The Nebraska State Education Association recently paid a visit to the state’s major newspaper and explained why Nebraska doesn’t need school choice:
Editor’s note: In a recent visit to the York News-Times, Nebraska State Education Association president Jenni Benson and executive director Maddie Fennell shared that organization’s thoughts on two hot-button education issues – charter schools and private school vouchers. The NSEA is the union that represents Nebraska teachers. It is the oldest professional association in the state.
The NSEA’s 10 reasons to avoid “private school voucher schemes” are:
1. Nebraska cannot afford to finance private education as well as public education. There would be only two ways to pay for vouchers—take money from already underfunded public schools or raise taxes. Both are unacceptable.
2. Tax dollars for private education won’t fix student achievement challenges at public schools. The best way to assist all low-performing students is by strengthening public schools and addressing individual learning problems directly. Vouchers will siphon tax dollars away from our public schools where children have the greatest needs.
3. A voucher would be a ticket to nowhere for most children. Private schools can choose to accept or reject any student, and many have long waiting lists and only admit top students. On average, parochial schools reject 67 percent of all applicants. Other private schools reject nearly 90 percent of applicants. “Choice” does not reside with parents but with private school admissions committees.
4. Parents have an expanding array of choices for the public school their child attends. Among the many public school options available in Nebraska, parents may choose to send their child to another public school in the same or different school district, or enroll their child in various public academy schools, focus or magnet schools, career academies, or other public alternative schools.
5. Vouchers don’t create a “competitive marketplace.” Competition is based on an even playing field; there is no fair competition when “competitors” play by different rules. Public schools accept all applicants, private schools don’t. Private schools are not required to provide transportation, special education, bilingual education, free and reduced price lunches, and many other programs that public schools provide. They are also not required to meet even basic state certification or accreditation requirements.
6. The State of Nebraska should not spend tax dollars to pilot test a bad idea. Tax-funded pilot projects should only be conducted to test good ideas. Vouchers are a bad idea! A pilot voucher program would not be a “lifeboat” for some students, as claimed. A voucher system would be the Titanic, draining needed funds from public schools where most students would remain.
7. Vouchers would destroy the “private” in private schools. Parents of children in private schools don’t want the status quo disturbed for their children—they want their schools to be truly private. Private schools accepting tax-funded vouchers or private school tax credit schemes would become subject to government regulation. Allowing public tax dollars to be spent on private schools would be mean private schools would have to change admission requirements, implement state-required testing, certification and accreditation, comply with discipline and expulsion laws, and allow voucher students to be exempted from religious activities.
8. Inserting the word “private” doesn’t make a school good. There is no proof that private school vouchers would improve students’ academic performance. In fact, students attending private schools under the Milwaukee, Cleveland and other private school voucher programs did not outperform their public school peers.
9. Vouchers would promote further religious and economic stratification in our society. Private elementary and secondary schools have been founded primarily by two types of entities: (1) religious denominations seeking to teach academics interwoven with their religious doctrine; and (2) wealthier parents seeking to give their children an advantage over other children. Tax-funded vouchers for private schools would increase divisions between rich and poor and among different religions, threatening the future of our American democracy.
10. Public policy should respect parental choice but provide for all students. The best public policy is to provide parents with even more choices within the public schools, which serve more than 90 percent of the children in Nebraska. Nebraska legislators should concentrate on making all public schools stronger, safer, more challenging and accountable. Public tax dollars should be spent only to improve public schools—not to assist the small number of parents who choose to enroll their children in private schools.
NSEA on Charter Schools
The fact is that charter schools are not meeting the need they were created to fill—including to serve as lab schools to develop new teaching techniques—and many are failing their students and families, while squandering taxpayer dollars.
