-
Bring Fenty Back
July 11, 2012 | 63 comments
-
Mitt W. Bush
May 7, 2012 | 29 comments
-
Education’s Medicaid Problem
January 11, 2012 | 39 comments
-
The NEA’s Progressive Turn
December 9, 2011 | 13 comments
-
Taking Over Lousy Schools
December 2, 2011 | 29 comments
The Nation's Pulse
Obama’s New Teacher
Rep. John Kline could upset the plans of school reformers of both parties.
President Barack Obama and his Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, have spent the past two years beating back the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and their allies to reform the nation’s woeful public schools. By November 3, Obama and Duncan may find themselves with a different obstacle in the form of Republican Minnesota Congressman John Kline. With Republicans poised to win back control of the House of Representatives, the former Marine Colonel and think tank executive will be reshaping federal education policy as chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.
A former Marine helicopter pilot who once commanded air operations during the occupation of Somalia, Kline is most fond of talking about his time carrying the nuclear “football” for President Reagan and flying the presidential helicopter, Marine One. Kline can also thank Obama for his current spot as Ranking Republican on the Education and Labor Committee; it was Obama’s appointment of Kline’s former House colleague, John McHugh, as Secretary of the Army last year that prompted the musical chairs that led to Kline ascending to the position.
But unlike current education committee chairman — and Obama favorite — George Miller, Kline won’t be carrying anything on his behalf. Kline has long opposed Race to the Top, the $4.3 billion competitive grant initiative that is the centerpiece of Obama’s reform efforts. From his perspective, “it was irresponsible” for congressional Democrats to give Secretary of Education Duncan $5 billion “with no strings attached.” Kline also doesn’t like that the administration required adoption of Common Core, a set of academic standards in English, math, and science, to win Race to the Top funds; he calls it a step toward creating a national curriculum.
Kline isn’t likely to go for Obama’s request to increase Race to the Top funding by another $1 billion. Says Kline: “Why should Congress give more money to a program that hasn’t proven itself?” The skepticism is warranted. Race to the Top, along with the willingness of Obama and Duncan to use their respective bully pulpits, has convinced legislators in states such as California, Michigan and Massachusetts to eliminate restrictions on the expansion of charter schools and on the use of student test score data in evaluating teachers. But in choosing states such as Delaware (which weakened reform measures to gain NEA and AFT support) and Maryland (which didn’t even offer much in the way of measurable reform), the Obama administration has disappointed school reformers of all stripes, especially those championing more serious measures.
With Kline in the chairmanship, Obama will have less of a free hand (and less backing) for the more expansive elements of his agenda. Kline in particular is ready to ditch parts of the No Child Left Behind Act, the federal education law that has been the bane of teachers unions and school districts alike, proclaiming that it is overreach into an area that shouldn’t be a federal concern. This stance, along with his support for vouchers, charter schools, and other school choice measures, is certainly pleasing to the ears of conservative school reformers and their more movement-oriented allies in the Republican grassroots.
BUT CONSERVATIVE SCHOOL REFORMERS won’t necessarily be pleased with the rest of Kline’s plans. He also argues that the best way to reform education is to return to local control or essentially letting traditional school districts do as they please. These districts, as even Kline admits, are among the most fervent opponents of choice, along with teachers unions and other defenders of traditional public education. After nearly two centuries, local control has proved to be of little value to students (who get stuck in mediocre schools) and taxpayers (who pay all too dearly for them). Choice advocates, who have battled with school districts for the past three decades, will be particularly displeased.
School reform-minded Republican governors such as Indiana’s Mitch Daniels and Kline’s fellow Minnesotan, Tim Pawlenty, may also disappointed with Kline’s emphasis on dialing back the No Child Left Behind Act. As with Race to the Top, No Child has actually expanded state authority over education; governors have successfully used the accountability rules, mandates, and statistical measurements to rally support for their efforts and defeat school districts and teachers union affiliates.
Kline also opposes Obama’s effort to apply the clever competition model at the heart of Race to the Top (the reason why states embrace school choice and subject teachers to private-sector style performance management) to the rest of the $152 billion spent annually by the federal government on public education because he feels it will further politicize federal funding. But the competitive grant approach appeals to conservative school reformers, who, like many centrist Democrats, feel that the traditional program-centered approach to federal education funding is wasteful and hasn’t improved quality of education.
