In today's P-I, a guest editorial by John Burbank, perhaps best known for fathering the unsuccessful Seattle "latte tax" initiative.
Burbank writes today that "Privileged should invest more in public schools", hectoring private school parents to send their children to government schools, or at least "embrace more investments in public schools that might increase their taxes".
If Burbank really wanted to improve educational opportunities for public school students, he wouldn't just advocate for dumping more money and children into institutions that people who have choices have chosen to reject. He would also ask private school parents why they have chosen private schools, and then advocate for bringing those desirable characteristics into the public schools. He'd find it boils down to this:
1) private schools have to compete for students in order to survive and are therefore directly accountable and responsive to parents
2) the teachers are not unionized
I'll look forward to Burbank's next op-ed supporting vouchers and deunionization!
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 27, 2007 09:17 AM | Email ThisThe solution is to increase the wealth of the families through opportunity and growth.
What is the difference between a Democrat and a Republican?
A Democrat thinks that a person wants a health care plan.
A Republican thinks that a person wants a job...with a health care plan.
Big job provider now are the call centers. Kids drool at the prospect of $2/hour to troubleshoot problems with software and hardware. Puts them in middle class right away.
Posted by: swatter on July 27, 2007 09:53 AMSpending more money on schools will not fix the problem. Spending less may not fix it either. The problem isn't the money. The problem is the mission statement of the schools, the policies, and the stakeholders are not literally putting the education of the children ahead of any other interest.
Posted by: steve miller on July 27, 2007 10:20 AMI had found that the public schools were using a terrible curriculum and were leaning towards controversial teaching methods (such as peer teaching).
I discussed my concerns with teachers, but they said their hands were tied. This is the curriculum and teaching style that state supperintendent Terry Bergeson wants.
I support charter schools and vouchers. Then parents could choose what methods are best for their children.
Posted by: Whole Lotta Rosie on July 27, 2007 10:50 AMI had found that the public schools were using a terrible curriculum and were leaning towards controversial teaching methods (such as peer teaching).
I discussed my concerns with teachers, but they said their hands were tied. This is the curriculum and teaching style that state supperintendent Terry Bergeson wants.
I support charter schools and vouchers. Then parents could choose what methods are best for their children.
Posted by: Whole Lotta Rosie on July 27, 2007 10:51 AMAnd rosie, I just got done with attending my kids last parent teachers conference which was run by- my kid.
Posted by: swatter on July 27, 2007 10:55 AMWhat a big smelly pile of poop!
/facilitators = teachers
//poop
///harsh
////lol
/////slashies//////
What a big smelly pile of poop!
/facilitators = teachers
//poop
///harsh
////lol
/////slashies//////
lmao!
Posted by: kim in vancouver on July 27, 2007 11:08 AMHis premise is greatly flawed and shortsighted. I salute all parents who sacrifice (yes, it is a sacrifice for many) to put their kids in a good private school.
does he not get this?
Posted by: Michele on July 27, 2007 03:34 PMCall it a crazy science experiment to see what straw will break the camel's back.
Posted by: Andy on July 29, 2007 10:07 AMNow the city of Seattle is paying for iPods for students who sign up for WASL test prep. The article says that a 'private donor' is paying for some iPods, but 'the city' is paying for the rest.
When will the insanity end?
And to comment on "Student Led Conferences" (SLC's): I believe all high schools do SLC's now. The idea has even trickled down to many elementary schools.
I have been told to BRING MY CHILDREN to their conferences since they were in first grade. I don't do so because I don't always want my kids to hear what I say. This is my private time to speak to the teacher, but I have been made to feel that I am not empowering my child, by letting them be a part of it.
Posted by: Whole Lotta Rosie on July 29, 2007 11:52 AM1. Public shools must "take" all students. Private schools select their students.
2. Bergeson is a idiot and her corrupt policies have made teaching more difficult in public schools. Student led confrences, WASL, GLE's ELR's, and a crap math curriculum desinged by one of her college progessors.
3. Parents in most public schools do not participate, and do not provide their children with any sense of value regarding education.
4. There are a lot of great public schools and a lot of great things going on in those schools. If you have ever been in one you would know it. Uniformed critics are a problem.
5. Inability to weed out problem students. State Courts and bleeding hearts allow sex offenders, gang bangers, and all other sorts of social refuse to remain in public schools.
There are five problems. For those of you who have visited a private school, how many kids with handicaps or special needs did you see at those private schools? None to very few. Private schools cherry pick the cream of the crop, it should not be hard to get great results from those kids.
