Thurgood Marshall graduation 2012
Badin vs. Versailles
Law Enforcement Memorial Day
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2009 > May
May 2009
Politics and schools: A long love affair
For as long as I’ve been writing about education (and, of course, long before that) people have complained about politics becoming enmeshed in schools. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard somebody complain that if they could just depoliticize schools things would be better.
But that’s a pipe dream. It’s just the nature of the beast. Schools are a huge government-run enterprise and at the top of the organizational chart — locally, at the state level and nationally — are elected officials. And elected officials play politics as a matter of survival.
Consider the recent example of U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s joint appearance with Gov. Ted Strickland at what amounted to a political rally last week. There were lots of political undertones to the speechmaking and media interviews afterward. Check out my column today for more.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Schools and Politics
Speaking of vouchers …
Earlier this week, I was writing about the debate over vouchers in Washington, D.C. Let’s not forget that we also have a huge and nationally important voucher program right here in Ohio — and Dayton, naturally, is a key player in this school choice program too.
In today’s paper, Tony Gottschlich reports voucher applications are up statewide. There are now more than 13,000 voucher applicants, very close to the state cap of 14,000 vouchers.
There are a lot of questions about this program, which now ranks as the second biggest voucher program in the country behind one in Milwaukee, and the only statewide program of its size.
First of all, Gov. Ted Strickland is a voucher skeptic. While he’s not advocating killing the program, it’s hard to imagine him advocating for its expansion if the cap is reached next year.
Then there is the question of accountability. Strickland has demanded more of it for vouchers, proposing that schools taking kids be required to test all their students with state exams so the quality of those schools can be compared to the public schools the kids left behind. This, by the way, is an idea we endorsed on the editorial pages. It’s a good plan to for the state to be able to compare scores and decide if it is getting its money’s worth.
Ohio should be studying vouchers carefully. It’s got enough kids using them now to begin to ask whether the program works to help kids in low-rated schools do better with a private education, and if there is enough achievement to justify the cost. Strickland’s accountability plan would be a good step in the right direction.
Things will come to a head on this issue soon. When Ohio reaches its cap, voucher supporters will clamor to raise the limit. This will force the question about whether the program works. In Milwaukee, there was intense pressure to expand vouchers, which eventually was done. But there 15 percent of the city’s kids were using vouchers. The pressure here won’t be as concentrated, but it will be statewide and in Democratic stronghold urban centers. It should be interesting to see how it plays out.
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment | Categories: Charter Schools and School Choice
Will Obama walk the walk on DC vouchers?
it looked last week like President Obama wriggled loose from a potentially sticky controversy when he announced support for the District of Columbia’s voucher program. The program had been conspicuously left out of earlier budget plans, with deafening silence from Democrats who appeared to be hoping the program — reviled by some in their coalition — would die quietly.
It didn’t. Voucher supporters raised alarms, pointing out that the program’s demise might actually result in some classmates of the president’s children at their private school being tossed back into the city school district. An awkward potential image, to say the least.
But Obama’s support of the program is both weak and conditional. He supports adding $12 million to the budget to keep kids currently in the program at private school until they graduate but he opposes allowing new kids in. Also, there is no guarantee voucher opponents in congress won’t still kill funding. Whether Obama actually fights for the vouchers in the budget process remains to be seen.
And either way, he has set in motion a process that will slowly kill the program at a time when even the reform-minded head of the school system, the blunt-talking Michelle Rhee, would likely admit that many of the city’s schools are at the moment failing to educate kids. Even if change comes and big improvements are made, they will take time.
This debate is heavily political, with lots of baggage on both sides of the aisle. But Obama may not be able to dance around it, as it is very easy for voucher supporters to challenge the disconnect between his rhetoric and his actions if he does.
Many hardcore liberals hate the DC voucher program. First, a committed group simply believes vouchers are morally wrong. They view them as taking money from poor public schools and giving it to wealthy private schools, dooming the vast majority of public school kids to ever shrinking funds for reform while rewarding just a lucky few. They believe the money is better spent improving public schools. Others on the left are allied to teachers unions, who both oppose vouchers on the moral grounds and out of self-interest — they want money for public education kept in the system.