Reports detail fraud and waste totaling more than $200 million of taxpayer funds in the charter school sector. It notes that these figures only represent fraud and waste in the charter sector uncovered so far, and that the total that federal, state and local governments “stand to lose” in 2015 is probably more than $1.4 billion. It says, “The vast majority of the fraud perpetrated by charter officials will go undetected because the federal government, the states, and local charter authorizers lack the oversight necessary to detect the fraud.”1
The result of charter schools on student achievement just doesn’t live up to the hype. Less than a third of the total charter schools in the U.S. perform better than comparable public schools. The other two thirds are about the same or worse.
Article continued below advertisement
In fact, the biggest proponents of charter schools are Wall Street hedge fund and venture capital firms like JP Morgan, USB, and Liberty Partners. Unfortunately, Wall Street losses on charter schools such as Edison have proven that charter schools are a bad investment. Further, even in places where the public schools don’t come close to the standard of quality we have in our Nebraska public schools, charter schools are being closed for poor performance and irresponsible management.
The facts could not be any clearer: Investments in our public schools yield the best returns.
“The Tip of the Iceberg: Charter School Vulnerabilities to Waste, Fraud, And Abuse,” was released jointly by the nonprofit organizations Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools and the Center for Popular Democracy. It follows a similar report released a year ago by the same groups that detailed $136 million in fraud and waste and mismanagement in 15 of the 42 states that operate charter schools. The 2015 report cites $203 million, including the 2014 total plus $23 million in new cases, and $44 million in earlier cases not included in last year’s report.
Some studies regarding private school vouchers and charter schools:
• Vouchers close neighborhood public schools and benefit wealthy school districts and privately run schools (Vasquez Heilig & Portales, 2014) http://bit.ly/EPAAVouchers
• Vouchers as a reform agenda are not viable given a paucity of peer reviewed evidence that they improve student outcomes in a consistent or large way in the US. (Vasquez Heilig, LeClair, Lemke, & McMurrey 2014). http://bit.ly/TCEPvouchers
• When vouchers are applied universally, education inequity is exacerbated. Schools do the choosing (Vasquez Heilig & Portales, 2012) http://bit.ly/IUPRAChileVouchers
• Charter schools have a 40 percent attrition rate for their African American students (Vasquez Heilig, Williams, McNeil & Lee, 2011). http://bit.ly/BREAttrition
• Charters schools are more segregated relative to public schools in their vicinity. (Vasquez Heilig, LeClair, Redd, 2014 Under Review)

Excellent piece! And please note also that in a 1966 referendum Nebraska voters defeated a very mild plan to divert public funds to private schools, a bus transportation plan, by 57m% to 43%. — Edd Doerr
LikeLike
They could add something else- the minute they get charters and vouchers every lawmaker in the state will abandon the existing public schools and completely ignore public school families.
That’s what happens in ed reform states. Ed reformers parachute in and them you find your school budgets are cut and no one at the statehouse can be bothered with the unfashionable public school sector anymore.
LikeLike
Has Mercedes tried getting rid of the desks? I bet if she got rid of the desks DeVos would designate her as an “innovator” and deign to visit. Desks are very 19th century.
The students will have to sit on the floor but that’s a small price to pay for the magical transformative effect of desk eradication.
The desk thing is funny because that’s the basis for Ohio’s most famous school equity court case. Lower income students didn’t have desks. Little did they know they were leading the innovation revolution. They just thought they were poor and the state wouldn’t give them funding for furniture.
LikeLike
If Nebraska could solve their relatively minor funding issues (compared to other states), they would be extremely well positioned to attract a lot of the great teachers that have been driven out of the profession by the abject stupidity of “reform”, thereby further improving their students educational outcomes. I hope that as a state, they have strong campaign finance disclosure laws. Perhaps the only thing so far that has saved them from being in the crosshairs of reform is that they are a very large state with low population density and few large cities. There just isn’t that much money to be easily extracted there. That would not stop them from being targeted by the deep pockets of the “reformers” for being a bastion of fact based education practices. The “reformers” can’t have an entire state giving the lie to their hostile ideological/corporate takeover by showing how K-12 public education should be done. Go big red!