Some conservative reformers already have mixed feelings. “In sum, the old GOP education agenda isn’t what 21st century America needs and recycling it, while surely easier and perhaps safer than thinking anew, isn’t going to do the job,” proclaim Chester Finn Jr. and Michael Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, the leading think tank among conservative reformers.
This dissonance isn’t surprising. There is almost as much disagreement on education policy (and school reform) in GOP ranks as there is among centrist reformers and teachers unions within Democratic Party ranks.
School choice supporters such as the Heritage Foundation and Cato Institute scholar Andrew Coulson — who embrace a small-government philosophy — constantly bicker with organizations such as the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which advocate with centrist Democrats for a stronger federal role in enacting more rigorous curriculum standards. Both, in turn, have fought with suburban Republicans — including congressional leaders such as Kline — who count on support from school superintendents, parents who still think public schools are still doing a fine job of educating their kids, and (to a lesser extent) teachers-union bosses.
The reality is that for all the small government rhetoric, Republicans and conservatives alike have supported expansive federal education policy when it suits them. It was the Reagan Administration that nurtured the modern school reform movement in 1983 with the publication of A Nation at Risk, which called for improving (and standardizing) curricula and academic standards. Obama’s own reform efforts are a continuation of those of his predecessor, George W. Bush, who, with the help of then-education committee chairman John Boehner, passed No Child. Another pet project of conservative reformers, the now-shuttered D.C. Opportunity school voucher program, was established by the then Republican-controlled Congress in 2003 (admittedly, at the behest of residents frustrated with the woeful school district).
Kline’s ascension could prove to be as vexing for school reform-minded conservatives as it will be likely be for Obama and his centrist Democrat school reform allies. He may also be less successful in expanding the kind of school choice options conservatives hold dear. Instead, Kline and other congressional Republicans may end up forcing the GOP ranks into the kind of uncomfortable conversations that have fueled civil war among Democrats.
The only beneficiaries may turn out to be the very teachers unions both Kline and Obama count as their opposition.
About the Author
RiShawn Biddle the editor of Dropout Nation , is co-author of A Byte at the Apple: Rethinking Education Data for the Post-NCLB Era. He can be followed at Twitter.com/dropoutnation.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (33) | Leave a comment
More Articles by RiShawn Biddle
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/10/15/obamas-new-teacher
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Appleby| 10.15.10 @ 6:47AM
Public schools should be eliminated totally; you gave birth to it, you pay for its education and make sure you are getting your moneys worth.
And dont give me the whine about ThePoor -- there are millions of poor people with children in parochial school and many more middle-class families sacrificing the third car, the boat, the cottage and Moms sixty pairs of Pradas so that the children can be properly educated. And very few parents who pay for this education want classes in putting on condoms or detailing the many sexual gymnastics it is possible for 10 year olds to aspire to -- much less in sitting passively watching Al Gore lie to them on a teevee while the teacher does her nails.
Parents used to see that their kids were educated, not to mention fed, clothed, transported, sheltered, and kept out of jail. If they had to pay for these things, instead of paying bullies and thugs to extort them from their neighbours, the ship would right itself.
Nancy in NC| 10.15.10 @ 2:23PM
Appleby, you have hit the nail right on the head.
It's not the responsibility of government to be sure that your children are educated. (if it is, they're doing a sorry job,)
And my 12 year old grandson had to watch "An Inconvenient Truth" last week. His mom and I are rabid, but he's fortunate enough to have a mom that talked to him about the movie, and the slant. Some children were very upset and crying (polar bears dying and rise of ocean waters...we live on the coast). The teacher did tell the kids that it was a theory and controversial, but some 12 year olds don't have parent's like my daughter, and were terrified.
If individual districts had control over their schools, we as citizens could vote with our feet...and move if we were unhappy with the school system and unable to get them to change. Now it's the same crap regardless where you live...just slightly more or less crappy according to where you live and luck of the draw.
When our framers were around, most kids started school at age four, and many could already read. Also, school was not mandatory. We've really progressed, haven't we?
