State Senator Aaron Osmond of Utah has called for an end to compulsory education.
Osmond says that parents are expecting too much of the schools. He believes that education should be a choice, not a mandate.
This is evidence that education “reform” is hurtling backwards in time, taking us to an era when there was no compulsory education, when kids could be kicked out of school for low test scores or bad attitudes, when students were expected to obey and sit in silence.
Yes, we will soon have fully restored 19th century educational methods, all in the guise of “reform.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Whatever next?
Suggestion: read this: http://www.agencybasededucation.org/ending-compulsory-education/
Mom: You’ve got to realize that there are students out there with parents who don’t care or who are so overwhelmed with illness, parent or child illness, working multiple jobs, etc. These parents do not have the ability to fight the kids to get them to school. Already we have a lot of student absence. This will make it worse, because schools will have nothing to hold these kids to. Parents will keep kids home to babysit younger siblings, or even work part or full time. I do not want to have a permanent underclass of citizens. It is NOT these children’s fault that they were born into difficult circumstances. We need to SUPPORT these kids, NOT push them aside.
“I do not want to have a permanent underclass of citizens. It is NOT these children’s fault that they were born into difficult circumstances. We need to SUPPORT these kids, NOT push them aside.”
I agree, but this statement is kind of frustrating to hear on this blog in this context: the constant cry of the unions/counter-reformers/etc is “these kids have bad home lives! You can’t expect us to change them! Their destinies are formed outside school hours!”
Aaron Osmond takes his marching orders from the Eagle Forum in Utah. They are a bunch of fruitcakes. http://www.utaheagleforum.org/
His marching orders may also be informed by the fact that he is VP of North America for Certiport, and IT education testing and certification company.
http://www.certiport.com
I guess it all depends on whether we want a peaceful society with citizens who care about one another or a violent selfish society.
The Eagle Forum in Utah is nuts, and has a lot of power. I’m in Utah, and I’ve already talked with one legislator about this and I am planning to talk to many others. The legislator that I talked to think that this law won’t go anywhere. I don’t think it will–when pushed, parents really do support public schools, as evidenced by the enormous defeat of vouchers in a citizen initiative in 2006.
We may need back up on this from others, though. I will let this group know. Our legislative session doesn’t start until late January, so this will ruminate for a while. I’ll keep you posted.
PS: Aaron Osmond is a nephew of the famous Osmonds. His father was not a part of the singing group. Just so you know!
Thanks, LP–I thought he might be related to the Osmond Bros. (& Marie). Perhaps they can use their celebrity status & relationship to get him to stop!
Speaking of relatives–is Tony Bennett related to William Bennett?
Sing it with the Osmonds, everybody:
“He’s a little bit crazy
He’s a little out of his tree
From the University of Phoenix
He’s an expert in the B.S.–his degree
Don’t know if it’s good or bad
But in Provo, they’ll decree
He’s a little bit crazy
He’s a little out of his tree.”
Actually, this Osmond lives in South Jordan, not Provo. But otherwise, excellent! (:
That could work, too. 😉
Bet you’ve got that horrid song stuck in your head, now. I know I do.
I do, LG. Thanks a lot! (:
SENATOR “DUMB-ASS”:
“Utah’s constitution requires that we provide the opportunity for a free public education to every child. But public education is NOT “FREE”—it costs taxpayers billions each year.”
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
WTF???!!!
I found the above quote so absolutely appalling that, after reading it and drinking it in, I was left momentarily speechless
Seriously, THIS is the caliber of intellect of a Utah senator?
Anybody with a brain in his head knows that the Utah constitution actually means that an education is “free” in the sense that the parent does not have to “pay” DIRECTLY for it in the same way he doesn’t the roads, police, firefighters, etc.
It means that all the citizens—those with kids, without kids, who used to have kids, who never had kids, who never will have kids—all agree to provide a public education system, through taxation, that will lead to all citizens—or as many as possible—being educated, productive, moral, and law-abiding citizens as adults, as that is in everyone’s best interests. True, that’s an ideal that is not always reached, but it remains an ideal to which every civilized and successful country in the world aspires.