LikeLike
It is unfortunate that many other states lack Nebraska’s insight and wisdom. They have bought the whole “choice” lie lock, stock and barrel. Now their systems are on the verge of collapse. It is simple math. States cannot afford to pay for splinter, parallel systems well as they can for a public school system that is more efficient and often more effective.
As an aside, I watched the CNN healthcare debate last night. The Republicans kept pushing for states rights in developing plans to suit each state. I am not suggesting that education should be federal, but there is something to be said for consolidating resources. Bernie aptly pointed out that administrative costs will increase exponentially under a variety of state plans. He pointed out that Medicare’s administrative costs are about 2%. Private insurance administrative costs are 18%. Sometimes, it makes more sense to consolidate resources as we do in public education, and having certified teachers also offers some level of quality control.
LikeLike
This is the typical BS that the people who want to perpetuate the NEA/AFT/AFCSME socialist-top-down-one size fits all government monopoly bureaucracy continue to spew forth. They cannot post their true objective, so they work up bogus and false issues.
School choice/vouchers are coming, and they are coming nationwide. One state at a time.
LikeLike
Charles appears to be a troll for DeVos, Trump, Pence and the Theocrat Right. To claim that even a minority of four million or so Catholic, Protestant and Jewish AFT and NEA members are robotic socialists is pure Cloud Nine fantasy. Poor Charles gives the words “ignorant” and “uninformed” whole new sets of meanings. — Edd Doerr
LikeLike
Edd,
Charles can’t explain why only 2-3% of students use vouchers even when they are freely available.
LikeLike
I am no troll. I have a distrust of government. I believe sincerely, that most (not all) parents are able to make informed choices for their children’s education.
There is one thing that I can explain. The state of Indiana, has the highest percentage of their parents/students exercising choice, by opting-out of the public schools, and redeeming their vouchers at non-public schools (some are home-schooling).
The reason is, that the 97% of the students who are remaining in the public school system ( in Indiana), are perfectly satisfied with the education that is being delivered by the public school of their choice.
This “choice” to remain in the public school system, reveals that the public schools are entirely satisfactory, to the parents/students who are attending them.
Got it?
LikeLike
No, Charles, 97% of public school students remain because Indiana has good public schools, and money is diverted away from them to religious schools, most of which are not as good as the public schools. It is a lose-lose except for rightwing ideologues.
LikeLike
@Edd: I am not saying that the Protestant/Catholic/Jewish membership of the public school unions are necessarily socialists. Far from it.
I am saying that the public-school monopoly is a socialist enterprise. People who participate in the enterprise, are not necessarily socialists. Students who attend a government-run public school are compelled to attend due to law. Teachers who work in these schools, are compelled to follow the dictates and policies of the school system, no matter how distasteful.
The labor union leadership, is compelled by their own economic necessity, to fight to keep the monopoly going, and to work against anything that would weaken their grip on their membership, and reduce the amount of dues flowing in to the leadership.
Got it?
LikeLike
“…public-school monopoly….”
Yeah, and if you think that’s bad, just look at the public police monopoly. And the public fire department monopoly. And the public ambulance monopoly. Just give me a dang voucher and I’ll get my own police and fire department and ambulance service!
LikeLike
Some communities have private fire protection. Example: San Mateo California. See
http://www.primebuyersreport.org/ca/redwood-city-fire-protection-contractors.html
San Diego California, has private ambulance service. see
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sdut-sd-continues-outsourcing-ambulance-service-2013oct30-story.html
Many communities outsource services like fire protection, ambulance, trash pickup, etc.
And some communities outsource educational services, to private firms.
LikeLike
Charles,
Why not get rid of government altogether?
LikeLike
Q Why not get rid of government altogether? END Q
I am not an anarchist. I am a veteran, US Air Force, and I have put my life on the line, for the constitution.
There is a need for government, and law. Our society has delegated some powers to government. The powers which the people have delegate are few and highly restricted. See Article 1, Sec. 8, US Constitution.
