Vouchers
Don’t hold back, people. Tell me what you really think about my voucher bill. Are you with me?!
I’m very sad that it didn’t pass. I concluded that vouchers would have been good for individuals and the education system. But, the people disagreed.
Fair enough.
Along with some silliness on both sides, we had some of the best public dialogue we’ve had on education in a very long time. Though over-the-top commentary frequently gets reported and facile or fictional talking points find legs, I enjoyed many tremendous conversations with (often tremendously informed) individuals, both favoring and opposing vouchers. Those conversations involved people earnestly trying to figure out how to best educate our children.
Such discussions form a potential basis for significant improvement – if we can figure out how to keep the discussions going and how to collaborate on possible approaches and solutions. I would hope we have broad agreement that (1) parents need to be more involved in their children’s education, (2) Utah’s educational system needs to adequately (and, some day, exceptionally) prepare our children for college, the workforce, and the world, (3) incentives need to be in place to attract/retain great teachers and encourage bad teachers to improve or, if not, leave, and (4) public education needs greater funding.
I’m not sure the Legislature can do much about Point 1. I’m confident that the Legislature will take care of Point 4.
Points 2 and 3 are the wildcards. Without the serious involvement of informed citizens, nothing will happen on points 2 and 3. And, far more than the fate of one piece of legislation, that would be tragic.
On a personal note: Utahns have class. I’ve received many calls and emails. Surprisingly few suggest that I throw myself off a cliff. Most (from both sides of the issue) said they enjoyed the debate and hope that we can use the increased attention to further improve education in Utah. My sincere appreciation goes out to everyone who gave their time to engage in the political process. To my friends on the winning side: congratulations; please don’t gloat over the rest of us too long; we have work to do. To my friends on the losing side: I’m very sorry – especially if I came up short in any way; please don’t be bitter or disengage; we have work to do.
I’m very sad that it didn’t pass. I concluded that vouchers would have been good for individuals and the education system. But, the people disagreed.
Fair enough.
Along with some silliness on both sides, we had some of the best public dialogue we’ve had on education in a very long time. Though over-the-top commentary frequently gets reported and facile or fictional talking points find legs, I enjoyed many tremendous conversations with (often tremendously informed) individuals, both favoring and opposing vouchers. Those conversations involved people earnestly trying to figure out how to best educate our children.
Such discussions form a potential basis for significant improvement – if we can figure out how to keep the discussions going and how to collaborate on possible approaches and solutions. I would hope we have broad agreement that (1) parents need to be more involved in their children’s education, (2) Utah’s educational system needs to adequately (and, some day, exceptionally) prepare our children for college, the workforce, and the world, (3) incentives need to be in place to attract/retain great teachers and encourage bad teachers to improve or, if not, leave, and (4) public education needs greater funding.
I’m not sure the Legislature can do much about Point 1. I’m confident that the Legislature will take care of Point 4.
Points 2 and 3 are the wildcards. Without the serious involvement of informed citizens, nothing will happen on points 2 and 3. And, far more than the fate of one piece of legislation, that would be tragic.
On a personal note: Utahns have class. I’ve received many calls and emails. Surprisingly few suggest that I throw myself off a cliff. Most (from both sides of the issue) said they enjoyed the debate and hope that we can use the increased attention to further improve education in Utah. My sincere appreciation goes out to everyone who gave their time to engage in the political process. To my friends on the winning side: congratulations; please don’t gloat over the rest of us too long; we have work to do. To my friends on the losing side: I’m very sorry – especially if I came up short in any way; please don’t be bitter or disengage; we have work to do.
posted by steve u. at 11/07/2007
Subscribe
26 Comments:
Nice post. I do agree that there has been some constructive dialogue about education amidst the chaff.
Thanks Steve, for showing class and statesmanlike vision. More work ahead.
I first want to thank you for all the support you gave Utah’s voucher issue, but even more, I want to thank you for your commitment to the education of diverse learners.
