Sunday, February 23, 2014

The troubling history of school vouchers, and why our public schools are NOT failing.

Courtesy of Yes Magazine:

To truly understand how we came to believe our educational system is broken, we need a history lesson. Rewind to 1980—when Milton Friedman, the high priest of laissez-faire economics, partnered with PBS to produce a ten-part television series called Free to Choose. He devoted one episode to the idea of school vouchers, a plan to allow families what amounted to publicly funded scholarships so their children could leave the public schools and attend private ones. 

You could make a strong argument that the current campaign against public schools started with that single TV episode. To make the case for vouchers, free-market conservatives, corporate strategists, and opportunistic politicians looked for any way to build a myth that public schools were failing, that teachers (and of course their unions) were at fault, and that the cure was vouchers and privatization. 

Jonathan Kozol, the author and tireless advocate for public schools, called vouchers the “single worst, most dangerous idea to have entered education discourse in my adult life.” 

Armed with Friedman’s ideas, President Reagan began calling for vouchers. In 1983, his National Commission on Excellence in Education issued “A Nation At Risk,” a report that declared, “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.” 

It also said, “If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.” 

For a document that’s had such lasting impact, “A Nation At Risk” is remarkably free of facts and solid data. Not so the Sandia Report, a little-known follow-up study commissioned by Admiral James Watkins, Reagan’s secretary of energy; it discovered that the falling test scores which caused such an uproar were really a matter of an expansion in the number of students taking the tests. In truth, standardized-test scores were going up for every economic and ethnic segment of students—it’s just that, as more and more students began taking these tests over the 20-year period of the study, this more representative sample of America’s youth better reflected the true national average. It wasn’t a teacher problem. It was a statistical misread. 

The government never officially released the Sandia Report. It languished in peer-review purgatory until the Journal of Educational Research published it in 1993. Despite its hyperbole (or perhaps because of it), “A Nation At Risk” became a timely cudgel for the larger privatization movement. With Reagan and Friedman, the Nobel-Prize-winning economist, preaching that salvation would come once most government services were turned over to private entrepreneurs, the privatizers began proselytizing to get government out of everything from the post office to the public schools. 

Corporations recognized privatization as a euphemism for profits. “Our schools are failing” became the slogan for those who wanted public-treasury vouchers to move money into private schools. These cries continue today.

There is very little that angers me as much as listening to people bad mouth teachers.

When I was struggling in school with behavioral problems and lack of motivation, the intervention of teachers saved my life. That is a debt I will spend a life time repaying.

In my day teachers were on par with firefighters in public trust and admiration, and today they are vilified at every turn by those who want to undermine our education system, destroy teacher's unions, and sabotage secular education.

By the way it is no surprise that all of this happened on Regan's watch. In fact it appears likely it was all part of his plan to return America back to its "Christian roots." Even if those did not really exist in the first place.

This from Salon: 

(Frank) Schaeffer himself developed the theme in his most influential call to action, “A Christian Manifesto,” a 1981 book that (Jerry) Falwell described as “probably the most important piece of literature in America today.” As in his other recent works, Schaeffer stressed the inevitability of an authoritarian takeover if Bible-believing Christians remained indifferent to politics and failed to take a stand. He believed that the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 might represent a window of opportunity to reassert Christian values. But he also warned that the power of relativistic secular humanism was so strong in the government, in the courts, and in the schools that it soon might be necessary for Christians to resist through civil disobedience—and even with violence—much as the United States had resisted British tyranny at the time of the American Revolution. Christianity and secular humanism, he emphasized, were opposites. “These two world views stand as totals in complete antithesis to each other,” he declared. “It is not too strong to say that we are at war, and there are no neutral parties in the struggle.”

It is no secret that many of the applications for charter schools are submitted by religious groups hoping to insert Christianity into the daily lesson plans of their students. (We have already seen that on display in Texas charter schools.)

The scariest thing in the world for a group that relies on ignorance and reliance on faith, is a fully funded public education system that teaches critical thinking skills and confidence in logic.

13 comments:

  1. Anonymous5:44 AM

    This Trial Could Change Public Education Forever

    http://crooksandliars.com/2014/02/trial-could-change-public-education

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous6:11 AM

    This is such a tangled web: religious zealots, privateering corporations, the demise of local newspapers that informed the public about where their school dollars went, the ignorant envy of non-union workers against teachers, who generally have a union.
    Public schools aren't perfect -- but the more that parents and the community work together on this precious public resource, the better they'll get.
    Of all the reasons I had not to vote for Romney was his shilling for some of his corporate pals who own for-profit schools. Shamelessly, on the campaign trail, free advertising from a Presidential candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous6:36 AM

    I've decided that if there were such a demon as Satan, Ronald Reagan is it.

    The man did everything he could to make this country fail. He stole from the poor, elderly and disabled to feed the wealthy.

    He raped Social Security, f''u the public education system, taxed the unemployed and took away deductions for interest on credit cards. He threw the mentally deficient out of the hospitals and into the streets while cutting housing and section 8 subsidies by 50%. At the same time, he granted subsidies (welfare) to huge corporations while allowing them to pay no taxes at all.