Society must have protection from foreign threats. Our nation must have standards weights and measures, and an infrastructure.
I am only stating, that there are many services, which can be performed by the private sector, more efficiently and with less waste.
Some communities have found that fire protection, ambulance, trash pickup, etc. can be provided to the citizenry, at a lower cost, and with more efficiency, than can be obtained through government.
Most people wish for their government to act efficiently, and for their taxes to be low. Most reasonable people do not go to government and ask for higher taxes, so that services can be provided by government.
Our nation is beginning to realize, that educational services can often be provided, at lower cost, and with greater efficiency, by non-public sources.
LikeLike
Why not outsource the military? Erik Prince says he can do the job better.
LikeLike
Q Why not outsource the military? END Q
Reductio ad absurdum. The US Constitution, in the preamble, which liberals are so fond of reciting, states clearly about the “common defense”.
The federal government is specifically authorized to raise an army and a navy, and implicitly, an Air Force. (Powered flight was not in the minds of men in 1787). The US Constitution authorizes a common defense. It does NOT specify how that defense can be obtained.
The Defense Department (Keep in mind, I work at the Pentagon) has to out-source many functions. In the combat zone, certain functions are performed by private contractors: Mail, food service, computer services, fuel delivery, PX, road construction, etc. The list is endless. It is more cost-effective to obtain these services through private contractors, than through the uniform services.
The Army does not make its own rifles. The Navy does not build its own ships. The Air Force does not make its own airplanes. The Marine Corps does not make its own uniforms. And on and on.
In a sense, much of our military equipment, and defense services are already out-sourced. I know, I ran computer services and data processing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Two of my co-workers were killed, one man lost a hand to an IED. I was shot at, and mortared on myself.
What point are you trying to make?
LikeLike
Outsource the military to Betsy zdeVos’s brother Erik. How can you oppose that? CHOICE!
LikeLike
True, Charles.
Liberals are fond of quoting the Constitution.
LikeLike
Chas,
We discussed this point before and I would have sworn you swore off using “public school monopoly” as a description of the reality of the diverse, over 13,500 different public school districts.
¿Qué pasó?
LikeLike
I made no such vow. Each public school district, which does not have an option for citizens/parents/students to obtain educational services from a non-public source is in fact, a monopoly.
There are thousands of communities in the USA, which have only one cable TV provider, and this is in fact a monopoly.
When parents/students are compelled to pay for a public school system with taxes, and are provided only one educational provider, this is, by definition, a monopoly.
I concede, that there are a plethora of monopoly school systems all across this land. So what?
LikeLike
An additional issue is that chaters do nothing different. Like shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic. It is time to take the restrictions, such as Common Core, off the backs of the traditional public schools and free them to change their system and philosophy of education. Without change, public schools will perish. However, they must be allowed to change. Public schoo teachers know what to do if given the opportunity.
LikeLike
@Caplee68: I find myself in agreement. I believe that there is far too much “top down” over-management of publicly-operated schools. Teachers continue to complain (justifiably) about too much testing. I have been an education fan for many years, and I have never seen a teacher ask for more testing.
I believe that there are thousands of dedicated, professional people teaching in this nation’s public schools. Even though I support school choice, wholeheartedly, I can still respect and admire individuals who are public school teachers. It is not a zero-sum game.
I am appalled at the huge amount of over-management hammering down on teachers from nameless, faceless bureaucrats in Washington and state capitals. Enough is enough.
The federal Dept of Education needs to be abolished, and education returned to local government, where it belongs.
LikeLike
No, Charles, you want education turned over to churches, mosques, synagogues, and witches’ covens.
LikeLike
Not quite. You do not know what I want. I believe in local control of local education. If the public schools are answerable to the local community, the schools will meet the standards set by the community.
I do believe that there are many excellent schools, which are administered by religious enterprises. Georgetown, Notre Dame, Islamic University of Minnesota, Yeshiva, BYU,etc .These are all fine schools.
