Sure, I can pile on!
From CNN this morning, the Bush Administration announces a new push for school vouchers:
Congressional Republicans on Tuesday proposed a $100 million plan to let poor children leave struggling schools and attend private schools at public expense.
Face it, there are schools, mostly in poor areas (or simply poorly managed areas) that are trapping kids in poor educational environments. Throwing money at some problems can fix them but I believe it is has been proven that throwing it at this one generally doesn’t work. And it has been done in limited trials:
Under the new legislation, the vouchers would mainly go to students in poor schools that have failed to meet their progress goals for at least five straight years.
How long do we go before we admit that something has to change? Five years is a long time in the educational life of a child stuck in a badly performing school.
Parents could get $4,000 per year to put toward private-school tuition or a public school outside their local district. They could also seek up to $3,000 per year for extra tutoring.
Supporters say poor parents deserve choices, like rich families have. When schools don’t work, said Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, "parents must have other opportunities."
During Bush’s presidency, Congress approved the first federal voucher program in the District of Columbia, and private-school aid for students displaced by Hurricane Katrina.
DC has some of the worst schools in the nation, and some of the highest per pupil spending in the nation to boot. What is needed is a new paradigm. The old one is not working. Yet, the folks who advocate for more money "for the childre" keep saying this:
"Voucher programs rob public-school students of scarce resources," said Reg Weaver, president of the National Education Association, a teachers union. "No matter what politicians call them, vouchers threaten the basic right of every child to attend a quality public school."
How about we rephrase that and put the emphasis where it is needed:
Vouchers support the basic right of every child to receive a quality and publicly funded education.
This places the emphasis on the child, not the school – a reformulation that I believe is better.
Reg Weaver of the NEA (See above) is advocating not for the kids, but for the status quo which in this case is the Teachers Union, plain and simple. Teachers will be needed no matter if it is public or private schools in which they teach, but he knows that the power of the union will be diluted if the paradigm shif is accomplished.
More please, and faster please!