In the case of the DC voucher program, there is also the political reality. Many on the left chafed when Republicans pushed what they viewed as a “conservative” program through and “forced” it on DC, one of America’s most liberal cities. For some, the political winds have changed and it’s payback time.
All of these considerations, of course, miss just the point that Obama has said he is all about on education — ignoring politics and focusing on what works. Just last month the administration released a study that found modest gains in reading for DC voucher kids (no gain in math) and suggested the benefits of private school may grow the longer the student attends. What did the Obama administration do with that information? It released it late on a Friday afternoon, a favorite Washington trick for burying bad news on a slow news day.
And even Obama’s solution — keeping kids who are in the program but blocking new kids from entering — fails to address his own core principle of asking “does it work?” If so, why keep kids out?
Here’s my idea for a better solution. Allow new kids into the program, but only if they are assigned to the very worst performing DC public schools. That way, the opportunity remains to close down the voucher program — as schools improve, there will be fewer desperately poor performers and, thus, fewer voucher slots. At the same time, keep monitoring voucher student performance in private school so we can see if the program is actually raising achievement.
This approach keeps the kids and their needs in the equation. The other ideas, so far, have left the kids out.
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment | Categories: Charter Schools and School Choice
Can potential sex offenders be saved?
That’s the question we’ve asked over at the Matter of Opinion blog. Have ideas for public policy initiatives or new laws that could help keep potential sex offenders from crossing the line? Please head over there and share your thoughts.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Student Health and Safety
A blueprint for challenge grant cash?
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was in Ohio today for a “rally for education” with Gov. Ted Strickland, who is in a tough fight to get his budget, and the attached 10-year education reform plan, through the Republican-controlled state Senate.
The mere presence of Duncan at such a rally was an interesting show of support for Democrat Strickland and his reforms, many of which match nicely to the education reform priorities of the Obama administration. Duncan, when asked, stopped short of saying he “endorsed” Strickland’s plan, but expressed support for some of its features.
Congress is in the process of flowing $100 billion in economic stimulus aid for schools to all 50 states. (Ohio got about $1 billion for schools.) That’s helping Strickland hold his reform plan together for now. But he knows he’ll need more money going forward to keep momentum.
One potential source to tap is $4.35 billion in “challenge grants” that Duncan has total discretion to award to as few or as many states as he wishes.
With Strickland’s plan in pretty good alignment with what Obama appears to want, it would seem there is a decent change of getting some challenge grant money here, which could help fund the education reform plan. How much money this could be is a big question. At Friday’s event, Duncan and Strickland gave some hints.
During his speech, Duncan said challenge grants could benefit “five, 10, 15, 20” states, depending on the quality of the proposals. (Keep in mind that the department has not even created the request for proposals outlining exactly what they are looking for yet.) Afterward, I pressed him on how the money might be spread. He has been adamant that he will resist pressure to give money to everyone, focusing instead only on truly innovative states.
So I asked, would he really only give money to five states? Is it possible five states could walk away with as much as $1 billion each? He did not say no.
“It’s not about the number of states,” Duncan said. “We will work with however many states there are. It could be five, eight, 10 … we just don’t know yet.”
For his part, Strickland said he felt Duncan’s support at the rally was a good sign.
“His being here, perhaps, will be helpful to us when we apply,” Strickland said.
That’s where it got a little interesting. Strickland added that he had spoken with Duncan and gotten some guidance. Duncan, he said, suggested partnerships with other states and, especially, bipartisan coalitions of states with both Republican and Democratic governors applying together.
In fact, Strickland said he had already spoken with “two or three other governors” about a joint application, although he declined to identify what states were involved.
Hmm. So suppose a bipartisan coalition of Midwestern states were to apply. For fun, let’s say Ohio, Michigan and Indiana get together and ask for a pile of cash for education. I can’t help but notice that these three states also are politically important to President Obama, and states he won in 2008.
Duncan said that will not matter. He said repeatedly that this was not about politics. But he said it while speaking at a political rally in favor of embattled education reform plan proposed by a Democratic governor in a politically important state.
Perhaps Ohio, used to being ignored once presidential campaigns end, has a chance to be a player in the challenge grant game.
Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment | Categories: School Funding