1blumutt| 10.15.10 @ 10:56PM
Just twenty years ago.....wow, how things change, in our public schools, in Ohio, if a movie was shown, a notice first was sent to the parents, after the principal Oked the movie and the note. Parents should step up and demand that again...take back what belongs to the parents, here.,
SeattleBruce| 10.17.10 @ 2:48AM
"The teacher did tell the kids that it was a theory and controversial, but some 12 year olds don't have parent's like my daughter, and were terrified."
Unbelievable Nancy - these people never quit, huh?
1blumutt| 10.15.10 @ 11:10PM
This article will be kept by me, to see how things transpire after the election. I have a place in my heart for the poor children in D.C. and will see what Kline does for them as regards alternative educ. opportunities.
charlie| 10.16.10 @ 11:29AM
Washington DC is a special situation, since Congress controls its purse strings. The best thing that can happen in education would be to get the federal government out of it totally. The more Congress and the Dept of Education is involved the worse it will get.
1eye| 10.18.10 @ 10:43PM
Appleby. You state an extreme view to start a discussion and you make extreme left nuts looking like saints! The worst thing extreme left nuts did to people are making them extreme right nuts!
Melvin| 10.15.10 @ 7:49AM
Sometimes I just want to slap the dog squeeze out of these, "new age parents back into reality." They want their children to be raised with every feel good, warm and fuzzy education by by the newest flavor of the day child physiologists.
The parents who let their spawn run and scream like wild banshees in restaurants because they want to let them express themselves. Or the mothers who let their daughters dress like street walkers while attending middle school because they want to let their daughters to have freedom. Then in the next breath demand through legislation that people respect their little Disney trollops in waiting.
A number of years ago, I had written a letter to the editor in our local newspaper, detailing how it was the parents responsibility and not the government schools to feed their children breakfast and lunch during Summer break.
I noted that it was a complete waste of money and there was absolutely no excuse in why the parents could not get of their lazy rear-ends and tend to their parental duties.
Jeez Louise, you thought I had committed capitol murder a millions type over. For a period of about two weeks I was the topic in the Letters to the Editor, and one of the reporters even prosed a story about the virtues of the government breakfast and lunch program.
You know the really, really sad part to all this is. The government run Summer breakfast & lunch program was aboard a Marine Corps Installation. Now people, if a United States Marine or his wife cannot find the time and resources to take care of their children, then we are surely doomed as a society.
Petronius| 10.15.10 @ 9:31AM
Mel
You left out the negligent parents, (usually single), who send their overgrown toddlers to school not yet housebroken.
rainmaker1145| 10.15.10 @ 8:51AM
WE now spend an amount on public school primary and secondary pupil tuition large enough to allow us to send all public school kids to private school, send them also to a state college and still have money left over. Education fails because it is publicly-held and it has no competition and therefore the moral hazards, failures and conflicts-of-interest are the only possible outcomes. When we end public education we will again see greatness. Until then, we will just see more progressives brainwashing generations of children to be wards of the state.
rainmaker1145| 10.15.10 @ 8:51AM
WE now spend an amount on public school primary and secondary pupil tuition large enough to allow us to send all public school kids to private school, send them also to a state college and still have money left over. Education fails because it is publicly-held and it has no competition and therefore the moral hazards, failures and conflicts-of-interest are the only possible outcomes. When we end public education we will again see greatness. Until then, we will just see more progressives brainwashing generations of children to be wards of the state.
maverick muse| 10.15.10 @ 2:27PM
"Education fails because it is publicly-held and it has no competition"....
The argument could be made for taxing to fund education, but for the parents' taxes to be directed to the school of their choice for their children, charter and private schools included.
1blumutt| 10.15.10 @ 11:04PM
Reminded, here, Mavrick, that Obama bowed to the unions and cut the funding for the poor children in Wash. D.C. to be able to seek better alternatives, when he defunded the voucher program as named in the above article. He's such an "empty suit" and those poor folks in D.C. voted for him. They were used!
mejamom| 10.15.10 @ 10:01AM
I've had experiences in city, suburban and rural public schools, in 1 state. The people/parents and children are different from each other. There are of course exceptions. However, it's been obvious to me that a Federal or State curriculum or standard is ridiculous. How can one expect a city school with many of it's kids from lower income/single parent/welfare families "compete" with a school of middle to upper income kids? And then you have the rural schools, with variations of income, but smaller classrooms which leads to more teacher involvement. As a country, I think we need some kind of nationwide standard, but I don't know how that can be organized when there is so much diversity among 1 state.
