Tag: position

Speaking My Native Language

Post author By David
Post date November 12, 2008
13 Comments on Speaking My Native Language

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I have always tried to maintain a very civilized and respectful tone here when discussing issues that are sometimes charged with emotion in the public arena. I have been reading the book Why We Whisper and I began to recognize that my efforts to be civil had resulted in my speaking a dialect that is not native to me – secularism. I recognize that my effort not to shout had resulted in a timid whispering of my opinions for which I would not like to be known. The result is that my declared stances are weakened by an often apologetic tone when I take a position on some issues. I have determined that I can no longer do that. From now on I will be more willing to state my positions without apology and without an effort to articulate my position using secular terminology.

I still intend to be civil in manner, but by abandoning the secular terminology I will not avoid taking positions that are considered politically incorrect. As I have in the past, I will still be open to changing my positions in the future when I have been convinced of an error but I will try to avoid situations where people might mistake my true position based on my whispered stances and open declarations of uncertainty.

I appologize in advance to any of my readers who might perceive my writing as becoming more partisan than it has been in the past. I don’t know where this will take me, but I know that I cannot bear to think of myself as one who whispers the truth as if I am afraid to offend anyone or afraid that my positions may come back to haunt me in the future.

In addition to this change to a less wavering voice, I have also determined that it is time for me to find a party to affilite with in order to become more engaged in the political process as a participant rather than just as a pundit. I am still in the process of deciding what party would most closely align with my goals because I intend to make a difference in shaping the way we actually conduct the business of government. I do not intend to participate only in order to say that "I’m a delegate" (or whatever level of participation I actually achieve). In other words, if I were a delegate, I would be active in shaping the party platform and holding elected officials accountable to that platform not simply attending and casting a vote at the convention.

Tags civic participation, discourse, parties, position

State

Get Vouchers Right Next Time

Post author By David
Post date October 31, 2007
18 Comments on Get Vouchers Right Next Time

It’s not often that I get to see Utah featured in a nationally syndicated column about a positive policy debate. Usually when Utah makes the national news it’s for things like a mine disaster, raging wildfires, or polygamy. Today John Stossel wrote about the voucher issue in Utah. Naturally he is in favor of vouchers – like I am, but the Utah legislature was kind enough to give us such a bad proposal that it’s a no-win situation for those who favor parental choice. It’s easy for people outside of Utah to say “take the leap and give parents more options” but those of us inside Utah who have studied the issue know that it’s not that clear-cut.

If we get vouchers (which does not look very likely right now) we will have a poor implementation that will be used to ridicule the idea elsewhere while we pay the price for our mistakes. If we vote against Referendum 1 – as I plan to – our votes will be painted as opposition to parental choice.

Let me clear up the message of the vote I will cast next week on this. I am in favor of parental choice and I think that vouchers can be a useful vehicle to encourage parental choice but HB148 and HB174 do not make for a good implementation of vouchers. I hope that their defeat next week will not discourage those who want more parental choice. I hope instead that it will force them to come up with a much better solution. Besides learning something about crafting good law, they can also learn something about engaging in shady politics. Parents for Choice in Education should clean up their act or be shunned. They need to do a much better job at defending the issue if they are involved and they need to avoid the political trickery that is more a smear on them than a strategy for changing public opinion.

Tags dirty politics, media, position

National

Another Reversal

I’ve had another change of position which is sure to make me popular with some people. When I originally looked at endorsing Ron Paul I had some reservations. Over the five months since then those reservations have disappeared. My current position is that Ron Paul is the only candidate in either party that would bring real change to the White House. There are reasons to choose another candidate, but if you are looking for substantial change instead of new approaches to politics as usual then your only option is Ron Paul.

I am not blind to the challenges that he faces, but Ron Paul has been gaining momentum in the form of supporters (converts such as myself) and cash – he is raising as much money as John McCain and spending much less so he is prepared to keep running for a long time. Ron Paul also has something else in his favor – none of his supporters are passive in their support.

It’s funny that the only candidate who would really change things is one who has been in Congress for two decades.

