Home of Today's Common Sense

Sent August 10, 2003
Editor,
I just read the article in the Sunday, August 10 issue, headed “Schools need more support” that was in response to an opinion I posted in the June 27 issue.
I am very pleased to see that my writing has evoked a sincere debate on an issue that is of the highest importance to our community. Perhaps seeing two sides will motivate folks to become more informed on what BISD is doing with our money and vote accordingly.

Unfortunately, the response was not to the issue I raised, “How the education money is spent”. I would like to correct certain items attributed to my article, however.
First, I did not say that if rich people don’t like an educational system they can just abandon it for another, private institution. I did say that if a particular school is not doing the job it was intended for “The rich can send their kids to a private school to improve the situation; the poor can’t”. The fact that they also may be able(your supposition) “to hire tutors or that the teenaged students do not have to work and can spend as much time as they need with their usually educated parents to plow through their homework and learn the material” would be the case whatever school the student attended. I would submit that reality does not support this supposition in a majority of cases though.
My focus is on how the limited funds are spent and how to motivate “management” in this case the Board of Trustees, BISD and its Principals to use those funds to provide the best environment possible. The consequence in the case of a voucher/choice system is loss of funds and thereby power, otherwise there is no real consequence or tool.
The political wrangling and state review of the last year demonstrates sufficiently that there has been massive misuse of the funds available. Some of this misuse was overlooked because the money came from other “richer” districts that sacrificed programs to give our students a better opportunity through the “Robin Hood” system of state funding. Is it any wonder why these folks do not want to continue the “Robin Hood” system to fund the salaries and pay raises of the friends and family of the Board and BISD in administrative positions. BISD was advised that it was bloated with administrators, so they propose to continue vacancies in the number of teachers (increasing class size), give those teachers still with us (some of the newer teachers have already taken jobs in better paying districts) less than a $200 net increase in salary and give administrators a 1% increase in their already excessive salary. Perhaps the administrators could voluntarily take a pay cut so that teachers, especially experienced ones could get an increase. Most increases in the recent past have focused on new teachers and left the “old guard behind”.
Second, I did not at any time state that “money does not make a better teacher”. As it happens I agree with Justin, it doesn’t make better teachers but it does help make for teachers who are more motivated to do the job they have dedicated their lives to do. In what other profession would you find people who buy supplies and other things, with their own money, to help their children reach their goals. Is it any wonder why less and less young people are looking to other career paths. The current school system chooses to fund administration rather than help the children learn. Additionally the funding of professional conferences, training and up to date teaching materials are the minimum that the BISD should provide for a decent learning environment.
Thirdly, I did not suggest that any specific voucher program be adopted as most have built in restrictions and requirements that either discriminate one group over another or are unworkable.
I would recommend a choice system on the order of the one currently in use in Canada. Essentially, there are two boards of education a “Public” board and a “Separate” board. Funding is based on what you declare to the tax system. Currently, the Catholic Schools are the ones predominately certified to receive students and education funding through the “Separate Board” but there are some others such as Montessori.
In the U.S., criteria for funding through the “Separate” vehicle might include any educational method including “home schooling” so long as the curriculum testing goals are met.
In that system the level of education is said to be superior to the U.S. due largely because the two boards provide oversight on one another. Each system is jealous of funding and effects the best education possible at the best price. The public system is still alive and well.
Lastly, Mr. Raines devoted a large part of the text to pointing out that children were somehow incapable of learning because they were poor and that the D.C. government was somehow at fault because of high regressive taxes. If the D.C. schools spend more money per student than any other school system, including the “rich” ones, I cannot see why there should be a vast difference in the result other than for how the money was spent..
I am the product of a poor family in a depressed “border town” on the Quebec/Canadian Border. Our bi-lingual issue was French/English. My dad was a school custodian and in the best years we lived in a two bedroom apartment at the school. Neither of my parents went on to college. The richest people I heard about were teachers and potato farmers. I attended grade school in a school that had grades 1 thru 3 and 4 thru 6 in two separate rooms, and graduated high school 40 years ago this year with a New York State Science Regents Diploma. That meant that you passed the regular school class exams to receive a high school diploma and took State exams prepared by the State Education Department Regents. (School Accountability 40 years ago) If you passed the Regents exams and took the proscribed courses you were granted a State Regents Diploma which was frequently accompanied with offers to admit, from Universities. Rather than go on to college at the time, I chose to join the military and served in Vietnam for four tours. When I returned, and while working full time I completed a four degree in Management Science and accounting in 3 years and went to graduate school in Management under the GI Bill. I am here to tell you that just because you start out in poor circumstances does not mean that you are somehow less intelligent or competent than anyone else and I resent even the suggestion.
The problem is what kind of environment the school system provides with the money available not necessarily how much.