Houston Rao| 10.15.10 @ 11:11AM
We do have national standards, SAT, GRE, etc. . Try getting into a good college without a SAT score waving some state or national "Recognized School" certification.
maverick muse| 10.15.10 @ 2:38PM
Excellent point.
Furthermore, with the transient work force, it's always been understood which concepts are expected to be learned by which age/grade level. That some regions teach those concepts better should not be held against those students who learn.
The greatest fallacy is expecting any professional educator to "teach" students who refuse to do what is required in order to "learn":
diligently study at least as much as it takes to get it, and then some more practice in order to memorize for later recall and use.
Parents today expect all of the teaching and learning to be accomplished at school alone. These parents undermine the entire process of learning by not supplementing their own children's homework themselves. Ultimately, these parents not only abuse the schools and teachers, but their own children. These parents teach irresponsibility. Their children know irresponsibility. And any teacher or authority that attempts to teach responsibly is defeated by these people's choice to be irresponsible, remain ignorant, and become stupid.
Those parents and children who want OUT of those circumstances should be allowed the opportunity to excel and learn without persecution.
Unions protect incompetent and perverted teachers.
Dai Alanye | 10.15.10 @ 10:16AM
It is a fact beyond argument that in the past local control of education did a better job of meeting the nation's needs, and possibly meeting those of the students. Times have changed, however, in this age when we apparently believe every child must have a college degree leading to a clean-hands career.
One fallacy has remained strong for more than a century---that "education" will solve all of society's problem. A corollary of this seems to be that education consists of sitting in school for many years regardless of whether any gain is made in coherent and useful knowledge. It would appear that most educators and politicians---and all too many parents---have come to believe that once everyone has a college degree---no matter in what discipline---the US will regain and maintain its economic and moral leadership of the world, and we'll all live happily and prosperously ever after.
In fact, we still need humans to pick up trash, slaughter cows, pick beans and broccoli, and clean the pools of Hollywood millionaires. When the dreams of Isaac Asimov come true this may no longer be the case, but until robots achieve a greater degree of domination these jobs will continue to be assigned to meat machines. Our present reaction to these labor needs is to import aliens both legal and illegal while offering ever more generous welfare to those citizens who either can't or won't find work.
We are, in effect, subsidizing layabouts. And who can blame a man who chooses to go fishing or maintain his lawn for a moderate dole instead of taking a dirty, soul-deadening line of work that pays the same or less?
But back to education. Many years back local control generally worked well in a more realistic society. But the experts weren't satisfied, always assuming they, the wise self-appointed leaders of humanity, could better decide what your children and mine truly needed. This same philosophy now permeates state and local education departments.
They make it palatable through keeping children and parents happy by offering educational candy. On the one hand, more and more activities---athletics, music and performance, homecoming and other ceremonies, monthly good-student awards and so on. On the other hand they rename and curiously redesign conventional studies like history and geography while offering fun courses such as videography. My local system, while demanding more money to carry a lower enrollment, has set teams of students working in all schools---elementary, middle and high---making propaganda videos for a tax levy. For credits applicable to graduation requirements. Some parents love it.
Educational candy takes more concrete forms. In the school of a first-grade grandchild suckers are given out daily---large suckers if no students receive "red cards" for misbehavior that day, small suckers if problems have occurred. Suckers! Emblematic, wouldn't you think?
Here's my solution: Federal control won't work, state control presents great problems, and local control is failing. Only parental control gives hope. Sure, parents will make mistakes but a form of educational Darwinism should eventually correct many of the faults as both children and elders learn what is practical for success in life. As when they learn, for instance, that we already have sufficient Art History and Ethnic Studies majors in America.
And at least YOUR children won't suffer from the mistakes of someone else.
Petronius| 10.15.10 @ 10:23AM
I know I'm going to catch it here, but viewing our academic decline over time, it is the result of our passed productivity, prosperity and expansion.