Tags change, position, Ron Paul

State

Turning a Corner

I have been a vocal supporter of vouchers previously, but I have been less than pleased with some of the tactics of those behind vouchers. My support was wavering because of my displeasure but then as I stared at the conclusion of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst’s Report that vouchers would be draining more than 40 million dollars per year once all students have become eligible for them I realized the magnitude of the flaws in our current voucher laws. In my opinion, that’s too much of a drain for an experiment. I also firmly believe that it’s much harder to change a law once it is implemented than it is to just let 40 million dollars get siphoned off from our state budget each year.

Between that financial drain and the gutter-politics associated with voucher support I can not support Referendum 1 in good conscience. I still support the idea of vouchers, and would be supportive of future efforts to implement a better implementation later. Good suggestions include using tax credits or requiring that students attend a minimum amount of time in public school before accepting vouchers. I certainly don’t have all the answers, but I have one answer – I have to vote “no” on Referendum 1 in November.

Tags Education, issues, position, State, vouchers

State

Who Do You Believe?

I had two interesting (and unconnected) thoughts about the arguments being made in the voucher debate. The first thought came as I was hearing the argument again that vouchers take money away from our schools. Of course the voucher supporters argue that vouchers will pump new money into education as parents who use vouchers will have to put some of their own money in to finish paying for private schools. The difference between the price of a voucher and the per-pupil money being spent on public education also means that there more money left in public schools on a per-pupil basis (this is the foundation of the infamous Oreo example). In a moment of clarity, some voucher opponent argued that this equation did not take into account the overhead costs of running a school. It’s certainly true that the cost of lighting an elementary school is the same whether the classes are full of students or only half full. The thought that captured my attention was – if an average voucher leaves $5000 per student extra and that $5000 is not enough to cover the overhead that remains when a student leaves then I see a huge problem with public schools. We should not have 2/3 of our public education money ($5000 out of $7500 per pupil) being dedicated to overhead costs.

The other thought that has percolated in my brain recently is that voucher supporters have focused their defense on the financial aspects of vouchers. This is probably a wise move considering that every time I try to dig into the numbers of the voucher opponents I come away feeling that their arguments don’t wash. Voucher opponents spend an equal amount of time talking about social consequences (or potential consequences) such as desegregation. Voucher opponents – when they are not talking about the financial impact of vouchers put forth pathetic arguments such as “Hillary Clinton, MoveOn.org and Ted Kennedy oppose vouchers.” Sorry, but Ted Kennedy is a huge fan of breathing air and despite how much I disagree with him I don’t plan to give up that practice just to oppose him.

It is up to the voters to decide rationally what they believe about the financial impact of vouchers (where the opponents can’t seem to make a solid argument) and what they believe about the social consequences of vouchers (where the supporters don’t seem to want to bather with an argument). If voters make their decision based on an emotional response to the pro or con arguments then the state will lose on this issue whether vouchers pass or fail.

Personally I think that vouchers make financial sense and I have more faith in the choices that parents will make than the opponents of vouchers do who seem to suggest that parents will pander to their baser instincts until we create an economic apartheid.

Tags issues, position, State, vouchers

State

Arguments Against Vouchers

Post author By David
Post date October 8, 2007
No Comments on Arguments Against Vouchers

I enjoyed reading Dixie Huefner’s opinion in the Salt Lake tribune recently. It was one of the more well-considered arguments against vouchers. Despite avoiding the emotionally charged shouting-match feeling that seem to dominate divisive issues like this, she still managed to skew the data to fit her position rather than presenting more accurate facts along with her legitimate personal opinion. (Yes, my support for vouchers does not cause me to think that everyone who opposes vouchers is a mindless zombie big-government liberal.) So here are some thoughts to temper her arguments.

Siphoning off tax dollars to support private school enrollment . . . also siphons off support for the public schools by parents who obviously care deeply about their children’s education.

This is perhaps one of the strongest legitimate arguments against vouchers. What is not mentioned is that the availability of vouchers gives parents who care deeply about their children’s education a lever to demand more accountability from public schools when the schools are not serving their children well.

The subsidy, from $ 500 to $ 3,000, mostly helps families who can afford to pay a significant portion of the private school tuition. Many of the best private schools cost between $ 10,000-15,000 a year. If vouchers are meant to help those who cannot afford private schools, they significantly limit the private school choices available to low- and many middle-income families.