There are many fine K-12 schools run by religious enterprises. If parents wish to enroll their children them ,then fine. If the state can rebate a portion of their taxes to assist them, then fine.
LikeLike
Charles,
It is so boring to read your dozens of comments every day. Don’t you have anything better to do with your time than to write the same thing over and over and over?
LikeLike
“It is not a zero-sum game.”
Every dime that goes to charters or voucher schools comes directly from the pot that public schools depend on. How is that not a zero-sum game? It is, in fact, the very definition of a zero-sum game.
Do you really want us to believe you’re this ignorant?
LikeLike
Re Charles’s uninformed rants, I am a former Indiana public school teacher, as was my late brother for 32 years. My niece, my granddaughter, and two grandnieces are teachers. So I think I know a bit about schools. Indiana’s state ed dept publishes a list of the private schools that qualify for vouchers, and it includes two Islamic schools along with numerous Catholic and Lutheran schools. Under Governors Daniels and Pence Indiana’s public schools have taken a serious beating, with piles of money draining off to church schools. Sadly, Indiana’s highest court has allowed this despite Article I, Sections 4 and 6 of the state constitutions.
LikeLike
Edd,
None of that will deter Charles. He supports public money going anywhere. Even to totally incompetent schools with uncertified teachers. He is a bot.
LikeLike
Take these things one at a time. I have plenty of free time, so I can discuss different topics, at my leisure.
When parents opt-out of a public school, and remove their child, the money follows the child, that is true. But when the child leaves the school, the per-pupil expenditures remaining with the children remaining, is unchanged. In fact, Arizona has an ESA program which provides 90% of the per-pupil funding. That way the public school retains the 10%, to spend as the public school chooses.
I am not ignorant. I can be a supporter of public schools, and support school choice, simultaneously.
It is not true, that “every dime” comes from the pot that public schools depend on. Some states permit corporations and individuals to donate to opportunity scholarships. States with ESAs are perfectly free to levy additional taxes to support public education.
Indiana has set up a school choice plan, that is in line with the federal constitution, else it would not be continuing.
LikeLike
Charles,
Since everything can be sold off or given away to private companies to make a profit, do we need any government?
LikeLike
“But when the child leaves the school, the per-pupil expenditures remaining with the children remaining, is unchanged.”
That is false. If Public School A has 300 kids, ranging from grades K through 8, and 30 of those kids (from all different grades) go to charter/voucher schools, Public School A’s costs remains pretty much the same. They still need the same number of teachers and support staff, the same building, etc. This whole idea that school funding works “per pupil” is right-wing propaganda. I’m pretty sure sure you understand this, so maybe you aren’t ignorant. The alternative is evil – I’ll grant you that if you wish.
LikeLike
Q . If Public School A has 300 kids, ranging from grades K through 8, and 30 of those kids (from all different grades) go to charter/voucher schools, Public School A’s costs remains pretty much the same. They still need the same number of teachers and support staff, the same building, etc END Q
I concede, that if a school loses 10% of the children, and the concurrent loss of spending, on children who have departed, then the school must make do, with less funding. Exactly like when a community loses population with a plant closing. When students depart from Rochester NY, when Kodak closed, the school is left with less students, less funding, and a number of “static” costs.
Public School “A” with a loss of students, and a loss of funding, has “sunk” costs. The school building remains. Utility costs to heat a classroom with 30 students are the same for a classroom with 27 students.
BUT- Schools are like other enterprises, when demand drops, the enterprise must down-size. With fewer students, teachers and support staff can be laid off, to match the delivery of educational services, with the diminished demand for educational services. Schools are not immune to the laws of supply and demand, except in a government-operated monopoly system.
We are seeing the decrease in population in inner cities, like St. Louis and Rochester, NY. The school systems must contract.