We have gone soft not only because the money school districts glommed by manipulating tax increases has been there, but because the old line faculty who came by everything in life the hard way are dead and gone. The senior faculty in our schools today are the losers of the baby boom generation who abhor the world of commerce and competition. While getting their degrees in education the most important thing they learned was how to metastasize an organization. The teachers get promoted to administrators and run hand picked candidates, (their own retirees) to the boards. If their people lose, the union stakes and petitions for a recall election which gets held when nobody is paying attention and their puppets get in. The poor taxpayer is just a sap to them. The students matter only as a medium to be turned into cultural clones of themselves.
The crisis we face is tied to the advance of technology in our industries where there are no longer places for the unskilled. In that universe a tech savvy socially promoted prole is at a loss. He may be computer literate but can't communicate except in text shorthand because he's never diagrammed a sentence and does not know when or how he has expressed a complete thought.
In any case, those things that anyone must know to be successful in life are not taught in any school.
That comes from family upbringing and social interaction. When the liberals who are anti family speak of "leveling the playing field", they claim the right to attain their goals on their terms. Ergo the old rules and conventions for advancement must be jettisoned and we now have quotas, that the deprived can get at "their share of the goodies." Small wonder why those of average ability sit on their hands. They see the special sequestration of privilege lavished upon those minorities who only need to ask, "Where's mine?"
The truth cannot make anyone free as it may no longer be spoken or heard.
Steve A| 10.15.10 @ 10:39AM
I have a daughter who is a Jr. in HS & is an excellent student. She is taking a Pshchology course in a public school. They were asked to read 3 books & do a brief summary of each & contrast it vs. different pshch theories. She busted her butt, wrote an excellent report & got an A. She came home & showed me the report & told me how the grading was "unfair." Apparently, anyone who simply turned in a report, of any quality, including a kid who wrote a giant X on a piece of paper got an A as well. I contacted the teacher & was informed that "it is not a weighted class & participation is the goal."
I used it as an introductory opportunity for my daughter to the "Wonderful World Of Liberalism." She immediately recognizes the results are a lack of motivation to excell, poor work quality, lack of accountability, lazy administration & that equality of results, regardless of quality of product, is a recipe for failure. I would like to thank the public school system for this opportunity to teach my child how to deal with it & what to expect from here forward.
Gina Foster| 10.15.10 @ 11:39AM
Did you really say "President Barack Obama and his Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, have spent the past two years beating back the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and their allies to reform the nation's woeful public schools."? The White House owes much to the teachers unions and seems to give them whatever they want.
maverick muse| 10.15.10 @ 2:23PM
"With Kline in the chairmanship, Obama will have less of a free hand (and less backing) for the more expansive elements of his agenda." As if lacking appropriation ever stopped Obama from spending anyway. Certainly Bush's executive order making the Sec./Treasury autonomous would provide Obama another unconstitutional means to spending without constitutional authority.
Also, although they may not be getting ALL that they demand from him, teacher unions are still propagandizing on behalf of socialism and Obama in particular. He is definitely their president.
Chuck| 10.15.10 @ 3:30PM
Whatever form education takes, one thing it does not need is layers of bureaucracy. When I taught school, the only thing I needed from the district office was a way to manage the physical facilities, textbooks and HR stuff -- and perhaps curriculum guides, but I wrote the district's guide for my subject myself.
I was perfectly qualified to design and teach my courses. The principal was perfectly qualified to evaluate me. Everything else was something I could see no use for.
So cut out most of the district machinery. As far as Dept. of Education, I think that could likewise be abolished or cut by 2/3. Maybe a use for it would be as a clearinghouse for educational research and methods, but no more than that. Certainly no need for it to allocate money or mandate ANY programs.
Local, Local, Local.
DickH| 10.18.10 @ 6:37AM
You have nailed it!
I'd like to suggest two additional roles of the US Dept of Ed, if we must have one, could play:
1) provide guidance as to the trends in types of knowledge required with a 20 year vision, based on visions by other cabinet level departments. Suggest a variety of curricula that get there.
2) collect & publish all school performance data, including costing. Report state-to-state comparisons.
This seems like it would result in a very tiny Dept. So, why bother to have one at all!
