1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

JUAN WILLIAMS: Obama’s Outrageous Sin Against Our Kids

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, Apr 21, 2009.

  1. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,391
    Likes Received:
    9,309
    Obama, putting the interest of the teachers' union first, fails to live up to his pledge to do what works for kids.

    [rquoter]As I watch Washington politics I am not easily given to rage.

    Washington politics is a game and selfishness, out-sized egos and corruption are predictable.

    But over the last week I find myself in a fury.

    The cause of my upset is watching the key civil rights issue of this generation — improving big city public school education — get tossed overboard by political gamesmanship. If there is one goal that deserves to be held above day-to-day partisanship and pettiness of ordinary politics it is the effort to end the scandalous poor level of academic achievement and abysmally high drop-out rates for America’s black and Hispanic students.

    The reckless dismantling of the D.C. voucher program does not speak well of the promise by Obama to be the “Education President.”

    This is critical to our nation’s future in terms of workforce preparation to compete in a global economy but also to fulfill the idea of racial equality by providing a real equal opportunity for all young people who are willing to work hard to succeed.

    In a politically calculated dance step the Obama team first indicated that they wanted the Opportunity Scholarship Program to continue for students lucky enough to have won one of the vouchers. The five-year school voucher program is scheduled to expire after the school year ending in June 2010. Secretary Duncan said in early March that it didn’t make sense “to take kids out of a school where they’re happy and safe and satisfied and learning…those kids need to stay in their school.”

    And all along the administration indicated that pending evidence that this voucher program or any other produces better test scores for students they were willing to fight for it. The president has said that when it comes to better schools he is open to supporting “what works for kids.” That looked like a level playing field on which to evaluate the program and even possibly expanding the program.

    But last week Secretary Duncan announced that he will not allow any new students to enter the D.C. voucher program. In fact, he had to take back the government’s offer of scholarships to 200 students who had won a lottery to get into the program starting next year. His rationale is that if the program does not win new funding from Congress then those students might have to go back to public school in a year.

    He does not want to give the students a chance for a year in a better school? That does not make sense if the students and their families want that life-line of hope. It does not make sense if there is a real chance that the program might win new funding as parents, educators and politicians rally to undo the “bigotry of low expectations” and open doors of opportunity — wherever they exist — for more low-income students.

    And now Secretary Duncan has applied a sly, political check-mate for the D.C. voucher plan.

    With no living, breathing students profiting from the program to give it a face and stand and defend it the Congress has little political pressure to put new money into the program. The political pressure will be coming exclusively from the teacher’s unions who oppose the vouchers, just as they oppose No Child Left Behind and charter schools and every other effort at reforming public schools that continue to fail the nation’s most vulnerable young people, low income blacks and Hispanics.

    The National Education Association and other teachers’ unions have put millions into Democrats’ congressional campaigns because they oppose Republican efforts to challenge unions on their resistance to school reform and specifically their refusal to support ideas such as performance-based pay for teachers who raise students’ test scores.

    By going along with Secretary Duncan’s plan to hollow out the D.C. voucher program this president, who has spoken so passionately about the importance of education, is playing rank politics with the education of poor children. It is an outrage.


    This voucher programs is unique in that it takes no money away from the beleaguered District of Columbia Public Schools. Nationwide, the strongest argument from opponents of vouchers is that it drains hard-to-find dollars from public schools that educate the majority of children.

    But Congress approved the D.C. plan as an experiment and funded it separately from the D.C. school budget. It is the most generous voucher program in the nation, offering $7,500 per child to help with tuition to a parochial or private school.

    With that line of attack off the table, critics of vouchers pointed out that even $7,500 is not enough to pay for the full tuition to private schools where the price of a year’s education can easily go beyond $20,000. But nearly 8,000 students applied for the vouchers. And a quarter of them, 1,714 children, won the lottery and took the money as a ticket out of the D.C. public schools.

    The students, almost all of them black and Hispanic, patched together the voucher money with scholarships, other grants and parents willing to make sacrifices to pay their tuition.

    What happened, according to a Department of Education study, is that after three years the voucher students scored 3.7 months higher on reading than students who remained in the D.C. schools. In addition, students who came into the D.C. voucher program when it first started had a 19 month advantage in reading after three years in private schools.

    It is really upsetting to see that the Heritage Foundation has discoverd that 38 percent of the members of Congress made the choice to put their children in private schools. Of course, Secretary Duncan has said he decided not to live in Washington, D.C. because he did not want his children to go to public schools there. And President Obama, who has no choice but to live in the White House, does not send his two daughters to D.C. public schools, either. They attend a private school, Sidwell Friends, along with two students who got there because of the voucher program.

