Thanks For Your Opinion

12 Responses to “Thanks For Your Opinion”

1. martin kennedy writes
   June 15th, 2009 10:52 am

   Cute. They - Obama, Alexander, Dean - were able to excercise educational choice by virtue of their relative affluence. They merely want to extend that opportunity to others. Turner wants to limit choice.

   Where an official sends (sent) his or her kids is only relavent if he favors limiting choice for others.

2. Steve Steffens (LeftWingCracker) writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:08 am

   OK, I’ll accept the idea of charter schools, even vouchers, on ONE condition: that they accept ANY and ALL children who come to them, regardless of ability to pay, regardless of developmental issues, regardless of anything. NO CHERRY-PICKING.

   If someone from North Nashville shows up at MBA with a voucher, they HAVE to take them. Same deal with charter schools, no cherry-picking, why should the problem children be relegated to the public schools, that is NOT equal opportunity.

3. Steve Steffens (LeftWingCracker) writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:08 am

   OK, I’ll accept the idea of charter schools, even vouchers, on ONE condition: that they accept ANY and ALL children who come to them, regardless of ability to pay, regardless of developmental issues, regardless of anything. NO CHERRY-PICKING.

   If someone from North Nashville shows up at MBA with a voucher, they HAVE to take them. Same deal with charter schools, no cherry-picking, why should the problem children be relegated to the public schools, that is NOT equal opportunity.

4. Steve Steffens (LeftWingCracker) writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:10 am

   oops, sorry about the double-post.

   My belief is that the voucher/charter schools movement is about re-segregation of the schools, this time based on class instead of race, but it’s still segregation, and no one is for that. RIGHT?

5. nedwilliams writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:26 am

   Wow, that’s quite an assertion LWC. The affluence of a kid’s parents has nothing to do with my support for vouchers.

6. martin kennedy writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:35 am

   LWC, You must be joking. “Re-segregation” of schools based on class? What the sam hill do we have going on now? 70% of Metro Nashville and 80% of Memphis students are on free and reduced lunch.

   You can hardly get more (class) segregation.

7. martin kennedy writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:36 am

   Most children attending Ensworth, MBA, and Harpeth Hall do not qaulify for free and reduced lunch.

8. martin kennedy writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:52 am

   I find the “cherry-picking” issue largely a smokescreen. That’s not to say there aren’t legitimate questions. Our (Davidson County) academic magnets “cherry pick.” Worse, they “cherry pick” out of a hat; a rich kid’s name is equally likely to get picked as a poor kid’s name. On cherry-picking and class segregation I don’t think anyone supports forcing a school to opt into a program that includes public funding.

   The emergence of charter schools would provide an option for those who can’t affort places like MBA. Some parents for example would prefer a single-gender option. Obviously the market supports such alternatives and would support more if more people could be brought into the market - empowered with choice like their more affluent neighbors.

9. common sense writes
   June 15th, 2009 11:55 am

   Martin, I agree with your perspective to an extent, but I still think Mike Turner is right (and he oughtta know - he’s in the trenches every day). The real problem here (the pink elephant) is that groups of homeschoolers, libertarians, private school advocates, etc., are all trying to destroy the public school system because they think schools are about indoctrination (closing the mind) rather than education (opening the mind). If you believe that education is about telling kids what to think, you’re going to act one way. If you believe that education is about teaching kids HOW to think critically, you’re going to act another way.

10. Freddie O'Connell writes
    June 15th, 2009 12:02 pm

    How does creating strong, independent public schools (charter schools) in any way “destroy the public school system”?

11. Steve Steffens (LeftWingCracker) writes
    June 15th, 2009 12:02 pm

    Common sense says it better than I did. I am all for giving kids the best possible chance to achieve, but it’s hard to achieve if all those who can achieve leave, providing them no role models. I am a firm believer in mixing of classes, races, etc.

12. martin kennedy writes
    June 15th, 2009 1:14 pm

    We’re already into double-digit comments and the back and forth entails no name calling or other ad-hominem attacks. That’s progress.

    Perhaps you’re right CS. There’s no proving or disproving the motivations/intentions of various types of people. I do think that you paint with a pretty broad brush. We’ve homeschooled. We’ve sent a child to private school, and have had many at Metro public schools. I’ve found myriad motivations, styles, attitudes, and tastes among homeschoolers.

    Private school folks? Same roughly. Education, as a consumption decision, is fascinating. Perception is extremely important. People make decisions based on perceptions. They want their children (K-12) to go to a “good” school and mingle with “good” people. There is no question in my mind that income and race are used by many to determine whether a school is good (high income = good, white = good). Race and class are easy to observe.

    Often I try to evaluate policy from the perspective of a person waiting to be born into a society, a person who does not know where, in what race, or what class he will be born into. From that pespective I don’t think anyone would disagree that expanded choice would be preferred.