Vouchers Aren't The Answer

The magic bullet has been placed in the chamber in hopes that all of the ills of public education will disappear. Like other supposed cures, it sounds good in the sound bites, but it just won't cut it when the smoke clears.

School vouchers work something like this: Student X doesn't like h/her current high school and wants to be with h/her friends at Scared Heart Secondary School. Student X applies for chit (voucher: equal to the amount the public school spends on h/her for an academic school year) with a value of $3000 to $5000 depending on the state.

The hue and cry promoting the vouchers is that the private school has:
1) smaller class sizes;
2) high quality instruction;
3) a safer environment; and,
4) higher tests scores.

There is no longstanding evidence that could suggest that any of the above are factual save for #1.
But, let's get to the points that aren't shared with the public.
1) Private schools are not required to admit anyone, so racial groups might have issues upon enrollment;
2) Students with disabilities are likely to find the admission doors closed; and
3) Private schools are not required to meet any state standards on tests, teacher quality, special education, etc.


An example of unfairness in the voucher program is if student X takes his chit to Sacred Heart and discovers that that school does not have a speech therapist (physical therapy) on staff, state law will require his previous high school to provide for that service even though the expenditure money for student X is now in the coffers of the private school.

Of course the above list is short, and yes there are many more issues that should be brought front and center to the marketplace of ideas for a fair hearing in the public square.

So, the next time you hear the cheer for vouchers, take the role of a wise and informed citizen and look at all the facts.

Hey! Let's Beat Up on the Kids

Check out State Budget Shortfalls on K-12 Education Spending and Job Loss. Geez, wouldn't you know it, right off the bat the destruction will be around 9% loss on common ed. spending.
Ok, let's use really big numbers here for emphasis: $54,000,000,000. Sadly the stimulus package won't help shortfalls in local spending.
This country ought to be ashamed of it lack of effort or concern for it's citizenry and it's future. Every S.O.B. elected leader has h/her hand out for the stimulus money, but as usual the kids get the punch in the mouth both now and, oh, yes, later when the bill comes due to pay for this mess over Wall Street.
Of course the teachers get kicked in the ass over this crap too, yet they will be expected to shoulder the load and suffer from the "come on do it for the kids" even though their health insurance soars, their retirement stands in jeopardy, and their principal has one thing on his/her mind: Test Scores.

But, hey, lets screw with those who can't speak for themselves. Isn't that the American way?

Say No to Merit Pay for Teachers

Here comes the cure-all for ills suffered under the huge umbrella called education. It's posted everywhere, it's ubiquitous, it's the answer... it's Merit Pay for Teachers. Don't buy this snake oil. At least have a conversation with a teacher before you believe the hype coming out of school superintendent offices nationwide.

First the old chestnut is thrown out on the public square to get our pulse rate up: "Throwing more money at the problem won't solve the problem". The truth of the matter is that we haven't put enough money in education for decades, save for the huge amount that is spend out of the general fund for special education (about 25%). The last huge influx of dollars into common education occurred in the 60s during the race to space. The results were unbelievable and positive.

Second, the anti-ed crowd will shout to the heavens that we need to get rid of bad teachers. I agree, but the average citizen would be stunned at the low percentage of teachers who are doing an unacceptable job. More often than not, educators are placed in positions of which they have little or no skills or training. One simple example could be a beginning teacher who, in need of a job, will be placed in a classroom for special needs children. This teacher may not have a clue as to how to write an appropriate lesson plan for these children. Sadly, these teachers are left to figure out what to do with little or no assistance from h/her fellow teachers or administrators. A really excellent biology teacher may be assigned to teach physics, a subject h/she may not have the skills to teach. It certainly doesn't suggest that this teacher is a bad educator.
As unbelievable as it may sound, a school principal may have a conflict with a teacher over politics, religion, or even sports with (I am not kidding here) the principal looking for ways to "write up" that teacher with a "needs to improve" evaluation. Is this an exaggeration? Absolutely not!

Third, merit pay should be based on the tests performance by their students. The inherent unfairness in this concept is almost too difficult to explain because there are too many scenarios to explain. For example, Mrs. X teaches Honors English while Mr. Z teaches 10th grade English. It doesn't take an I.Q. over the temperature of table water to determine that Mrs. X's students will perform well above Mr Z's students.
What about Ms. Bell and her art class? There isn't a statewide/nationwide test over art. or for that matter physical education, or government, music, etc. Is it fair that Ms. Bell would be denied a pay increase while Mrs. X will probably enjoy a hefty bonus? What about the school librarian or the school nurse?
Speaking of tests, more Americans don't know that the tests never compares , for example, sophomores to sophomores of a given class, region, state, or the nation. Instead, it compares the current a sophomore class to the previous year's aggregate sophomore group.

Lastly, there remains the group who calls for the Arkansas Model for Merit Pay. It is even more bothersome than merit pay on its face. This model calls for a bonus to all of the employees (cooks, janitors, secretaries, and teachers) of a school when that school raises tests scores to a specific level. The idiocy of this plan is to suggests that the secretary or custodian worked as hard as the history teacher to raise the actual scores. Did the football coach truly deserve the same merit pay as the biology teacher who is stressed to the max to improve tests scores.

My real point is that a true conversation is needed the between concerned citizens and the educators. Have you ever noticed that when it comes to complex issues such as this one the principal/administrator is paraded out to "speak for the school" in an effort to muffle the voices of those who are truly and harshly impacted, the teachers.