Many of the best private schools – this ignores the fact that the $ 10,000 to $ 15,000 private schools make up a tiny fraction of the private schools in the state. There are many others which cost significantly less (some even less than $ 3000) and still offer a greater range of choices to parents than public schools do. The vouchers are not limited to being spent at the “best” (read “most expensive”) private schools. I would bet that 50% of private schools charge less than $5000 and if vouchers are implemented new charter schools are likely to spring up catering to this within-reach-of-the-vouchers price range. For those who argue that $ 5000 is still a lot of money I argue that:

- A $2000 voucher brings the cost to $ 250 a month which is a good chunk, but if you are serious about your child’s education you’re likely to find a way (start by ditching your $ 60 cable bill).
- Voucher opponents do not suggest raising the level of vouchers – they prefer to limit parental choice to the rich.

The provision allocating money to public schools to partially offset the loss of tax dollars for children receiving education vouchers expires after five years.

Why should public schools be perpetually paid for students that they never educate? This argument directly conflicts with the argument that vouchers cost too much. If the public schools were paid for more than five years the vouchers would cost more. Besides, the provision itself does not expire after five years, the offset money expires for individual students who remain outside the public school system for more than 5 years. In other words, the schools quit receiving money after parents have determined that their student really is doing better outside the public school system.

Other parents may determine that their child’s instructional needs have not been met by the school. They may have a child who is harassed or bullied by other children, or they may prefer smaller class sizes.

Certainly, private schools have a role in educating children who are not well-served by their public school. But the selection of another public school is also an option for parents who are seeking a more effective school environment for a particular child.

Students are allowed to move between schools within their districts. Their choice of schools are limited to other schools that are directed by the same people who are directing the schools they are trying to get away from. That sounds like Henry Ford telling people that they could have their car in any color they chose – so long as it was black.

Another concern about the voucher legislation is that it will encourage private schools that lack a track record and will not be as instructionally effective as the public schools. Public schools are accountable to the public and must report such matters as drop-out and attendance rates and achievement scores.

The voucher legislation will not provide vouchers for schools that do not have a track record. The track record in private schools is that if they do not meet the demands of parents they lose their students and have to close. Public schools are insulated from that kind of accountability – they just have to report their numbers but there is no risk to their bottom line.

[Public schools] must comply with due process protections and equal protection mandates of the U.S. and state constitutions.

This is a nice scare tactic, but what “due process protections and equal protection mandates” are private schools going to violate?

If all the energy in time and money spent on supporting private school vouchers went to promoting ongoing professional development of educators; [etc.] . . . we might have an education system that better meets the needs of all our children.

If all the energy in time and money spent on oppopsing private school vouchers (that’s much more than has been spent supporting them) we might have an education system that was better, but one size still does not meet the needs of all our children.

As I have said before, there are valid arguments against vouchers. Most of them are based on personal beliefs about the way our children should be educated and what is in the best interest of society. Let’s quit pretending that this is a fight between good an evil. It’s largely a matter of personal preference and social vision. “What do you think is best?” That’s the real question behind this legislative fight.

Tags issues, media, position, State, vouchers

General

My Position on Vouchers

I have stated that vouchers have potential benefits to our education system and also that they do not address the core issue that is leading our education system down the path of crisis. So here is my position on vouchers.

The bills that we are going to vote on are flawed – most bills are. That being said, I will support vouchers at the ballot box and then I will work to improve the public education system. The virtual monopoly of our public schools in the arena of primary education is not beneficial to our society. That monopoly must be challenged. Only as it is challenged will we give our educational administrators the incentive to root out the inefficiency and manipulation that are pervasive in the current system.

Despite any claims to the contrary, the public education system is not designed to educate. It is designed to measure. It measures things like how many hours a child sits in the classroom – which is not related to how much they learn. I have a friend who has chosen home school because she was told that her son was in danger of not advancing to the next grade because of the number of absences he had that year. This was without regard to the fact that this child was at or near the top of his class in every academic measure of performance. Those measures meant nothing next to the butt-in-seat time where he was flirting with the legislatively imposed rules of what constituted acceptable attendance. The public education system also spends large amounts of money on academically unnecessary things like upgrading high-school athletic facilities while complaining about lack of funds. (That is just one example of spending that is completely unrelated to academics.)

Our standardized tests are more academic in nature, but the emphasis on such testing encourages the employment of every intellectual pump-and-dump scheme that can be found. Teachers do not want to lose their jobs so they teach to the test without regard to any retention after the test is administered. This is because teachers are graded (formally or informally) on a bell curve. The result is that some percentage of teachers are going to fail and some percentage are going to pass regardless of whether the entire system is getting better or getting worse. Such a norm-referenced mindset works well in the media because people understand it, but it does not work well in improving the system. I honestly believe that most teachers are interested in improving the minds of their students, but if they lose their jobs they can’t do that. Their jobs are not based on how much their students learn, but on how much their students remember on the day of the test as compared to other students. That kind of environment will eventually wear out most well intentioned people so that they either leave, become complacent, or resign themselves to the flaws in the system.

My assertion that a quality education can be had only based on parental involvement suggests one of the risks of vouchers, or any other escape from the public school system. When provided with an easy alternative, most involved parents are likely to abandon the public school system because other options (home, private, charter) do not carry all the baggage that weighs down the public education system. This leave the public schools worse off than before because it will be left to care only for those students who come from homes where parents are not involved and where there is no culture of learning. (Voucher opponents use this fact to accuse supporters of engaging in class warfare because the culture of learning is less prevalent among the poor – who’s parents are not generally as well educated as the rich.) Because of that risk, I will actively encourage people, including myself, to avoid using vouchers to leave the public schools unless it is absolutely necessary.

The educational bureaucrats must know that we have the option to leave, and that we are interested enough to vote for change. Once we have made that known we must show them that we are willing to work with them, for the good of everyone, to improve the public schools. (Utah Rattler stakes out a similar position.) We must demonstrate that leaving them to deal with those who have the least support is not our objective, just as living off our taxes and raising their own paychecks should not be their objective. (Admittedly I do not think that is the objective of most administrators, but who can resist the chance to give themselves a pay raise when their colleagues keep reminding them about how hard they work.)

Tags Education, issues, position, State, vouchers

General

Vouchers and Public Education

Post author By David
Post date September 5, 2007
No Comments on Vouchers and Public Education

My views on education have been a topic of regular discussion for many years with my wife and her family. She grew up in a family where all the children went to a very expensive private school. (It’s very expensive now, I don’t actually know what it cost back then.) My father-in-law has a PhD in education, three of his children have masters degrees in education (including my wife), I have a masters degree in education and I started a PhD myself before I decided that it would not be worth the debt I would incur to get it. On top of that, every one of my wife’s siblings has done some form of home schooling or charter schooling for their children at one time or another (some still are and others are not).

Through all the years of discussion my views on what is most important to the education of our children has been utterly static. I have always argued that a child could get a quality education in public school, private school, charter school, or home school (they can also get a lousy education through any of those avenues). The common thread to a quality education is parental involvement combined with a culture at home which values learning. There are times when an exceptional teacher can provide a surrogate in the absence of parental involvement, but that is outside the scope of what we can expect of them. A school which has a culture that values learning can compensate to a degree for students where the culture at home is not very supportive of learning.

Parental involvement is not simply a matter of joining the PTA or doing your child’s homework for them. It requires that you know your child. It requires that you know what they are doing and what is expected of them. It requires that you know their teacher and school environment (that’s easy with home school). It requires that you work with the school to achieve the results you desire.

A culture in the home that values learning must be cultivated – it does not spring up without work. A culture that values learning must differentiate between homework and learning. It must value learning even when it is not related to school or grades. It must not place awards before effort. It must also recognize effort when there are no external awards. A school in which the prevailing culture in student homes is one that values learning will be more likely to have a culture at school where learning is valued. Without the appropriately supportive culture at homes, schools will find it almost impossible to create that culture at school. All the head-start programs and other educational techniques or classroom gimmicks cannot make up for a school culture where learning is not valued.

So where do vouchers fit into all of this? Vouchers cannot replace parental involvement, nor create a culture that values learning. They can provide a vehicle for parents who are involved to exercise greater control over the formal education of their children. They might even serve as an invitation for parents who are not involved to get more involved in the education of their children. Those are the potential benefits. The potential risks are that they may be one more way that parents may choose to separate themselves from the education of their children as they shift the burden of responsibility from public school teachers to private school teachers. That will certainly be the case for those who do not understand, or refuse to accept, their central role in creating a successful partnership for educating their children.

Tags Education, position, State