School systems have to expand and contract, with normal demographic shifts. When the “Baby boom” children started to need schooling in the 50’s schools were forced to expand, and hire more teachers and support staff. When the steel industry in Pittsburgh PA collapsed, school systems there contracted, and there were layoffs. and schools closed. When people started buying cars from Germany and Japan, Detroit lost population, and schools closed.
School choice/vouchers simply amplify this dynamic, and accelerate the supply/demand curve. As public schools contract, there will be layoffs and school closings. Taxpayers are not going to subsidize empty classrooms. As non-public school operators expand, to accommodate the new demand, non-public schools will hire more teachers/administrators/staff.
There is nothing “evil” in this scenario. Just like when people started subscribing to cable Television, rooftop antenna manufacturers had to face down-sizing. New, smaller , more economical air carriers, put some carriers, like Eastern and PanAm, out of business.
LikeLike
Q He supports public money going anywhere. Even to totally incompetent schools with uncertified teachers. END Q
This is not true. I support parents being given alternatives, to sending their children to one publicly-operated school, based solely on their zip code. We have a plethora of choices at the university/college level, we can have similar choices at the K-12 level.
With school choice, will come some reasonable regulation. Voucher redemption can be restricted to only schools which have passed accreditation. Some parents (already over a million) will choose to home-school, their children. The voucher/ESA can be redeemed for legitimate educational expenses, like computers, internet service, educational software, etc.
Do not think that I support sending public money “anywhere”.
I have more faith in parents, to select the appropriate educational venue for their children, than you do.
LikeLike
Forget zip codes. I call BS. Talk about poverty. Schools can’t fix it. Double Charles’s taxes so that schools everywhere have the resources they need.
LikeLike
Q Talk about poverty. Schools can’t fix it. Double Charles’s taxes so that schools everywhere have the resources they need. END Q
We are in agreement, there is poverty in this nation. Very few nations collect the data on their population, and then publish the poverty statistics. And there is no doubt, that schools cannot “fix” poverty.
The causes of poverty are many and varied. Drugs, crime, fatherlessness, welfare, hopelessness, economic upheaval, etc .etc.
Over 70% of African-American children are born to unmarried females. A black male, has a 1 in 22 chance of being murdered. The jobs of the 21st century, require post-secondary education, and few African-American families can afford college costs.
Education is part of the solution to poverty. (NOT a panacea). Providing a quality education to all children, including the non-college bound, is both cost-effective, and a societal responsibility.
It is a bargain, to educate children, and provide them with the skills to secure employment, in the 21st century economy. It is much cheaper, than prison or a lifetime of welfare.
I believe, that most reasonable people are willing to bear a tax burden, when the government spends their money properly and correctly.
I have no children, but I pay my federal/state/municipal taxes, so that I can live in this society.
LikeLike
Charles seems unbothered by the fact that diverting public funds to special interest private schools would fragment the school population along religious (Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Adventist, Episcopal, evangelical, Orthodox Jewish, Reform Jewish, Conservative Jewish, Quaker, Scientology. Islamic, etc.), ideological, ethnic, class and other lines, while increasing costs and totally fowling up the teaching profession. Charles knows little about either education or economics.
LikeLike
Charles is a genius at not listening to what any one else says or writes
LikeLike
You are partially correct. I am not bothered by parents being given more control over the direction and content of their children’s education. Not at all.
The government does NOT have “dibs” on children, and the government is NOT empowered to indoctrinate children. The supreme court ruled on this back in 1922. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierce_v._Society_of_Sisters
When school choice is introduced, naturally some parents will opt-out of the public school system, and enroll their children in a religiously-operated school.
Already, we have a plethora of religiously-operated universities and colleges, and students attend these schools, with taxpayer assistance. You can go to Notre Dame, on a BEOG, and there is no problem. How can you say “The Sky is Falling!”, when a person gets a school voucher, and sends their child to a religiously-operated secondary school? Are similarly upset, by the wide variety of religiously-operated colleges, to which your taxes are flowing?