Sweet Jesus! Hasn’t this guy ever been taught a rudimentary civics lesson?
You can find the above quote HERE:
http://www.senatesite.com/home/compulsory-education/
Now, now, Tony. Don’t you know that freedom isn’t even free? It costs money. And should be stopped. 😛
Osmond is proof positive that any idiot can run for office.
Even worse, the people will elect the idiot!
In fairness, Utah has some really good senators too. But we also have a large share of idiots. Believe it or not, Osmond’s not the worst by far. I can guarantee you that Sen. Howard Stephenson is pulling Osmond’s strings. All you have to do with a group of Utah teachers is to mention Senator Stephenson’s name and you get a chorus of groans.
Yep – Stephenson is awful. He’s got his fingers in all the voucher stuff and I’m sure is making a tidy sum off his charter school dealings. But the pious Utah churchislators are rarely investigated for conflicts of interest or downright dirty dealings.
Stephenson is the devil! Right next to Buttars, who thankfully retired…..just in time to double dip into his benefits! What a hypocrite. I’ve said several times that a group of us should take bags of shredded DIBELS testing material and score sheets, etc, and dump it all over his lawn. Kind of like in high school when someone would toilet paper a friend’s house.
If you have ever gone up to the Hill during the sessions, and sat in on a Senator’s meeting when education bills are up for discussion, it’s interesting to watch Stephenson. It is apparent that everyone is just wasting his time as he lets out long, audible sighs.
Oh yes – Buttars was hideous too. A sanctimonious hypocrite.
PLUS, both he and Senator Jerry Stevenson sleep or eat right on the floor during sessions. REALLY inspires confidence!
Libertarian nonsense. Idaho’s constitution contains a similar clause about the state’s obligation to provide a free, thorough system of education. Hardly a month goes by when I’m not subjected to some knuckle-dragging Libertarian mook arguing that nothing is free if it is provided by the gummint.
I always told my 4th graders that every person they see on the news, in the community, etc. used to be a 4th grader. And, that they all made choices to become what they are. When a local student gets into trouble with the law, it saddens me. When there is a national tragedy, we talked about the fact that that horrible terrible person was once a 4th grader. What went wrong? How can they be sure that they grow up to be someone who cares about not takes away from society? They “get it”. Now, will they all remain innocents, no. But, I try. That is a huge responsibility of teaching. Keeping children away from society may protect them but it won’t teach them how to fit in or to get along. It won’t teach them to share and learn civility. It will teach them that they are “above it all”. Is that a good thing? I don’t think so.
Compulsory eduction was resisted early in the last century so that poor children would be available for cheap labor for long hours and unsafe conditions. Every child- rich or poor, male or female, must the right to a free education, and no parents should have the option to deny that to their child. Without compulsory education, abusive and exploitative parents can force children to be shopped out for servitude to others or to remain at home attending younger siblings. For many unfortunate children, free public schooling is the only safe refuge from abusive parenting and a life of ignorance. It is the vital component of any democratic society. It was achieved only through hard fought struggle. I wouldn’t assume the clock won’t be turned backward- we must fight hard to keep free and appropriate education for everyone’s children, and work to making that education of the highest quality.
Ending compulsory education would prove catastrophic. If anything they should uniformly raise the compulsory school age across the states, etc. to prevent minors from dropping out (and lower the minimum school age that children should start school). Education should also be compelled for criminal offenders and recipients of public benefits lacking high school diplomas and/or job skills, to subsequently alleviate burden on the government once the individuals become employed correlative to their education/job training. More than half of incarcerated persons lack a high school diploma. It costs roughly $6,000 to educate a student in the public school system, while it costs more than $30,000 annually to house a prisoner. Compulsory education is, thus, not only a matter of public safety, it is a matter of financial prudence, as with government spending. http://yolandamichellemartin.wordpress.com/2013/06/21/compulsory-school-attendance-up-to-graduation-or-18-years-of-age-and-an-illimitable-age-requirement-for-criminal-offenders-and-recipients-of-public-benefits/
It’s bad enough that we already allow “home schooling” with minimal (if any, in some states) oversight regarding the parent’s ability to teach, the curriculum being taught, etc. Now some people want to chuck the whole thing out the window. Every time I think we’ve gone about as far backwards as we can, we take several more backwards steps.