Lets see a private school teacher get a hard core gangbanger to read Thoreau or write a four page essay. When you can do that, then you can step to the plate to trash public educators.
Posted by: grandgadfly on July 29, 2007 12:15 PMBergeson is AN idiot
UNINFORMED, not uniformed
My apologies
Posted by: Grandgadfly on July 29, 2007 12:20 PMMy impression is that most Seattle schools try very hard to appeal to parents and that unions are not a significant hindrance to the schools. Were these really the reasons you chose a private school for your child?
Posted by: Bruce on July 29, 2007 11:25 PM1. Proximity - Most kids at the private school are from the neighborhood. This facilitates kids' and parents' social relationships. Parental involvement with school affairs is extremely high.
2. Control - As a customer of the private school I am in control. If I am dissatisfied with the services provided, I can take my business eleswhere. Who controls the Seattle Public (i.e. government) schools? Why, the Seattle municipal government, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party. I do not wish my kids to recieve a partisan education/indoctrination.
I pay my property taxes, just like those whose kids do go to public school. So while I am forced to pay for public education, I simply don't use the services.
Posted by: Steve on July 30, 2007 11:27 AMIn any case, "control" is abstract (and equally relevant to public and private schools). How has this "control" led to a better experience for your kids?
Posted by: Bruce on July 30, 2007 01:43 PMFrom the very first sentence, he basically says that only government can teach our children not to be bigots. He then goes on to say that there's negative values being taught by not sending a kid to public school, but none being taught by sending them to public school, which from my perspective is backward: anyone can not send their kids to public school. There's no privilege there. We homeschool. How is that privileged?
Yet the values taught by Burbank and others who say we all "should" go to public school are some of the most vile values mankind has ever known: conformity, state control, government intrusion, not to mention assent to the values taught by the school itself, which vary from school to school, some of which include direct approval of lifestyle choices which are damaging, a warped view of history and science and philosophy, and so on.
And don't even get me started on the insane social environment provided by most schools, including private ones, which boils down to one small step above Lord of the Flies, where you learn how to make other kids feel bad, or how to cope with them making you feel bad. No doubt some of these "survival skills" are necessary for anyone, but not for five-year-old kids, and I question the nonsensical claim that you can only properly learn those skills in such an environment.
This is perhaps the most evil thing Burbank said: "Private school parents invest a lot of money and energy in their schools. Think of what would happen if they invested in their local public schools. ... In the fight for public education, we need all hands on deck, especially the most privileged among us. We need the parents of the 14,000 children in Seattle's private schools. We must all connect the dots between personal responsibility and the greater good."
In other words: maybe it is not as good for YOUR child, but it is for the GREATER good, and shouldn't that be good enough? And, of course, the answer from any reasonable parent is "hell no." I am a parent, and the greater good IS what is best for MY KIDS. That is what it means to be a parent, and it makes me wonder if Burbank has kids himself.
It is not possible to "fix" public schooling such that I would ever be interested in sending my kids there. Don't even bother trying. My kids are far too important for me to entrust their raising to anyone else, especially the government.
YMMV. I am not saying you have to agree with me; I am just giving my reasons for not sending my kids to public school, and attacking the logic that says that only the government can adequately teach our kids, and that even if we don't buy that, we should let them do it anyway, letting the government harm our kids in order to help others. But I didn't have kids to allow the government to harm them. If all I wanted to do was help the greater good, I'd not have any kids at all, and just donate the money I spend on them to some Greater Good Charities.
I am not even against public schools, per se. For those who really have no other options, or are too lazy to take them, or actually think it IS the best option, fine, go to public school. I don't even mind paying more for schools out of my tax dollars if it is needed: I would not oppose a tax increase for schools if I thought it was necessary for the schools to function well. But public schools are necessarily, by definition the default backup option, in my view. Homeschooling is not an alternative to me: it's the default. Parents should be the first option, followed by people who are employed directly by the parents, followed by people who are employed by an organization hired by the parents, followed by, lastly, people who are employed by the government which is answerable, in a very small way, to the parents.
As you can see, for me, the issue is control. The parents should decide what is taught, and how, and who the kids spend their time with, and what experiences they are exposed to. It's why my kids will have a much greater opportunity to excel in all areas than kids who are taught by the government.
Posted by: pudge on July 30, 2007 04:02 PMAlso, I question the "control" by parents over their private school. They certainly can walk but, at least in Seattle, you don't choose a school - most good private schools have way too many applicants - they choose you. Also, they can unchoose you, at any time for no reason, and you don't have recourse because almost every private school contract will state they can kick your kid out any time. So you pick which ones to apply to but that doesn't mean you'll get in or stay in. I've seen a least a couple of friends' kids either get kicked out or threatened to be kicked out. One was because he was told to write an essay on what he liked and didn't like at his school and they took offense at what he didn't like.
