoon by the same adults.  The officers followed the adults home and found that they came from the city.  The township district found the correct addresses and wrote to the parents of these kids.  They offered them the choice... pay the tuition of a visiting student or stop coming to the township.   Yes, these parents wanted more for their kids and who could blame them.  But, without exception, every one was way behind academically and couldn't keep up.  Behavior was not up to standards and hygiene was relatively poor.  Before they discovered the truth it had cost the township money we can't afford for counseling and tutoring services.  Now, could these kids make up the years of neglect?  Probably, eventually, but at what cost?  Luckily it was only a few kids.  Had this continued  on a larger scale the school board would have been in an uproar and probably the local taxpayers would have complained to the heavens.    

	I am not against giving a choice, but you have to think it out before making some blanket statement from a safe distance in a safe place.   There are so many factors to be considered... factors we haven't even discussed here...  What teachers would be hired and where would we get them from when no one wants to work in the city now?  (consider my previous post on the subject)   Teach for America?   Good people, but most of them leave after three or four years.  They tout that many more are staying, but that's only in a few instances.   My old district hired seven TFA in science alone.  Good teachers all!  Three left after 2 years, two more after 3 years, and after five years they were all gone off to better pastures: law school, business schools, etc.  (These were among the job openings my friend offered me two years ago. ).  So, who gets the best teachers and what's to stop the good teachers from from jumping ship like mice from a sinking ship when all the good kids have gone off to the suburbs?   Think of the social costs of trying to educate the remainder!! 
(Unless you advocate for the elimination of universal education! and then what do you have...chaos! )    

Other things that choice now advocates haven't figured out...  Consider how the new *choice* students will get to their new schools?   Consider that the *choice* students still live in the rathole of a city and have to face their peers nightly who still go to the local schools and the gangs they have to deal with on a daily basis.  Consider how these new kids feel when the suburban teacher assigns homework to be done on line and they don't have a computer at home and the local library is closed for lack of funding.  Consider how they feel when an after school activity is offered that they really want to join but they can't because they have to catch the only bus ride home at 3 pm.  Consider the peer pressure from the locals who may or may not accept the new kids... racially, socially, academically.   Consider all these things and many more that I probably overlooked and then come back and say you have THE solution... free choice of schools.  When some savior comes forward with the answers to these questions, then you can advocate and I will agree wholeheartedly.  Right now, choice is for the elite few who have the parents and the means to make it work,  But, for the hundreds who want it?  We aren't there socially and academically yet.  

Marty      

> As far as "real world" examples, why is it that this debate is non-existent among the state colleges and universities? They are also funded with tax dollars. They also underpay teachers. Could it be that the colleges and universities offer the ultimate example of "school choice". 
Yes, and the state universities can accept or reject students based on SAT or ACT.   The community colleges accept everyone, but can expel students for lack of progress or behavior problems and many other reasons.   Many community colleges now are seeing more and more adults who want to better their careers and won't put up with any nonsense from immature teenagers!   It's a completely different system and you can't compare college to the regular school districts.  
>