    This reckless dismantling of the D.C. voucher program does not bode well for arguments to come about standards in the effort to reauthorize No Child Left Behind. It does not speak well of the promise of President Obama to be the “Education President,’ who once seemed primed to stand up for all children who want to learn and especially minority children.

    And its time for all of us to get outraged about this sin against our children
    .[/rquoter]
     
  2. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    Whoa, Basso. That would force Obama's kids to go to school with poor children from the wrong "class."
     
  3. Rashmon

    Rashmon Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2000
    Messages:
    21,238
    Likes Received:
    18,250
    It must suck for you and other like-minded posters, what with your political views being so marginalized and washed away by the current political tide.

    I admire your ability to ignore reality and post away.

    SAD
     
  4. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,391
    Likes Received:
    9,309
    what do you find objectionable about Juan Wiliiam's article?
     
  5. KingCheetah

    KingCheetah Atomic Playboy
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    59,079
    Likes Received:
    52,748
    Typical fear mongering from the right.
     
  6. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    27,105
    Likes Received:
    3,757
    We should have performanced based schools. Starting in Jr. High and split the system into those preparing kids for college or preparing for non-university careers. If your kid is dumb but you are rich you can pay extra to send them to a private school not in the system.

    Taking public education funds and putting them into private school hands is bad.

    The culture of mixing those who do not want to be in school with those who are trying hard is a terrible system. You should have competition among your peers to be better.
     
  7. pirc1

    pirc1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Messages:
    14,137
    Likes Received:
    1,882

    I think that might not be a bad idea. Kids should be tested to enter junior high and high school they want to attend.
     
  8. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    43,789
    Likes Received:
    3,708

    Not making an opinion on this article, but this is refering to kids who have earned scholarships
     
  9. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    27,105
    Likes Received:
    3,757
    If they have a scholarship why do they take away money from public schools with a voucher? The scholarship was "everything you voucher doesn't cover?"

    If so that is pretty weak.
     
  10. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,807
    Likes Received:
    20,465
    If we come up with a fair way to gauge performance I would agree. Right now that doesn't exist.
     
  11. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    We already do that in New York City.
     
  12. pirc1

    pirc1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Messages:
    14,137
    Likes Received:
    1,882

    How's that working? How do they do this?
     
  13. Mr. Clutch

    Mr. Clutch Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Messages:
    46,550
    Likes Received:
    6,132
    Obama is a lot more open to changes in public schools actually, moreso than past Democrats. He supports charter schools for one. I wish he would go further, but it is what it is.
     
  14. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    27,105
    Likes Received:
    3,757
    It is easy you just reevaluate after 2 years in Jr High. There does not need to be a big split in coursework at the Jr. High level. So the split there is not very crucial it just divides the majority of dunderheads from the top.

    Once you are done with Jr. High if you are detroying your class mates in grades and testing then you are slotted accordingly. I don't see how that could be unfair. If you want to get to the better high school, prove you do in Jr. High.
     
  15. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,807
    Likes Received:
    20,465
    But students who move in fresh from another country at JR. High are not being evaluated equally with other students. That's the problem.
     
  16. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    27,105
    Likes Received:
    3,757
    Your problem with it is the immigrants who come to the US might be incorrectly placed? Is that really your deal breaker?
     
  17. Qball

    Qball Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2001
    Messages:
    4,151
    Likes Received:
    210

    The problem with testing for which middle/high school you would probably be a function of what elementary school you went to. If you went to an elementary where the primary focus of your education was the D.A.R.E program, you'd probably lack the essential tools to score well on your proposed middle/high school entrance exams. It won't solve the essential problem.

    A kid being "dumb" is more due to lack of strong early childhood development rather than physically unable to learn (i.e. dyslexia, ADD, ADHD, etc.)
     
  18. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    I don't have any kids so I can't really comment on how well it works. basso muight be able to shed better light on the subject. But I do know that the competition is fierce for these kids. Especially to get into the better public schools.
     
  19. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,807
    Likes Received:
    20,465
    Absolutely. If the placement excludes qualified students solely because the test is unfair to them, and they are condemned to be in an environment with so-called unmotivated students it would be a horrible disservice to them.

    What if it was your child in that position. Would you be willing to just toss them aside?
     
  20. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    27,105
    Likes Received:
    3,757
    The problem I have with your argument is the incredibly small population of students you are talking about. You are tossing a good system because of how it could "possibly" hurt .0001% of the students.


    It would be easy to get grades from their previous school, evaluate them after a term. Or since we are talking about such a small segment, stick them in the "better" school on probation.
     

Share This Page