Where does pressure to change come from?
In the Washington Examiner, Kimberley Ross argues that conservatives should not simply abandon public schools, because if they remove their voices, there will be no more pressure on public schools to improve. What she misses is the enormous pressure that naturally results from parents having a real choice--not just parents who can afford to pay school taxes and private tuition, too, but parents whose access to charter schools, private schools, or homeschooling depends as a practical matter on relief from the double tax burden in the form of vouchers.As things stand now, it's nice to think that parents can "have a voice" in the average public school system, but too often it's about as effective as the voice of prison inmates. The warden isn't all that worried about their views. Their dissatisfaction isn't threatening his livelihood. Nor is it threatening the pipeline of cash from the taxpayers to the teachers' unions to the pro-public-school-nonsense politicians.Things would change fast if parents could vote with their feet and the school tax dollars followed the students. We'd have a completely different discussion about how hard it was to achieve reasonable results in reading and arithmetic on a budget, and how difficult it is to ensure students' basic physical safety, not to mention an orderly classroom in which lessons are rarely disrupted by fistfights with the teacher. Most of us know perfectly well these basic standards are achievable in the real world; the only way for public-school champions to avoid knowing it is to eliminate all that inconvenient competition, with its unfair practices of solving the basic problems parents care about on a rational budget. Meanwhile, the public schools spend more and more every year to accomplish less and less because, as Lily Tomlin used to say, "We don't care. We don't have to."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
'...perfectly achievable in the real world....'
A local Jesuit-run high school for Hispanics announced that for the fourth year in a row, 100% of its graduates were admitted to college(s). These are not 'rich kid' Hispanics. They're all scholarship/charity cases.
Discipline, parental involvement, serious attention to basic academics, avoiding the latest fads in sociology and pedagogy . . . I can see why far too many school boards and PhDs in Education would recoil in horror. (And, alas, in part because of so many federal requirements placed on public schools in terms of "accommodations." Some of those are reasonable, but others? Not fair to anyone involved.)
LittleRed1
Little Red 1 - People do not get PhD's in Education. They get EdD's, like Jill Biden did. These are a much less demanding degree.
The effect of schools is minor. I had mostly stupid and abusive teachers in a mill city. I would not have done significantly better at another school.
It sometimes took a good teacher to make me see the beauty in a field. I missed the beauty of some fields for many years, until I happened to take up the subject later in life on my own. Clearly the problem can be overcome, but that doesn't mean it's a minor effect.
Still, I'm talking less about the effect of talented teachers and more about the effect of reasonably safe schools in which instruction is not completely shouted out by chaos. For most students, too, it will make some difference whether their curriculum has anything but word salad, pablum, and propaganda in it, even if the major effect is to delay their education until they realize they'll have to get it somewhere else.
Some students will do very well if they're simply left alone to read, but where are the public school teachers who will tolerate that? I had a few teachers who would do it, as long as I was current on my assignments. Others found it insulting or insubordinate.
I'd have thought that stupid and abusive teachers would have some impact--not necessarily on all the students, but filtering out the less self-assured ones.
AVI, thanks for the correction. I've had one too many EdD's insist that "it's the same as a PhD, just in Education," and slipped up.
(My degrees are "just" in a field, not Education. This occasionally made/makes me unworthy in their eyes.)
LittleRed1
"A local Jesuit-run high school for Hispanics announced that for the fourth year in a row, 100% of its graduates were admitted to college(s). These are not 'rich kid' Hispanics. They're all scholarship/charity cases."
I wish I could say I thought that was a good metric of the quality of a school anymore, but I don't. The schools all want to be able to say it, and the colleges accept anyone that can deliver federal grants, it seems. Many go who would be better served in trades or elsewhere.
Post a Comment