Posted by: westello on July 30, 2007 05:37 PMEven if I had meant to refer to gays, which I didn't (I actually had in mind promiscuity, not homosexuality), why would you assume I meant they are inferior? The problem, in the way I am referring to it, is not about inferiority or superiority, but pushing something as normal/right/proper/good. I don't think homosexuals are inferior in any way, but I do think homosexuality is wrong, and many schools teach, explicitly, that it is not wrong.
And I still don't see how this has anything to do with conformity. It seems to me you only have a problem with what I said because you disagreed with the values you (incorrectly) believed I was pushing. If I had said I wanted my children to "conform" to my belief that racism is wrong, I doubt you've have raised an objection, and if not, then clearly this isn't about conformity, for you, but mere disagreement about the perceived object of conformity.
However, for me, this is about conformity. I don't care if the government is teaching something I agree with: there's still something inherently wrong and dangerous, to me, with the government pushing children to believe what the government says they should believe.
Posted by: pudge on August 1, 2007 12:09 AMI attended private school from kindergarten to the start of ninth grade. I was an average student, and I considered myself a good kid. The school was very strict (it was a small, grass-roots Christian school).
One day, while in the hallway, a friend said something shocking, and I exclaimed with the phrase, "oh my God!". I very rarely use that expression, and I'm not sure why I used it then. A teacher over-heard me, and I was given detention for saying The Lord's name in vain.
I had never had detention before, but I knew it was for one hour after school. So when my mom came to pick me up that day (there was no bus service at the school, so every student was picked up), I simply walked to the pick-up area to tell her that I would not be able to come home, and we had a brief conversation as to how I would get home and then I walked to the classroom to serve my time.
Well, evidently the teacher did not think I arrived to detention in a timely manner, so now my punishment escalated to a "paddling"!
The boy's PE teacher was summons, and I was taken to a room. Two teachers held me down while the male teacher beat me with a wooden paddle. I was determined not to cry, which I think was a mistake. I also instinctively put my hand up, in front of my behind to block the paddle. They then decided to tie my hands up, and they beat me until my pants ripped. By this time I was crying and hysterical.
My parents were not pleased when they learned of the incident. It was decided that it was best for me not to return to the school.
So I can relate to comments about parents not having as much control as they think they have at private schools, and that private schools choose you, more than you choose them.
However, despite this incident, I do feel I received a great education academically and I also plan to send my kids to private school. It just goes to show that parents always need to watch what's going on.
Posted by: Whole Lotta Rosie on August 1, 2007 12:57 AMI attended private school from kindergarten to the start of ninth grade. I was an average student, and I considered myself a good kid. The school was very strict (it was a small, grass-roots Christian school).
One day, while in the hallway, a friend said something shocking, and I exclaimed with the phrase, "oh my God!". I very rarely use that expression, and I'm not sure why I used it then. A teacher over-heard me, and I was given detention for saying The Lord's name in vain.
I had never had detention before, but I knew it was for one hour after school. So when my mom came to pick me up that day (there was no bus service at the school, so every student was picked up), I simply walked to the pick-up area to tell her that I would not be able to come home, and we had a brief conversation as to how I would get home and then I walked to the classroom to serve my time.
Well, evidently the teacher did not think I arrived to detention in a timely manner, so now my punishment escalated to a "paddling"!
The boy's PE teacher was summons, and I was taken to a room. Two teachers held me down while the male teacher beat me with a wooden paddle. I was determined not to cry, which I think was a mistake. I also instinctively put my hand up, in front of my behind to block the paddle. They then decided to tie my hands up, and they beat me until my pants ripped. By this time I was crying and hysterical.
My parents were not pleased when they learned of the incident. It was decided that it was best for me not to return to the school.
So I can relate to comments about parents not having as much control as they think they have at private schools, and that private schools choose you, more than you choose them.
However, despite this incident, I do feel I received a great education academically and I also plan to send my kids to private school. It just goes to show that parents always need to watch what's going on.
Posted by: Whole Lotta Rosie on August 1, 2007 12:58 AMI attended private school from kindergarten to the start of ninth grade. I was an average student, and I considered myself a good kid. The school was very strict (it was a small, grass-roots Christian school).
One day, while in the hallway, a friend said something shocking, and I exclaimed with the phrase, "oh my God!". I very rarely use that expression, and I'm not sure why I used it then. A teacher over-heard me, and I was given detention for saying The Lord's name in vain.