    Reaganomics destroyed the middle class as there is no reality to the trickle down theory. The truth is only trickle up works..... Living wages improve the economy. The 50's and the 60's proved that theory.

    He busted unions.

    He raised taxes on the middle class 11 times.

    He created the cocaine pipeline.

    Before giving amnesty to 3 million illegals, he made sure to remove sanctions against the employers for hiring them to begin with.

    He worked with Iran (our enemy at the time) to sell them weapons illegally. Plus he gave away billions in taxpayer dollars to Pakistan helping to create the Taliban and giving power to OBL.

    At the same time he increased the military budget exponentially, something that had never been done before even in times of war.

    To pay for all these atrocities, interest rates rose to 20% putting off large expenditures for the middle class and making home buying out of reach for them.



    In order to pay for all th

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anita Winecooler5:22 PM

      Excellent Response, was going to try to post the same but you did it with much more eloquence than I could.

      I'd really love to know if Nancy's "Psychic Friends" had anything to do with it, and when, exactly was his diagnosis with ALS? I'm thinking it was much much earlier, and Nancy ran the show.

      Delete
  4. Faith = invitation to be scammed

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous7:29 AM

    Watch what happens when the Tea Party takes over a school board. Warning: It gets ugly

    The Tea Party took control of a West Clermont School District in Ohio, placing themselves on the board, and the results are amusing from afar in that we expect chaos from this group, but for parents of the students, it’s an ugly spectacle.

    Tina Sanborn, Mark Merchant, and Jim Lewis or as we call them: Curly, Moe and Larry have garnered a response from the community saying they “care more about furthering their extreme political agenda than addressing the issues that are impacting the district.”

    After it’s come to light that illegal activities, not to mention, extremely bad business decisions took place, folks in the area are fighting back, asking for three board members’ resignations.

    In a surprise move, a Tea Party member tried to implement a vote for the school board to use a different attorney, and when asked why, he said, it’s because he’s less expensive. That of course, was found to be a lie. The attorney turned out to specialize in fighting unions. In addition, that attorney has no experience with education law. On top of that, the attorney costs $15,000 more than the board’s lawyer.

    John Prager at Americans Against the Tea Party explains, “The lawyer who, under their plan, would be representing the school district is Kevin Maloof. Maloof is the President of the West Clermont Education Foundation, a fund-raising group. School board members Mark Merchant and Tina Sanborn are also on the board of the WCEF.”

    So much for Tea Party transparency.

    Board member Steve Waldmann was stunned by the surprise move and remarked, “It is absolutely absurd that that would come to this floor with no prior discussion and no vetting process. I’m appalled. During the ‘board comment’ section at that. It wasn’t even an agenda item for us to be given information prior to the meeting to consider.”

    The motion was withdrawn.

    Watch:

    http://freakoutnation.com/2014/02/22/watch-what-happens-when-the-tea-party-takes-over-a-school-board-warning-it-gets-ugly/

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous7:34 AM

    Some years ago, I was hopeful about charter schools, esp when Whittle and Schmidt talked them up, like from the cover of Time magazine, calling them Edison schools. But Whittle and Schmidt's model has turned into one (count 'em: one) very very elite school in NYC that has white marble counters in its cafeteria and everything else to match. Definitely has little to offer the non-1%ers except a lesson.

    http://nymag.com/news/features/avenues-school-chris-whittle-2012-9/

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous8:06 AM

    I think some version of the voucher idea goes back way before 1980. When I was a kid in Catholic elementary school in the late 1950s, I remember one of the nuns explaining to us why our school did not support the idea of any kind of handout from the government. It was wrong, she said, because then we would be beholden to the government -- they would have a say in curriculum design, and how the subject was run. It was felt that our independence from that kind of government interference must be maintained. I will add that the curriculum itself was just fine. I got a fabulous education at that school, its students being generally a year above grade level of their public school peers in all subjects. I was well prepared for high school (even in science) by the time I graduated 8th grade. No government interference was needed to assure that.

    But this was well before the emergence of this newish brand of fundamentalist Christianity and their schools (and homeschools), which often exist to protect their kids against the influences & beliefs of the "secular" world.

    I homeschooled my own kids for part of their educational career, there being no good schools - public or private in our area. The beginning of the homeschooling was wonderful -- truly kid centered, secular, open, free, and filled with wonderful possibilities. But it didn't take long for the fundies to catch on to what a good way it would be protect their kids from the *evils* of a secular education and an ungodly world.... I (sadly) watched the rise of the Christian homeschool movement, which has now given homeschooling itself a bad name.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous8:14 AM

    The Catholic Church gets BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous11:40 AM

      And by that you mean what? The government does not give $$ to the church.

      Delete
    2. Anita Winecooler5:26 PM

      Maybe billions in Voucher money (taxpayer dollars). The ones near me wouldn't remain open if it were not for the voucher system.

      Delete
  9. Anonymous11:56 AM

    Sure, there are good public schools. But even in schools with good education funding, there are BAD ones.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous1:38 PM

    I dislike the idea of taxpayers money being directed to religious schools. If parents want their children to have that type education, they should pay for it themselves! Good public schools are and have been available, even though the Republican party and their extreme right are trying like hell to dismantle it!

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.