Pat| 10.15.10 @ 4:05PM
How about a reading comprehension test? You remember those from school, right? So read this article carefully and mark your answers.
This guy Kline’s ability to fly a helicopter will make him better at determining what’s best for our nation’s schools? True, false, Sometimes true, sometimes false. The Dept. of Education’s mission is to think up nifty names for new programs and then give local schools money to embrace these programs. Therefore (a) No Child Left Behind, (b) Race to the Top, (c) Stay Awake and Learn Something, (d) Are We There Yet and (e) Money for Morons are existing federal programs which take tax dollars from folks in Oklahoma and give it to schools in Detroit? Only a & b. Only e. Not sure. All of the above.
During the coming fiscal year, the Dept. of Education will (a) give away $152 billion which is its entire budget to be given away, (b) give away less than $152 billion and only to those school districts which show actual improvement, (c) think up another new program and give away more than $152 billion or (d) give away money only to those with political connections and who know how to play the game? Only a, Only b, both c & d, or how much is in a billion?.
Final question for extra credit: If the Dept. of Education were eliminated tomorrow, our nation’s schools would: (a) remain about the same as they are now, (b) keep many teachers and school administrators out of new car showrooms, (c) continue to provide kids with a mediocre education or (d) we’d still like to know how much is in a billion. Correct answer: all of the above.
Kay| 10.15.10 @ 5:05PM
Took my kids out of "the best schools in our area" 18 years ago, never looked back. Have been homeschooling ever since. Education is not a federal concern. Let's take education back to the local level, with the freedom to choose how best to deal with that. The more and sooner we get the Feds' hands from around our tax-dollar necks, the better potential future for our free society and its children.
One of the worst prospects of the current statist school system, among many other things, is that it has removed/revised a large chunk of our heritage and history to such an extent that our children will not fully know or appreciate who they are. No free society can survive if it doesn't know its true history, the good, the bad, and the ugly. We must end multiculturalism, teach AMERICAN history as we once knew it, the classics, the classical approach of teaching the trivium, logic as a science, Latin, yes, Latin! No more babysitting our children with nonsensical subjects and methods. They need a rigorous education or we are lost! The only reason it seems too difficult is because it has not been implemented for about 40 years now. Let's hope Mr. Kline has the right stuff to facilitate these ideas and ideals and return education back to the local level, "to the drawing board".
anne m erskine| 10.15.10 @ 5:53PM
Congress can override a president's veto if both chambers, the House and the Senate, come up with a two-thirds majority to over-ride the veto. That may be a possibility in overturning the Obamakillcare devastation -
Brian| 10.15.10 @ 8:48PM
All classes should be available via the web. Buildings and buses should be history if community/parents so decide (saving $100's of billions). Wake up sheeple.
charlie| 10.16.10 @ 11:33AM
I agree. My daughter did her entire HS through the Internet. Worked out great. - She is now a college graduate, and had several college choices with substantial scholarships and grants.
Gary B| 10.15.10 @ 8:50PM
Serious education reform must begin with the dissolution of the Department of Education - period. Until that stupid primate house is wiped off the map, homeschooling is the best answer.
Rob| 10.16.10 @ 6:10PM
Education reform should begin with decertification of the teachers' unions, since their demands for increased taxpayer spending serves no legitimate public purpose, and they pose an obstacle to dissolution of the Department of Education and a return to parents of decision-making about the education of children, including through vouchers.
John22| 10.17.10 @ 3:51PM
Parents should be the main educators of their children, not the schools. Pioneers in early American public schooling were really homeschoolers with the teacher under constant scrutiny by the parents of the children they teached. Aside from the mandatory reading, writing and math, the children learned the most important things: respect, common sense and surprise: morality and religion. Today, our public schools teach respect (for everything except their parents and siblings), common sense (for important things such as fashion, videogames, cellphones, internet surfing and "protective" recreation (sex sducation). Morality and religion is stepped upbut one has to be politically correct and certainly, tolerant (of everything unchristian and NON-church)!
Lilac | 10.21.10 @ 4:09AM
Is it wise to change a teacher? I have no idea. To someone, he is great. for others, he is not what it seems to be. Whatever, may God use him to bless more people instead of corruption. I don't like politics, but I hope everyone loves each other in the world.