Parents Must Hold Educrats Responsible for Educational Advancements

In the world of educational reform, it is time to place responsibility on those whom we look to for advancing our children's progress. Our current education monopoly (See excellent commentary,"NCLB?") does not empower administrators to hire and promote effective teachers nor release non-producing teachers. Nor does it support the rights of parents to choose the best education available on behalf of their children.

Missourians need to make themselves heard on the 'school choice' front. People in Kansas City have done so and parents and children will enjoy the benefits of a hard fought and victorious battle. The vote recently in Kansas City to release Indepence Schools from the Kansas City Public School system creates great momentum for the school choice movement. In Columbia, parents call for Columbia Public Schools to get out of CEE vs. MO, and instead get focussed on a broad-based strategy to advance public education.

Across our great nation, parents are finding ways to influence the monopolistic public school system. In Florida, the mayor of St. Petersburg ("Don't forget the poorest pupils" ) found out what other states and municipalities are learning. Parents want choice. Parents' first priority is a safe environment with dedicated teachers. In addition, they prefer their children's schools to be close to home. They also consider diversity important. This mayor calls upon citizens to "[Move] to a system where parents may choose to send their child to a school close to home...but it must not result in winners and losers." Of the many issues to consider, the mayor calls upon the parents to look at the system and cause the focus to be on parental choices and the rights of citizens for a "...a better public school system, and a better community."

Voice for Choice~Funding is NOT the issue!

The summer of '07 brought to light that Missouri indeed devotes enough funding to education (see CEE vs. State of Missouri). But that leaves many taxpaying citizens wondering why, if there's enough money out there, our schools are underperforming? Maybe the answer lies in HOW we spend the money we get and whether citizens are empowered with the CHOICE to seek out the eductation to which their children are entitled.

A great example of choice in the making is the recent resounding call by voters in a landfall victory in the Kansas City School District. 32,000 Missourians confirmed that Missouri parents and residents care about the performance of their local school district, after blowing out an election to transfer control of seven districts back to the local community. Voters overwhelmingly decided that transferring to their local district was best after nearly three decades of unanswered failure from the Kansas City Public School bureaucracy. The educrats wanted the system to continue with the status quo~but the parents did not.

Opponents of change like to attack vouchers and claim that voucher take money away from school districts that really need those funds. There is evidence however that vouchers do exactly the opposite. David Roland, of The Show Me Institute says in "Public Schools Improve! ", for all of the billions of dollars spent by public school systems nationwide in desperate efforts to improve their schools without disturbing the status quo, it was a low-cost choice program in Milwaukee (the city spends $12,000 per public school student, but only $6,500 per choice student) that has shown the most promise for improving public schools."

Mind you, vouchers are NOT where most of the work done in Missouri is centered. There is, however, much work being done in the area of giving parents the right to choose, expanding quality education options for students--especially those not being well-served by their current system: expanding providers, special needs education issues, virtual learning, etc. The education reform and school improvement discussion needs to be opened up to new ideas, quality providers and more efficient spending of tax dollars. While all of these options are being explored and vetted, parents with kids who are failing in unaccredited school districts need immediate support and better choices.

A little choice goes a long way…

Save the Charters!

Dave Roland takes issue with my criticism of an effort to close "failing" charter schools in Ohio. He writes:

A fundamental principle of school choice is that some schools will succeed and endure, but others will do poorly and close.

I agree completely — but the mechanism that closes schools should be choice, not state fiat. If parents aren't happy with the failing charter schools, they can always send their kids back to the traditional public schools. But in the absence of the charters, the traditional public schools are for many families the only choice. If the charter schools are that bad, no one will send their kids there and the charter schools will close of their own accord.

This controversy illustrates one problem with evaluating schools based on standardized test scores. Parents might want their kids to attend a charter school, even if it doesn't improve their test scores. For example, they may feel that the charter school is safer or inspires their kids to be more creative.

So why am I always complaining about bad test scores at traditional public schools? Well, since many families don't have educational choices beyond the traditional public schools, I suspect that some of them would choose other schools if they had the chance. The bad scores hint that for families interested in academic achievement, traditional public schools would not be their first choice.

But if parents prefer charter schools to poorly performing public schools, why should we deny them that choice?

Posted by Sarah Brodsky at 03:22 PM in Education | Permalink

Sarah Brodsky reminds me that school choice is not only about failing schools, but about the right of parents to choose the appropriate school for their child. In fact, my younger brother chose a technical institute that was adjoined to our high school for some of his classes—not because of test scores, but because he had an interest in culinary arts that my parents and I encouraged him to pursue. I think if everyone examined their experiences, they would find small instances of choice that made a great deal of difference.