I had never had detention before, but I knew it was for one hour after school. So when my mom came to pick me up that day (there was no bus service at the school, so every student was picked up), I simply walked to the pick-up area to tell her that I would not be able to come home, and we had a brief conversation as to how I would get home and then I walked to the classroom to serve my time.
Well, evidently the teacher did not think I arrived to detention in a timely manner, so now my punishment escalated to a "paddling"!
The boy's PE teacher was summons, and I was taken to a room. Two teachers held me down while the male teacher beat me with a wooden paddle. I was determined not to cry, which I think was a mistake. I also instinctively put my hand up, in front of my behind to block the paddle. They then decided to tie my hands up, and they beat me until my pants ripped. By this time I was crying and hysterical.
My parents were not pleased when they learned of the incident. It was decided that it was best for me not to return to the school.
So I can relate to comments about parents not having as much control as they think they have at private schools, and that private schools choose you, more than you choose them.
However, despite this incident, I do feel I received a great education academically and I also plan to send my kids to private school. It just goes to show that parents always need to watch what's going on.
Posted by: Whole Lotta Rosie on August 1, 2007 12:58 AMI attended private school from kindergarten to the start of ninth grade. I was an average student, and I considered myself a good kid. The school was very strict (it was a small, grass-roots Christian school).
One day, while in the hallway, a friend said something shocking, and I exclaimed with the phrase, "oh my God!". I very rarely use that expression, and I'm not sure why I used it then. A teacher over-heard me, and I was given detention for saying The Lord's name in vain.
I had never had detention before, but I knew it was for one hour after school. So when my mom came to pick me up that day (there was no bus service at the school, so every student was picked up), I simply walked to the pick-up area to tell her that I would not be able to come home, and we had a brief conversation as to how I would get home and then I walked to the classroom to serve my time.
Well, evidently the teacher did not think I arrived to detention in a timely manner, so now my punishment escalated to a "paddling"!
The boy's PE teacher was summons, and I was taken to a room. Two teachers held me down while the male teacher beat me with a wooden paddle. I was determined not to cry, which I think was a mistake. I also instinctively put my hand up, in front of my behind to block the paddle. They then decided to tie my hands up, and they beat me until my pants ripped. By this time I was crying and hysterical.
My parents were not pleased when they learned of the incident. It was decided that it was best for me not to return to the school.
So I can relate to comments about parents not having as much control as they think they have at private schools, and that private schools choose you, more than you choose them.
However, despite this incident, I do feel I received a great education academically and I also plan to send my kids to private school. It just goes to show that parents always need to watch what's going on.
Posted by: Whole Lotta Rosie on August 1, 2007 01:00 AMThere are some great public schools. Alas they are rare. NYC offers several successful high schools: School of Performing Arts ( the movie Fame is based on this high school); Aviation High School, ranked as the top high school in the nation and the one I attended; Bronx School of Science; Brooklyn Automotive. There are several more high schools of this nature, just don't remember them.
Aviation High School offered thee unique curriculum's when I attended, circa 1955 led by a cadre of highly qualified teachers, some of which were PhD.s. My math and history teachers were PhD.s and referred to as Dr. Agronoff and Dr. Goldstein. Three distinct courses were offered: Course 1 prepared students to qualify for an A&E license upon graduation and passing the FAA exam. This valuable license was the ticket for a rewarding and satisfying career servicing airplanes. Course 2 provides training to become a pilot. Upon graduation the student has the option to enter the Air Force as a pilot/officer. technical and flying training was provided by the high school. Course 3 laid the foundation for aeronautic engineering and entry into M.I.T.
There were no sports. No baseball team, football team, etc. Students were required to wear the Air Force uniform. The hours were long, usually 8 hours in school and several hours of home work. About 3,000 students attended the school. Students competed for entry by taking a test. This is one of the best examples of a public high school that offered an outstanding education experience by challenging the students.
For decades I have lobbied politicians to consider providing a few schools of this nature in Washington. And for years they did not take it under consideration for our politicians feared they would be creating problems of exclusion because only the best students would be accepted and the entry tests would serve as a yard stick to measure the quality of the elementary schools.
Finally a few years ago and Aviation High School was introduced in Washington based loosely on the NYC model. Good public schools do exist and one has opened in Washington. There is hope.
Now, if only, Microsoft will support a high tech high school dedicated to developing students for the high tech industry. That would indeed be an investment into the community. It can be done.
My point is that exceptional public schools do exist and provide models for excellence. However successes are routinely ignored because of conflicting agendas. Mediocrity remains.
Posted by: Snuffy on August 3, 2007 05:51 AM