Massachusetts students on education

Here's an analysis of education in the Presidential election from the youth of Press Pass TV:

"I think we all love teachers"

Thanks, of course, to Bob Schieffer for the above quote in response to Governor Romney's comment,that, while hiring teachers would not fix the economy, "I love teachers, and I’m happy to have states and communities that want to hire teachers..."

It billed as a foreign policy debate, but we did get a good bit of education-related talk in there. A few points:

• While it was nice to hear that neither candidate is in favor of sequestration, this would be more meaningful if we were hearing it from Congress, since, per Article I of the United States Constitution, budgetary power is invested in the Legislative branch.
• Governor Romney claimed some credit last night for education in Massachusetts being "number 1." It's important to keep in mind (as Diane Ravitch noted last night) that much of what has gone well in Massachusetts since 1993 had to do with reworking the funding formula, and the schools' success both pre- and post-dates Romney. What he can take credit for--and here's where the President's calling him out on this was wrong--is the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship, 'though, as Slate reported earlier this week, there's some question on how much good those scholarships are doing. 
• Since President Obama came out strongly in defense of class size mattering, I assume that we will be able to tell the Patrick administration that we're going to go back to using our federal Title I money to lower class size now? 

NPR on Romney and vouchers

NPR had a piece this morning discussing Governor Romney's support of vouchers as well as a campaign in which everyone loves "school choice." The point Rick Hess makes on vouchers is important:

Hess says that even if all of those federal dollars come in a backpack with the kid, it would amount to about $2,500 to $3,000 per child. He argues that's just not enough money to entice good schools, especially in the suburbs, to take low-income kids from struggling, inner-city schools.

Nor, of course, is that even close to tuition at a private school.
This is part of a larger national "school choice" push. Usually, that is code for vouchers, 'though this presidential administration has been using it for charter schools. In either case, it represents a fundamental reworking of what we're doing when we publicly fund education.
A democracy necessitates an educated citizenry. If everyone gets a say in who runs things, everyone needs to be able to have some understanding of basic science, economics, history, and so forth, and of course, everyone needs a measure of basic literacy. In order to continue to have a democracy, you need to continue to educate the next generation.
What you are doing is creating your next generation of voters.
(This is partly why, by the way, the discussions over science get so heated. If we educate the next generation on what we're actually doing to the Earth's climate, they may decide to do something about it.)
Thus we all have an interest in the education of children, and so we are all responsible for funding it. At the same time, however, we have a measure of oversight of that education. That's why we elect school boards (as well as representatives and senators and governors). The curriculum they are learning, as well as the circumstances in which they learn it, matters to all of us, whether we have children at all or children in public education.
If you give the public funds away to private schools or to charter schools, you are giving to entities that do not have public accountability. Public accountability isn't just "we can close you if your test scores are lousy." It means your budget books are open. It means your hiring processes are in line with state and federal laws (no exceptions). It means your curriculum is open to public debate and process.
None of which is true for these other systems.
We as Americans have a fundamental interest in the education of the next generation. School choice, when used this way, prevents us from pursuing that interest and maintaining responsibility for the continuation of democracy.
There's no reason for this to be in conflict with parents pursuing what is best for their child. We need, however, not to lose sight of the reason for which we have a public education system in the first place.

You should go vote

...particularly if you've got kids to bring along with you.
If you're in the fifteenth Worcester district and you pick up a Democratic ballot, there's a decent chance that you're deciding on your next state rep. Don't miss that. State reps are the closest to us when it come to Beacon Hill, so use your ballot on that one!
If you're in most of Worcester, you won't have a contested race on your ballot, or you'll have a single one, that of Congressman McGovern, who is being challenged by William Feegbeh on the Democratic ballot. To the Congressman's credit, he hasn't taken anything for granted (his Facebook page today reads like a western Mass travelogue), and he's running a real race. There's a great bit here that really ANYone can run for office and that even sitting Congressmen can be challenged in their primary races.
If you take a Republican ballot, and see all those uncontested races, or take a Green ballot, on which there are no names, or even if you go down the rest of the Democratic ballot, and see the rest of the uncontested races, there's a pretty clear message. There's a good chance that we're going to hear a lot today and tomorrow about low voter turnout.
How about low candidate turnout?

Go participate in democracy today; it doesn't run without us!

Opposing the Stand for Children ballot measure

Note that the following resolution was passed at the state Democratic convention in Springfield this weekend:

A Resolution to Keep Massachusetts Public Schools on the Right Track

"We, the Democrats of Massachusetts, are proud that national and
international testing repeatedly places the Commonwealth’s public schools first in the nation in subjects including reading and mathematics.

We recognize that our experienced and dedicated educators are committed to helping students prepare for the future and giving all children in every community the opportunity to succeed.

We support efforts to successfully implement the newly developed evaluation system, which was created in collaboration with teachers and education leaders from across the state and will further strengthen our schools.

Therefore, we stand with the Massachusetts Teachers Association and the American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts in their efforts to defeat the “Stand for Children” ballot proposal, which would ill-serve our students and our schools.

We believe that this broad and complex ballot proposal undermines the joint efforts of parents, principals, and teachers to keep our state the nation’s education leader, and therefore we stand in strong opposition to its enactment."

Thanks to those who sent this to me. Anyone see anything similar from the GOP?

More of the same

And just in case you were wondering, Mitt Romney's education policy is, ah, just about identical to Barak Obama's.