Not only am I not “bothered” by public funding going to parents who enroll their children in a religiously-operated school, I am delighted! True, the public school system will lose the funding, that otherwise would have followed the children, but the school system will also lose the children. A similar thing occurs, when a family moves out of a community, across the state or out of state.
School choice will create a “fragmentation” of the school population, this is true. Baptist children will go to Baptist school, etc. Some parents will enroll their children, at schools which are operated by a different religion. Near where I live, in Manassas VA, about 13% of the students in catholic schools, are non-catholics. see
http://catholicherald.com/News/Local_News/Why_non-Catholics_select_Catholic_schools/
(Non-Catholic) Parents often select Catholic schools, because of the quality of the educational services.
There is no evidence that school choice/vouchers increase costs. In fact, in Arizona, the ESA programs provides only 90% of the per-pupil funding which would be provided in the public schools. In Arizona. (and other places) school choice/vouchers/ESAs actually REDUCE costs. Parents are willing to forgo the spending in the public school, to ensure the quality of the education, that their children will receive.
As far as “fowling up(sic)” the teaching profession, I do not see it. When students opt-out of the public school system, the student population will decline. With fewer students enrolled, the public school system will have to down-size. Some teachers and support staff will be laid off.
On the other side, when non-public schools expand, because of school choice, the non-public schools will have to hire additional teachers and staff.
I am an engineer, not a teacher nor am I an economist. I have a solid knowledge of these subjects, notwithstanding.
LikeLike
Q Charles is a genius at not listening to what any one else says or writes END Q
I disagree. I have learned a great deal at this site, as well as other similar blogs, like Jan Resseger.
I enjoy it here very much, because I encounter many views which are different from my own.
LikeLike
The Ohio legislature spends 10% of their time on 90% of schools- they spend 90% of their time on charters and vouchers.
It’s ridiculous. Complete and total capture. If we didn’t have charters and vouchers they wouldn’t do anything at all on education in Columbus.
An Ohio newspaper columnist calls “choice” schools “the darlings” of politicians and it is true- they have zero interest in public school families.
THAT’S what happens The Movement captures your statehouse. Public schools become an unfashionable afterthought.
You can’t pay these people to work on public schools- I know- we ARE paying them in Ohio and they can’t be bothered.
LikeLike
You all saw that Harvard conference list of attendees- public schools are specifically and deliberately EXCLUDED.
They’re having a conference on “public education” and they excluded 90% of families and schools.
Ludicrous, right? But absolutely business as usual in ed reform. They’re “reinventing” public schools without any participation FROM or BY public schools. They see nothing wrong with this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If your public school is buying a lot of ed tech (I don’t recommend it, but a lot of schools are) you should use this market power to insist ed reformers give you a seat at the table.
Public schools are the single largest purchasers of all those Chromebooks and Ipads and ed tech programs. The ed tech industry couldn’t survive without public schools.
Use that. Demand that they listen to you instead of treating your schools and students like 2nd class citizens.
If they’re holding ed tech conferences and excluding public schools feel free to exclude that vendor from the list of companies who get contracts. If they don’t want to hear from you then you don’t want to hear from them when it’s time to buy product.
LikeLike
Nebraska sounds like a great state when it comes to their public schools.
But I am troubled that Omaha signed on to K12 as their virtual school. Why would they do this when they acknowledge the controversy surrounding these schools.?
https://thejournal.com/articles/2016/08/04/omaha-public-schools-to-open-nebraskas-first-virtual-school-this-month.aspx
“OPS will pay K12 Classroom LLC, a Virginia-based, for-profit online learning company, to provide the web-based software and curriculum for online classes. The company was one of two to submit bids to deliver online content.”
http://www.k12.com/
LikeLike
You are right, Nancy. A terrible idea. May be helpful to kids who live far from a public school, but my own view is that K12 is a profit making scheme that is good for no one but Michael Milken
LikeLike
My wife grew up in Omaha Nebraska. They still have great public schools. If it were not for winter, then we would probably move back north. But we both like being in the warmer climate of the Houston area.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike