Educational freedom
Choices. Gotta love 'em. But they can be a kick in the pants, too.
A few weeks ago I chose to criticize Subway for a kids' essay contest that didn't allow homeschoolers to participate. And I pointed out two misspellings in its printed rules. And, wouldn't you know it, my readers detected several typos in the email version of my rant.
Radio listeners missed out on this bit of hilarity.
Subway had spelled "United States" as "Untied States," and added an extra "t" to another word. I had used the wrong kind of "bear," and left out a "c" in another word. Once an email's out, it's out . . . but right away I made sure the website had it right.
Since Subway's instructions were printed, they had a harder time of it. But they were quick to correct the chief error I had chastised them for: Not allowing homeschoolers to participate in their contest.
When Subway realized that customers were angry, the company did more than confess to the lapse. With remarkable speed, Subway found a way to allow homeschoolers to compete.
This was a far more important problem than any typo. My proofreaders may have fallen a bit short in the homonym department, and someone at Subway got his or her fingers tangled. But leaving a contest open to everyone is very, very basic.
Thankfully, unlike in government, such mistakes tend to get fixed fast in the private sector. Why? Customers can choose to go elsewhere, taking their money.
That's the kick in the pants.
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
Comments(2)
Subway, America’s leading fast-food sandwich franchise, is sponsoring a contest for kids. It’s an essay contest entitled “Every Sandwich Tells a Story.”
This contest itself is something of a story.
First, the contest explanation and rules contain multiple typos.
Second, homeschooling families are prohibited from entering.
What’s going on here? Subway’s official explanation is that the first prize award of athletic equipment can only go to a school. This is a bit lame, since the equipment could easily go to a local park frequented by the winning homeschooling family . . . or any number of homeschooling associations.
What could the folks at Subway really be thinking? I wouldn’t be surprised if the team in control of the contest have spouses in one of the teachers’ unions . . . teachers’ unions are notoriously opposed to home schooling. Go figure.
There’s been a lot of speculation. Some folk say that Subway just couldn’t bear to see another homeschooler win. My thought is that any contest with that many typos in the promotional material is badly in need of an education.
Many homeschooling families — and their sympathetic friends — have started a boycott. And I have to say, much as I like Subway, I’ll be steering the family car to Quiznos or a local deli the next time my family agrees to go out for sandwiches.
Subway has, perhaps inadvertently, taken on a hot-button political topic, and come out on the wrong side.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Comments(3)
Just "being a professor" doesn't make you smarter than your students. Or more grounded in reality. Or common sense.
Take Priya Venkatesan, a Dartmouth academic who teaches a class in something-or-other to do with science, postmodernism and higher or lower consciousness or something.
She is suing some of her former students. Why? Maybe it's like climbing Mount Everest: You do it to see if you can. And this professor apparently thinks modern anti-discrimination laws entitle her to go after students simply for criticizing her teaching.
Roger Kimball has the scoop over at PajamasMedia.com. He quotes Professor V's minatory email to her students. In it she merely says she is suing "some of you" under Title VII of what she blunderingly calls "anti-federal" discrimination laws. She obviously didn't like her students' class evaluations, which she ominously says she will reproduce in a book.
Don't wait for her to find a publisher. Many of the evaluations have already found their way onto the Internet. Typical criticisms include "awful," "nonsensical," "worst course ever." Sure, we can't know the quality of her teaching for certain without trekking to Dartmouth and sitting in. But from her course description and her email's grammar and logic I'm willing to credit the students' insights.
More I shan't say, as I don't wish to be named in Professor V's lawsuit. My lawyer is overworked already.
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
Comments(0)
Banned! First alcohol prohibition, then other drugs. Now candy.
Yes, candy is now banned on many school campuses. Why? Refined sugar is so bad for you it’s wicked.
I’m sure you know many of the major bad guys here. Twinkies. Ho Hos. Nestle’s Crunch. Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups. Maybe you consumed some of these unsavory savories yourself in your youth. They’re not fruit and vegetables, that’s for sure.
In California the ban on intra-curricular sugar is legislative and statewide.
So, that’s that, right? No candy ever winds its way into a Golden-State kid’s lunch pail or backpack. Right?
Uh, not quite. There’s a black market. Valiant pint-sized entrepreneurs are sneaking the nefariously edible junk food onto school grounds despite the risks. According to Jim Nason, principal of Hook Junior High School, some of these rule-breakers “are walking around campus with upwards of $40 in their pockets. . . .” Forty bucks? That’s almost as high as the national debt.
It’s not just California. Sugar trafficking stretches from one coast to the other. In New Haven, Connecticut, eighth-grader and honors student Michael Sheridan was suspended for a day for buying a bag of Skittles. And banned from an honors student dinner. And not allowed to be class vice-president any more.
Seems the public schools are always panicking over something. Now, it’s sugar. When will they panic over poor education?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Comments(1)
Years ago, Oregon House Speaker Jeff Merkley voted against Oregon’s charter school legislation. He lost.
Later, he and his wife applied to send two of their kids to a newly forming charter school. The school was late in starting up, so he lost again as the application wasn’t acted on.
But now that Willamette Weekly leaked the application, it’s getting lots of attention.
Merkley first denied the report. Then, when the actual applications were produced, well, he stopped denying.
It’s funny how politicians who vote lockstep with teachers’ unions and the establishment monopoly school system keep on undermining their own publicly espoused positions. They keep voting with their dollars and good sense in their private lives . . . against the bad sense of their official loyalties.
It’s a revelation of attitude: Merkley and other such politicians believe that choice is only for the few. Them.
Steve Buckstein, a founder of Oregon’s Cascade Policy Institute, puts the story in perspective. He quotes a famous Supreme Court judgment from 1922, about an Oregon law to outlaw all private schools. The justices said No Way. And insisted that “the child is not the mere creature of the state.”
Too many politicians agree with this only when it comes to their own children. We could use their help making education better for all children. Schooling should be made to fit kids, not schools to fit . . . politicians’ re-elections.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Comments(2)
Power corrupts. Petty power corrupts . . . pettily?
Some time back I told you about Diane Pharr, whose son's school records — his private school records — were publicized by the school board . . . just out of petty vindictiveness for her wanting to learn more about the board's budget.
Now, in Fairfax County, Virginia, public school officials similarly act out. Hunter Mill School Board member Stuart Gibson was forced by the Virginia Board of Education to publicly apologize. That board sided with a local parent defending her son, whose special education history was released by Gibson during — get this — a political campaign. The boy's father happened to be Gibson's opponent.
We've got to watch out for our rights from local officials just as much as from the big boys.
Vienna, Virginia resident Bruce Bennett was twice forcibly removed from public meetings of the Fairfax County School Board. He had tried to tape the events, you see. The officials said that wasn't allowed.
Funny thing is, Virginia, like many states — and the federal government — requires open meetings. Mr. Bennett was entirely within his rights. But he was ousted anyway, and a school district spokesman gave a lot of hooey defending those forced ejections.
These are all developments occurring not far from where I live. I bet, if you checked into your local politics, you'd find similar trouble.
So, if you want to make a difference, get involved. There's somebody's rights you can defend . . . if only your own.
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
Comments(0)
During the early days of our republic, animosity against bad politicians could turn quite extreme. A bucket of tar and a pillow of chicken feathers later, and getting on the bad side of the citizenry could have real consequences.
Well, we don’t use tar and feathers any longer, but we do have the Internet.
In Galveston, Texas, the local school board has upset a lot of citizens, one of whom put up a collaborative watchdog website
One typical article on the site makes fun of Lynne Cleveland, the superintendent, by comparing her statement on a state-mandated review program with other such statements from other district superintendents around the state, each saying pretty much the same thing. The superintendent had cribbed her press release.
Many local contributors to the site direct some pretty cutting remarks against what they call the “Circle of H’Eight,” with an “h-apostrophe” before the number “eight,” for the district’s seven Trustees and the superintendent together.
So what does the H’Eight do? Hire a lawyer! Threaten to sue.
The lawyer claims he’s never seen such personal invective directed towards school officials. Oh, and he demands that the website be taken down.
You do have to dig under a lot of invective to find the website’s points — but they do have them. Does that matter? Free speech means never having to say your sorry to politicians. That’s the law. Galveston officials should just be glad that they escaped tar and feathers.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Listen to audio (MP3)Comments(0)
Humanity’s wisdom is often distilled in easy-to-remember, concise sayings. Maxims. Aphorisms. Problem is, these eloquent exhortations often contradict each other.
For example: “Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.” Just take what you’re given and don’t question its value.
But: “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.” This one says you should worry about the gift, especially if the source is enemies at the gate wishing you harm. Of course, in the myth, the Trojans soon regret accepting that giant gift horse. Because once it is well inside the city, a lot of Greeks pop out wielding spears and swords.
I believe you do have to look at the consequences of accepting gifts, especially gifts from the government. Especially ongoing funding of an enterprise. What strings are attached? Will costs outweigh benefits?
So I applaud the advice of Jack Baribeau, president of Citizen Impact Canada. He says religious groups should think twice about accepting direct government funding of faith-based schools.
Baribeau said his study of education funding in America shows that governments tend to impose controls over activities they finance. He worries that new Canadian efforts to bring religious schools under the umbrella of the public school system could end up shoving private schools into a “one size fits all” model.
Indeed something to worry about, for Canadians and her neighbors too. The word the government uses to justify controls over the activities it funds is “accountability.” What it means is encroachment.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Listen to audio (MP3)Comments(0)
What’s the definition of a “flaw” when it comes to Utah’s new school voucher law?
In my view, the law is “flawed” if it doesn’t go far enough in unshackling families from failed schools. A group called Utahns for Public Schools says so too. Sort of.
According to the Utahns for Public Schools web site, one problem with the new law is that not every location in Utah has private schools, so not every family would be able to benefit.
The site also complains that where private schools do exist, tuition often costs more than the vouchers would pay. So . . . the problem is that the new law will only make it easier for parents to find a better education for their kids?
But these are phony-baloney objections, which becomes clear when you look at the other objections the site supplies. One is that private schools aren’t subjected to the same “oversight” as public schools, the same tangle of bureaucratic regulations. Private schools are private schools. Accountable not to bureaucrats but to parents. See the problem?
The group also complains that too little money is being spent on the state’s public schools. The real “flaw” is clear: if implemented, vouchers might indeed begin to chip away at the public school monopoly.
Referendum 1 on the Utah ballot this November would uphold school choice. I vote yes: new choices are better than the old monopoly.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Comments(0)
Why would taxpayers send money to the federal government that was ultimately intended to come back to their state or local governments?
That’s a recipe for losing a big chunk of our education dollars to those sticky-fingered federal fellows. And any money the feds send back, always comes saddled with a lot of silly mandates about how we locals can spend what is, after all, our own money.
In 2006, taxpayers were forced to fund the U.S. Department of Education to the tune of $57 billion. Of this, $44 billion slushed back to states and localities. But even the money returned by the federal government is often misspent. By mandate.
In a column for the Washington Examiner, Timothy Carney explains how one such mandate empowers pork-barrel politics, not education. Senators Jeff Bingaman, Patty Murray and Richard Burr have introduced legislation entitled the Achievement Through Technology and Innovation Act. The bill would require local schools to spend this federal grant money on computers, software and related training.
Carney points out there is much doubt about the effectiveness of educational software. He suggests that this legislation won’t help educate kids, but it “will certainly brighten the prospects of America’s software makers.”
Long ago Ronald Reagan advocated abolishing the federal Department of Education because, for all the money it spends, it doesn’t educate one single child. Our young people are educated at the local level.
Let’s keep all our education tax dollars at the local level. And the feds can keep their mandates.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Listen to audio (MP3)Comments(0)
Washington, D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty has taken full control over his city’s long suffering public schools. But he sends his own twin girls to a private school.
Does that make him a hypocrite? A bad mayor? Or, perhaps, just a good father?
Fenty is not alone. Many big city mayors educate their kids privately. A far greater percentage of public school teachers — especially in urban areas — send their own kids to private schools than does the general public. And a 2003 survey of members of Congress found that 41 percent of U.S. representatives and 46 percent of U.S. senators now send or have sent at least one of their children to a private school.
Granted, there is hypocrisy at work. Many of these folks stump for public schooling, opposing systems of private school choice. And yet, they choose to opt out of the system they allegedly shore up . . . from competition. The kind they themselves rely upon.
Years ago, during a campaign, Fenty pledged to send his kids to public schools. So, if voters want to hold that against him, they have every right to do so. My point is only that had Fenty — or any politician or educator — made the opposite decision, wouldn’t that be even worse?
Mayor Fenty’s choice boils down to this: Should he put the public schools ahead of his own children? Or should he put his children ahead of the public schools?
Which would you put first?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Comments(0)
Something a bit odd is happening in Michigan. Public school districts are advertising . . . in newspapers, on radio, through the mail.
All sorts of enterprises advertise for customers, of course. What's odd is that it still seems odd . . . for education.