Test scores are significant and take a serious role in why school choice is a necessity, and how we compare progress between charters and public schools, but the real issue of school choice comes down to parents understanding the needs of their children better than a lumbering, many-tentacled school administration. It comes down to children as individuals with futures fertile with potential.

Opportunity Knocks--Is Anyone Home?

There's good news developing across the country as parents not only ask for, but actively work towards, improving the public educational system. However, in order to take advantage of opportunity, one must first recognize that opportunity exists.

Take the St. Louis Public School District, for example. In an interesting video on Deseg, Magnets and Charters, teachers union president, Mary Armstrong, asks for placement in magnet schools for black children who are on a waiting list while seats are still open--waiting for non-African-American children. Seats in the magnet schools schools are kept empty resulting from former deseg litigation requiring that 2 out of 5 seats are filled with non-African American students. So, parents who cannot get their African-American child into a magnet are requesting Charter School placement. Charter schools are under the state, not the city--so money is diverted from the city public schools to follow the children who make their way to charter schools--all to avoid the unaccredited city schools. The OPPORTUNITY exists to place children in higher performing magnet schools and yet those seats remain unclaimed--because of beuracracy.

Now, take a look at the Kansas City Public School District. The people in that area have been working very hard for years to improve their district. They recognized the opportunity to implement change and finally got it with a resounding vote. Parental choice prevailed in a HUGE way: After three decades of school district failure, over 32,000 voters made their local voice heard about giving 1,500 children a better choice, and nearly 24,000 of these voters voted for a better school (72%). While this win in Kansas City is significant, it is also helpful to put this situation in perspective relative to the crisis before the City of St. Louis. St. Louis City has nearly twice the amount of children trapped in a failing district whose parents cannot vote because they have no address. It is estimated that the City of St. Louis has 1,500 children (5%) who are homeless, and up to another 1,500 (5%) heavily-reliant on sheltered assistance.

Less than a year ago, a tough school superintendant was brought into the failing Kansas City School District. Though there is debate about his approach, at least he seems to have a plan. If his plan does not work, then there will be a state take-over like the one in the St. Louis Public Schools. Though a temporary board is in place for the St. Louis Public Schools, we have yet to receive any word of an actual plan for improvement. While we wait, children suffer. Children are trapped in unaccredited districts and are being refused entry to neighboring districts, though obligated by law (RSMo 167.31). The OPPORTUNITY exists for them to transfer, but since the law is not being enforced, the kids are stuck!

Certainly there is room for improvement. Improvement may require changing systems, policy, broad overhaul--things that will take time. But for the here and now, we have opportunties we fail to recognize--existing laws that were meant to work for kids but aren't being enforced.

Unaccredited schools

My daughter is in the St. Louis school district. Earlier this year, the State Board of Education unaccredited the schools in this district, because the schools were continuously declining in academic performance, and other concerns about financial issues and leadership issues. According to the law, the students within unaccredited districts are allowed to transfer to other schools in a neighboring county, such as St. Louis county schools. The SLPS must pay for those students and pay for transportation to these schools. However, I spoke with another mother and other schools turned her down. The problem is that the students are allowed to transfer, but there is no law that says the schools must accept these students.

Then I heard the SLPS have been coercing the other schools not to accept these students. So what are we supposed to do…just wait until the schools are better? Maybe by the time my daughter is in 11th grade, the schools will be better. Meanwhile, I am trying to do extra work with her at home, after I come home from my first job and before I leave for my second job. I accept and embrace that it is my child and I am her teacher as well. However, what am I paying taxes for? For her to attend a failing school apparently. I hope that this gets resolved and I can get her into a better school immediately.

32,000 Missouri Voices On Transferring Out of Failed Schools

Missourians confirmed that Missouri parents and residents care about the performance of their local school district, after blowing out an election to transfer control of seven districts back to the local community. The Kansas City Public School system had fought the will of the parents for nearly three decades, but failed to carry even the Kansas City voting districts.

Clayton School District to Bill St. Louis Public Schools Tuition for Their Failure?

VIDEO HERE

Several children now enrolled in the Clayton School District are now asking them to send St. Louis Public Schools the tab for their tuition. Their attorney alleges that state law requires the failed district to make the payment whenever they transfer from an unaccredited district. What about the other 30,000 children held hostage to poor results?