Just because one person advocates it, doesn’t make it a movement…but it is scary to think we could even possibly move in that direction. It wasn’t even that long ago in our country’s relatively short history that the poor had NO avenue for improvement, that the educated became an “elite” class that ruled, and that effectively, democracy was subverted by the rich ruling class and the poor classes being unable to effectively take control from them until things got so bad that unions started making sense and people started taking risks to get better job conditions, education, and wages.
Sound familiar to anyone in this country now?
Sure, it’s not a movement. But keep in mind that this is a state senator. If anyone has influence over this, he has.
Which is why it’s so sad…
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
I keep wondering if this is what Obama’s agenda really is and what Common Core is about.. Many students come to America for education today because they are not allowed to continue to pursue it in their own country…only the “brightest and best,”.
Scary…I do not test well and would probably have been one of those students not allowed to go on. In the end though, I succeeded in AP courses, school, graduated with honors from college and has no problems earning a Masters degree.
OH MY GOSH
Have a beautiful day!
Kids are now being kicked out of school for low test scores and bad attitudes. They are criticized, ostracized and de-humanized in a multitude of ways when they do not shine bright enough for the NCLB, brain-drained data crunchers. So, yes we are hurtling back in time which is the intent of this 20+ year long attack on the public school system. Good luck to those who cannot afford private schools or private tutors.
Goodness.
Non-compulsory education makes up most of the policy in Central and South American schools.
And look where those societies are now. . . .
We better look carefully because the USA is headed right there.
” If you have read the writings at the founding of the free public school system, you know how few schools existed, how poor they were, how short their terms were, how poorly most of their teachers were prepared and judging from what Horace Mann said, how general was the indifference of the average, well-to-do citizen to the education of anybody except his own children.”
John Dewey, 1938, Democracy And Education In The World Of Today
Yes- Indifference. Indifference is the operative word. No to public schooling, no to healthcare, no to food stamps, no to housing assistance. How shameful that we have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again for a fair, compassionate society.
I hope someone said to him that there is something called the’ Individual Disability Education Act” as reauthorized in 2004. Let us see what it says? Um! Every disabled child has a right to a free appropriate public education throughout this WHOLE United States–and that includes, I think, Utah. Only an . . . (and I will not write the word) could propose an unconstitutional (state and Federal) law.
Osmond’s proposal is not to take away anyone’s “right” to an education. The doors will still be open to everyone. It is meant to restore the natural “right” of parents to oversee as the primary steward, the education of their children as stated in Utah’s Constitution. Are you unaware of stories like a child with ongoing health issues forced to lay in the school infirmary, in spite of being completely up-to-date on school work instead of remaining home in the care of loving parents who in no way neglected his education? Will some fall through the cracks? Yes. Are we claiming no one is falling through the cracks under compulsory education? The idea of restricting the fundamental stewardship of good parents, who likely make up the vast majority, to try to make up for the poor choices of the few is not compatible with principles of a self-governing people.
The right of a child to be educated is a fundamental human right that overrides a parent’s choice to deny it. There is choice- a parent can home-school provided that minimum standards are met, or send to a private school if not satisfied with a public school. But the child had a right to receive a comprehensive education. Our national history offers plenty of evidence of the misery and exploitation multitudes of children experienced when school attendance was optional for parents.
Terry, Why do you think ending compulsory education will lead to an increase in parents denying their children education? Does education only happen in public schools between certain hours under threat or force or fines? What if the parent is not qualified to teach certain subjects, i.e. advanced math at home? They have to choose all or nothing regardless of personal circumstance? What about the parents protesting the over testing in NY, walking out? Should they all be sent through the truancy system? I don’t know what the laws are in NY, but with the amount of testing done these days it could very well cross the arbitrary limit. I see compulsory ed punishing conscientious families in difficult circumstances while those who are truly neglected still fall through the cracks. This is not a move against public schools. If public schools want to stop losing the most affluent or involved parents, some changes are in order. I’m actively opposed to the corporate takeover of education, but the reason charters are succeeding is because they give parents the choices and/or accommodations they don’t feel like they can find in public schools, for example, some classes from home or online and some in the classrooms. Most parents I know aren’t comparing test scores of charters vs. public schools, but looking for the best fit for their child. A friend of mine has a high functioning autistic son. He does well academically in school and with some accommodations the public school classroom has been helpful in his social development… but it takes special accommodations, primarily with his attendance to make it happen. While this is okay with his teachers and the administrator, it is not okay with the truancy laws. When truancy enforcement trumps common sense one has to question what the purpose is. Per-pupil funding based on the time a kid sits in a chair? It’s not about the kids, and it’s not right. With liberty comes a risk that some will make poor choices, but I see that as more desirable than living in micromanaging nanny state. Common Core is leveling the playing field a bit between charters and public schools in term of testing which may be a factor in the explosive growth of homeschooling in Utah. Look at where Pearson’s biggest investments are going right now, in expanding their online classes and offerings. They want to sell to charters and even directly to parents who will pay for it with vouchers that would have otherwise gone to fund public schools. Some have mentioned the parents who aren’t able because of work etc. to educate their children at home or be more hands on. Being too rigid in public school while more flexible options available to those affluent enough to take advantage of them increase will only make the problem worse. Osmond knows that what he is proposing is controversial, but I believe the discussion is well worth having. I myself would not support legislation until I’d reviewed it and see how exactly it would be implemented (the devil is in the details), but I am initially encouraged by the conversations it is sparking around the country.
History (evidence) teaches us that without compulsory education, large numbers of children do not attend school, and that number rises the older children get. Particularly in the case of poverty, desperate parents will use their tween/teen kids as a source of childcare for siblings, send them working what ever jobs they can get to help feed the family. My own mother- now in her late 80’s was forced by her parents to drop out of high school when she turned 16, to go to work so her younger brothers would be able to graduate high school. Girls are especially at risk when boys’ education is more highly valued in many families. The ones at greatest risk if education is not required are our most vulnerable children who have the most to lose. Libertarians who care only about their personal freedom to choose for their own children are indifferent to the desperation and vulnerability of the impoverished. My decades of public school teaching has shown me that for poor children as well as children born to abusive parents, mandatory schooling is a safe haven- a lifeline to those kids.
And remember where there is no mandatory schooling, child labor will follow. There are already libertarian politicians calling for the repeal of protective child labor laws as an infringement of the rights of parents and employers.Learn your history.
You are so right. I know many, many people who let their kids stay home from school for almost any reason – whether the kid claims to be ill or the parent doesn’t want to get up that day. Without compulsory education, poverty will increase. But since certain groups don’t care about those in poverty, this idea would be meaningless to them. This is supposed to be a civilized society.
I’m sympathetic to your personal experiences as I hope you can be to those I’ve mentioned. I just don’t think force is the answer, especially for families that are already struggling. Perhaps they need more support, not one more reason to feel oppressed or resentful.
Yes families need support (and how sad that our Constitution’s preamble about providing for the general welfare has been vilified)- but all children need protections and some basic rights beyond the family they were born into. There is no minimum requirement for parenting, and many people not cut out for the job become parents. As a society, we need to insure that all children will be provided with an education. I have worked with many hundreds of of families over my career. Have you any idea of how people live who are not from your own social class?
What is so offensive about liberty? Are we saying that the only reason parents would send their kids to public school is to avoid fines etc? I’d be curious to see the statistics. I find out interesting that the same people who rant about over testing think the government has a fundamental right to dictate how long a student had to be at school, whether the experience is enriching or not.
You are missing one extremely huge point: Government, i.e. “The State” is not a separate entity from the people. It IS the people–of the people, by the people and for the people. A republic is far more manageable than a raw democracy, but the bottom line is that the culture sets the rules unless those with the power, money and influence are given special privileges by the people’s elected officials. In time, those types of officials can and should be dismissed of their elected duties.
I disagree. I think there is a difference between a fundamental right and a right granted to the government by the people. (Natural vs. legal rights) This is one of the most unique aspects of the US Constitution and other founding documents – the assertion that there are such things as inalienable rights. By nature, families are the fundamental unit of society.
Au contraire, LG. The state, in the sense of the government, is not equal to the people as a whole. Government is for the people, to protect their inalienable rights. It is, of course, a government of, i.e. governing of the people, and those elected and appointed to serve the people must necessarily be of the people, but they are merely responsible public servants. Always we must remember that the government’s purpose is to preserve the freedom of the individuals as much as possible. This notion of government has been largely forgotten. Now government is accepted by way too many as their “daddy.” Your daddy is your daddy. And woe to those who come into the world without a daddy to look after them and protect them. What your daddy will pay for you can have. But each daddy can only look after so many children of other men. The relative destitution of the middle class is because they are paying for other men’s children whom the government, in a TOTAL perversion of its function, has figuratively quartered on them. Because the responsible daddies have so many extra mouths to feed, backs to clothe, and bodies to house, they can’t look after their own families as well as they would like. At some point they may just refuse to keep on pulling the cart with so many free riders on it. The rhetoric is that the government is making all the daddy-less independent. The daddies say, “OK, great, go for it. In the meantime I think I’ll send my kid to a charter until you get it figured out.” And he slips quietly away to some place where his own kid has a greater chance of learning solid content, which he knows is the way to independence. Pythagorean theorem, anyone?
“Wha?” ROMEO AND JULIET? “Wha?” Subject-Verb-Object? “Wha?” Adverb? “Wha?” Explicit knowledge is everything. Even skills, if you break them down, are knowledge. Critical thinking? It is explicit knowledge of language and logic. Teachers are teachers ONLY by the extent of their knowledge. And their knowledge must go beyond what to why, because only what you know the why of can you explain to someone else. What a real teacher teaches come down to knowledge in every case. The kids come into class eager to understand, to know. If they get sham, they will turn off. How many here actually understand the true function of the constitution and government of the USA? If you yourself don’t know it and can’t explain it logically you are miseducating, misleading, confusing the kids. And they will find you out. If you are just Mr. or Ms. Methods, better to be a fishmonger or a toilet attendant.
Daddy, Harlan? That’s what the average taxpayer is? Your fundamental sense of selfishness is getting in the way of the concept of citizenship. As a member of society who enjoys the perks of society, you are responsible FOR society. Instead, the Libertarian view is every man for himself and leave the “great unwashed” to their own devices because they are responsible for their own lot in life. Tell that to an innocent child born into poverty by no fault of his own. You would essentially leave that child to rot because you “aren’t his real daddy,” right?
Yes, selfishness seems to rule the minds of so many these days. And, that idea is contributing to this patriarchal top-down heartless imposition of privatizating education. Money for the few (not the deserving) is more important than survival of all. Sad.
No I wouldn’t, but you miss the fundamental point. In the name of holy decency and compassion you are compelling me to be daddy by proxy to children whom I didn’t procreate. You could at least acknowledge that. What we do about saving them all is another matter. But first we need get straight what actually happened. No man’s FIRST duty is to “society” in general. His second duty perhaps. His first duty is to his own family. That’s a 4 million year old “tradition.” Actually it goes back even further and can be seen today on the Serengeti among lions, tigers, and elephants, although there the mamas take the lead for everyday matters (and all matters for tigers and elephants). Or are you preaching paternal neglect in favor of seeing to . . . what IS society anyway? No one by nature eats their own children, do they?
You said it so many times, Deb, these words of truth. We also have to remember that another argument against public schools mentioned in the above post is one based on the gross misrepresentation of public school teachers as merely “imparters of knowledge” with anti-Constitutional “methods” of imparting such. This crock of ignorance fuels support for such selfish rhetoric, yet so many “fearful patriots” hang onto every word “in the name of LIBERTY!” If there isn’t a better reason to support educating the masses than to avoid ignorance by misusing the concept of liberty, I do not not know one.
My only “goal” in contributing to this group is to support making public education the best it can be. Is it or was it ever perfect? Can it be? Some people will always be “disappointed” … with anything except having their own way. This occurs within the schools, too. Having someone who is only interested in their own “reputation” and getting “results” by any way possible being a part of the “team” … doesn’t work. And, I am sorry, but those with that attitude tell me that they are Libertarians and laugh in my face that I care about ALL kids. I don’t know how one puts the idea of teaching and selectively working with “their own” kids into the same sentence. But, some do.
We are many. That is for sure.
But, we need solutions to this creeping crud that is smothering creativity, individuality, joy, art, and hope out of students. It is the same movement that is doing these same things to society at large.
While trolls give us insights into to “the other mindset” they often take the purpose of the blog into personal, tangential, self-serving directions. That is frustrating.
“Actually it goes back even further and can be seen today on the Serengeti among lions, tigers, and elephants, although there the mamas take the lead for everyday matters (and all matters for tigers and elephants).”
Yes, Harlan. Lions, tigers, and elephants (oh my) have quite a thriving democracy, don’t they? 😛
Lions would kill their own male off-spring if they found them a threat, so by all means, use them as an example of your ridiculous thinking. You never cease to amaze us.
Precisely!
Oldika,
Are you a teacher? Because if you are, you stand in a room of only a few who would have the same arguments and point of view as yourself. I’m not against parent’s freedom of choice. But I am 100% in favor of, and will advocate for, free public education for our children, and that they should be in school, if not legitimately home schooled.
Let me open the door to an entire world of parents and students you might not be aware of…. I work in a Title 1 elementary school. Over 80% of our students are bussed from 2 major apartment complexes that are low income housing and accept refugee housing support. So basically, you’ve got a lot of poor kids running around the grounds getting into trouble and what not. A whole new world of racism is happening in a 3 block radius with different tribes from the same African villages, Mexican immigrants against blacks, Nepalese and Karen children fearful for their lives. It’s a community of poverty, drugs, violence, abuse, neglect, feuding, over crowded single family apartments, and the list goes on. These kids NEED an education to hopefully break the cycle of poverty and illiteracy in their families and communities. Being at school for these kids is a safe place where they will get two meals for the day, and someone who will treat them with kindness and compassion, create a relationship with them, oh and also teach them. Talk about a child who is sick laying on a cot waiting for their parent or someone to come get them – yet we have no current or working phone number for any parent or other person listed on their reg card. We had a Somali boy break his arm and it took three hours to get ahold of his family’s case worker, who then picked up mom, and made it to school to get the boy. Girls who miss school because they have to stay home and babysit a sick infant because mom and dad HAVE to go to work. Parents who let their kid stay home just because….nothing imperative to keep them from school. And what do they do while at home? Play video games! None of these parents have a clue as to what to teach them if they home schooled, nor are they illiterate enough. And this is the future of my community, theirs, our city! These are the kids who will grow up and as adults have to take care of our world…including you and me, as we are old and gray.
The friend you mentioned with the son who has autism… If he has an IEP with a 504, then one of his accommodations is that attendance should not be an issue, even with the law.
Please, think about the adults in our community who do not think like you and I, or Sen. Osmond. Think about what their children are missing out on, even currently without Osmond’s proposal.
To be fair to the Senator, he’s clearly not against the existence of public schools. He notes in the linked article that 92% of kids attend kindergarten in Utah, which is not compulsory.
Do you think the students who choose to attend might have better outcomes if they were surrounded by peers who also chose to attend, at schools that didn’t have to spend time and energy forcing a small minority to attend against their will?
I suppose that it depends on what you deem as “education” for your children. Of course, like-minded learners will pursue their interests with more fervor. The bored will change the mood of the class. This is why, as students reach the age of, say, 14, they are allowed to choose many of their classes as electives. Changes in Ohio law have made certain courses mandatory, and I think that is ill-advised.
If the only goal of education is to force-feed information into human minds and have them spew it back out, homogeneity is the way to go. A class with students having different interests and abilities can teach students other things about humanity, like compassion, like getting along, like sharing, like caring.
So, if all we want are robot-like info-spewers, computers and interactive screens are the way to go.
I had a fellow teacher who once said, “When students get more fun out of building a virtual snowman than experiencing the real thing, we are lost.” This applies to much more than snowmen.
That’s why Utah has charter schools – to surround themselves with white, like-minded peers of a similar SES.
So do you think it’s OK to have a whole group of people who cannot read, cannot count, cannot vote, and are completely reliant upon public assistance for everything? Or would you cut that from them too, so we can watch them all starve to death?
At least kids who receive a compulsory education can read at some level, count at some level, compute at some level, and have the opportunity to move beyond their public assistance roots. Without that education, they’ll spend their time picking fruit or sitting around begging for handouts. But the GOP would like to have that lower class of uneducated workers to do their slave labor, who won’t be able to vote because they can’t read, and to keep their own precious white kids away from the brown riff-raff because they might get contaminated. The Eagle Forum – and the Utah churchislators – are only thinking of how to better things for themselves and their spawn. They don’t care one whit about other people’s children unless they’re rich, white, and of the dominant religion.
But the GOP would like…to keep their own precious white kids away from the brown riff-raff because they might get contaminated.”
It’s unfortunate that you call the the Eagle Forum’s kids “spawn,” and then lambaste them for their lack of compassion for other people’s kids. I think your assumption that racial minorities have to be forced to go to school and would not attend without compulsion is problematic.
I’m in favor of universal schooling. I absolutely agree with you that ignorance perpetuates poverty. I think Senator Osmond’s idea is wrong on the merits. But his notions, and some of the other notions of far-right school reformers, are just the logical sequelae of sermons the liberal educator consensus continues to preach. Conformity’s bad! (except when people might take their kids out of schools altogether) Universal standards are toxic! (except that ideal of every kid in a public school taught by a teacher who went to an ed college–which, purely coincidentally, lets us be in charge of the system) We need parents involved! (well, unless they get so involved they take their kids away from us.)
Some people who’ve spent decades preaching that public K-12 education’s really about socialization, not skill acquisition or self-discipline or, you know, getting a job, are shocked, SHOCKED, that some parents and legislators are kind of taking that seriously.
All kids are precious and to categorize entire populations of people by their political affiliation or race as holding certain prejudices says a lot more about your own. I agree education is key to economic mobility. Trying to paint liberty as oppressive and elitist and stepping into people’s homes and families and making decisions for them as compassionate makes no sense to me. The idea that only certain kinds of people are capable of self-government is what sounds elitist to me. I’m not in any way trying to minimize the serious issues of poverty and assimilation, I just don’t see “one-size-fits-all-situations” truancy laws as some magic solution. Separate legislative considerations for more specifically addressing intergenerational poverty with public aid tied to accountability for children’s health care and education is also in process in Utah for example.
“But the GOP would like…to keep their own precious white kids away from the brown riff-raff because they might get contaminated.”
It’s unfortunate that you call the the Eagle Forum’s kids “spawn,” and then lambaste them for their lack of compassion for other people’s kids. I think your assumption that racial minorities have to be forced to go to school and would not attend without compulsion is problematic.
I’m in favor of universal schooling. I absolutely agree with you that ignorance perpetuates poverty. I think Senator Osmond’s idea is wrong on the merits. But his notions, and some of the other notions of far-right school reformers, are just the logical sequelae of sermons the liberal educator consensus continues to preach. Conformity’s bad! (except when people might take their kids out of schools altogether) Universal standards are toxic! (except that ideal of every kid in a public school taught by a teacher who went to an ed college–which, purely coincidentally, lets us be in charge of the system) We need parents involved! (well, unless they get so involved they take their kids away from us.)
Some people who’ve spent decades preaching that public K-12 education’s really about socialization, not skill acquisition or self-discipline or, you know, getting a job, are shocked, SHOCKED, that some parents and legislators are kind of taking that seriously.
Sorry–meant to reply to K Quinn above.
Many of the charter schools in both Utah and Arizona are “white flight” schools. Lots of research on this can be found via EPAA archives.
When Osmond proposed this end to compulsory education via his good buddies in the Eagle Forum, it was primarily meant to target 2 groups of people. 1) Poor minorities, particularly the itinerant workers who will no longer have to be told that their children have to be in school rather than picking crops to support their families – hence they will have fewer brown kids in public schools and 2) the good white religious folks who wish to “home school” their kids and teach them that earth is flat, dinosaurs didn’t exist, and brown people (I.e. the Laminites) are bad. This is not meant to diss all home schoolers, as there are many legitimate reasons to do so, and given a particular set of circumstances, I would do the same – but this is not geared towards the mainstream home schooled. There is a segment of extreme right wingers (I.e. Eagle Forum sycophants) in Osmond’s district, and he is pandering to them with this bill.
As for your comment about what you see as my “assumption” about forcing racial minorities to go to school:
I have worked with many migrant families who are torn between wanting their kids to get an education and needing money for their family, hence the kids are often out picking alongside the adults once school is out. Without that compulsory education piece, I can think of many of my families who would be more likely to keep their kids – mostly the older ones – in the fields working rather than in school. Not because they don’t value education, but because their need to survive is higher, and having the kids provide extra income for the family is crucial. Additionally, without the regulations behind compulsory education, there would be more absenteeism, tardiness, etc. When mom/dad gets sick or hurt and can’t go work in the fields/orchards, the kids have to step in. And there are plenty of unscrupulous farms/companies who watch this happen and turn the other way.
Thanks for saying this: it makes a lot of sense and gives me some context that I hadn’t considered. I had not thought at all of the migrant worker community. My own experience with the poor has been that they’re often eager to get kids to school, because it reduces the financial burden of childcare. But that’s in a different place.
As I said, I’m for universal schooling, and I think Senator Osmond’s idea is wrong on the merits.
I am a teacher in Sen. Osmond’s state and I will say that he speaks out of both sides of his mouth. Who knows if he is a friendly advocate of public education or not? A few years ago he came up with SB 64 which is our teacher evaluation bill. Surprisingly, he traveled the state and held town hall meetings regarding his proposed bill. Thousands of teachers spoke up, including our state Education Association, and district associations. He took interest in what educators were saying and he changed the direction of his bill, collaborating with our state Association on the rewriting and language. Of course it passed and teachers were lead to believe that we actually had a senator who took a step out of the box and did something very nontraditional compared to the other ignorant, self-serving politicians who are enemies of public education. Osmond just recently approved extra money for preK programs for at-risk students living in poverty. This was a major plus for us! But now he comes up with this cockamamie idea with the most ludicrous reasoning. One of his reason’s is that maybe a parent of a poor behaving, troubled student, will keep their child at home to give teachers a break. Seriously?! Those are the kids with failing report cards, but also have 100% attendance! In the school where I teach, parents don’t even know when school starts, and during the first two weeks back, students are being enrolled every day. We usually don’t have a true list of students until after Labor Day. Some parents even purposely keep their child home through Labor Day, and then sign them up for school. They believe that that is when school school start. And the poor kid has missed out on so much during the first two weeks.
Sen. Osmond’s proposed bill is an escape to what the real problems are. Yes, teachers are doing more than just teaching, like being social workers, and advocates, etc. It’s alarming to see the rate of students with mental health problems, violent home environments, parents without skills or knowledge or support for their child, and so many more concerns. But what about oversized classrooms that include these students. What about year after year of budget cuts that have left us with less and less resources to be able to serve the whole child, and even get them the extra help they need. What about having resources to serve our growing population of refugees?
Everyone knows – well, most everyone – that the key to a successful future is education. Without it, we do not have a chance to be nationally or globally competitive. Plus, we will be spending even more on the juvenile system, and investing more in jails, prisons and criminals. Criminals are already receiving more than students (compare the WPU to the annual cost to house a prisoner), which is plain futile to our future. I am a BAT and plan on getting more of my fellow BATs and other educators, to take part in an effort to get Osmond’s attention on this, and hopefully just drop the idea!
HJ in Utah