In Michigan it's happening because of a new set of laws regarding "schools of choice." The state now allows school districts to accept students out of district. And this means more school choice than before.
And where there's choice, there's advertising.
"It's an investment," said Greg Byndrian, a spokesman for the Detroit Public School District, which sports a $93,000 marketing budget. "You don't have to attract many students to recoup that," he stated.
A charter school in Pontiac, on the other hand, eschews buying media time. But it does send fliers out in the mail, and puts up posters in two languages. Still, the school insists that most of its success in attracting students comes directly from past educational success, spread by word of mouth.
But before you wonder about how important advertising is, consider another novel idea some districts have begun to offer: customer service. They are actually training employees to help parents navigate through the school system.
There are critics of all this, of course. They think schools should concentrate on what they do best: improving education.
But, ahem, before these competitive programs, the schools weren't improving all that much.
So, what next? Why, more competition. Of course!
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
Listen to audio (MP3)Comments(1)
Suggest a reform of the public schools and prepare for the firestorm. You will be attacked. Many who have favored choice for students, including paying tuition to private schools, get accused of wanting to destroy the public schools.
And yet today a public school faces closure. Not only has the public school system in Anne Arundel county, Maryland not come to its aid, the system seems openly hostile.
You see, the school is KIPP Harbor Academy. KIPP stands for Knowledge Is Power Program. The program is nationally recognized for its success with low-income students. The KIPP Harbor Academy is a charter public school.
It took a public outcry to get the Anne Arundel County School Board to reverse its initial rejection and allow the school even to open. Now, after showing success, Harbor Academy desperately seeks space for its program. But a public school at only 38 percent of capacity mysteriously denied the Academy's request to hold classes there.
The board of the Maryland Hall for the Creative Arts also denied the academy space, by just two votes. It did not go unnoticed that three of those on the arts board just happen to be with the school system.
What gives? You might want to call Anne Arundel County School Superintendent Kevin Maxwell, who recently said, "It's not my responsibility. It's not my school." His phone number is (410) 222-5303.
Politely ask him: Is education for the children? Or not?
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
Comments(0)
What's wrong with the Oklahoma Supreme Court? Maybe the justices don't quite get the gist of citizen government.
You see, the court threw a voter initiative, called the 65 Percent Solution, off the ballot. The measure would have mandated that 65 percent of school funds be spent in the classroom actually teaching kids.
In Oklahoma only 58 percent of education funds are spent in the classroom.
The Oklahoma State School Boards Association challenged the petition in court. The group's executive director, Dr. Keith Ballard, said, "We are very much in favor of as much money as possible going into instruction."
Only thing is . . . they aren't at all in favor of any such thing.
Dr. Ballard argued, "Other areas would have suffered greatly." And he pointed out "the great resistance that this had in the education community."
Funny, I don't think Ballard sees the great support among parents for spending education money on education. You know, in the classroom. Where our children just happen to be.
Ballard and his so-called "education community" argued that the short explanation on the petition, called the gist statement, was misleading. Of course, anyone not certain what they were signing had a full copy of the measure available on every petition.
Still, the court ruled that the hundreds of thousands of Oklahoma voters didn't know what they were signing. Once again, the court has protected Sooner State citizens from the awful rigors of decision-making.
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
Comments(2)
Good hard data. It's hard to beat.
The great thing about getting info about government is that much of what we are told about government spending isn't quite true.
Friends of mine all over the country often relate their frustration. Does every state's teachers' union claim that pay for teachers in their state is "one of the lowest" in the country? Or just most?
Not every one of those claims can be true.
I guess that helps explain why the Evergreen Freedom Foundation of Olympia, Washington, publishes an annual database of the salary of each public school teacher in the state. The third annual report came out in late March, allowing curious voters to research and compare.
One friend there claims to have never before envied teachers their jobs, other than their vacation time. But, after looking at his neighbors' incomes, he's thinking of trying envy. He wouldn't have, he admitted, had not the state's union recently run ads about how little the state spends on teachers.
I advised him against this whole envy thing. But I saw his point. He's a voter. People keep telling him that governments don't spend enough. And, comparing the prevailing private-sector wages available in his depressed area of the state, and the wages of public employees, he doesn't see how anyone with a lick of sense could buy the rhetoric.
Information has consequences. Maybe that's why in the past it's been so hard to get this information.
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
(To listen to this edition of Common Sense online, click here.)
Listen to audio (MP3)Comments(0)