One of my biggest concerns in regards to the voucher issue is that now that it has been defeated, everything will go back to status quo…and our diverse learners will continue to not be served. Status quo must not be an option. Forty to sixty percent of our Hispanic students not graduating from Utah’s high schools is unacceptable.
The late Dr. Ronald Edmonds from Harvard said almost 30 years ago:
We can, whenever and wherever we choose, successfully
teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We
already know more than we need to do that. Whether or
not we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the
fact that we haven’t so far.
We must now hold all anti-voucher people and organizations accountable to design and implement all the components of a strategic plan that will address the needs of diverse learners.
I am an educator who has done in depth research the last 8 + years to find what works for diverse learners, especially Hispanic students. Last spring I was accepted into BYU’s Ed Leadership doctorate program, and this issue is my focus. Therefore, I know what needs to be included in a strategic plan that will be effective for our diverse learners.
Utah definitely has a challenge—actually an exciting challenge. Yet it is important to remember what Stephen Covey says in his book, The 8th Habit: He says that nothing fails like success. When there is a challenge and the response is equal to the challenge that is success. BUT when there is a new challenge, the old once-successful response no longer works. If it is the response implemented, it will result in failure.
This is what we are doing in our schools that are no longer predominantly white.
And Abraham Lincoln said, “The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present.” To meet the new challenges will take us out of our comfort zones.
I am, as I know you are, committed to doing whatever it takes, including stepping out of a comfort zone, to make a difference for our diverse learners.
Please let me know how I can help.
Barbara Lovejoy
548-1538
bclovejoy@msn.com
I suspect those who won this debate may feel a sense of hollow victory since, as Lovejoy points out, "everything will go back to status quo." Both teachers and parents complain relentlessly about our school system, and finally something new was offered. "Do I dare disturb the universe?" Utah voters said "No."
Steve,
Great post. Ric described it best: Statesmanlike.
I think your action items in this post are right on. It feels good to be completely on your side in a policy discussion!
Steve,
Some thoughts for future discussions:
On the money side, focus on the simple. It costs the state $7500 to educate a kid in public school, $2000 in private. Don't get lost in the morass of public school financing.
Public schools are good. Private schools are good. No mudslinging.
There is an opportunity to help some kids that go through rough patchs and need some extra attention (semi-tutoring) or discipline that the public schools can't offer. It may only be a year or two. Public and private schools should be working together. (UPASS testing is needed to make sure kids can move from one school to another easily.)
I think if you drive those types of simple, positive points home that progress can be made.
To say I am frustrated with the public's reaction to this referendum would be an understatement. The most glaring point from the voucher foes is the LACK of a point - now that they have their victory, what do they propose to help make the system better, and do NOT tell me "more money". That, in itself, is not the answer. Students are frustrated with the status quo. Parents are frustrated. Teachers are frustrated. The only ones that don't seem to be frustrated are those on the school board, those that head up the UEA, or those in administrative offices of the various districts.
Again, I ask - now that a suggestion for reform has been made, and has been soundly rejected, what does everyone else propose we do?
So the *new* answer is that "(4) public education needs greater funding." Say what?
Haven't we been doing that for years now? Can't we all agree that there has only been a *decline* in the performance of our public school system? Throwing more money at the school *will not* fix the problem.
Vouchers would have improved the education of our children by allowing us to bypass the failing public school system. That didn't work out, so now what can we do now to improve our children's education?
More money is *not* the answer.
Amen
Steve,
I know I've been dogging you for the past several weeks over the numbers regarding your voucher bill, but I just want you to know that I really appreciate this post. As opposed to Patrick Byrne's comments from Tuesday night, your post is an example of grace in defeat.
Don
The voucher legislation was comprehensive; if not with the first bill, then with the second.
It's hard to pinpoint with something so broad, exactly what is so distasteful.
I can't help but think that there is some unremarkable way of small reform that can fit onto a bumper sticker.
I think, this next session, we need a series of bills that are no-brainers; that don't require a majority of people to read the legislation to understand its finer points.
As I read through the rest of the comments, I see that many voucher supporters are still stuck whining about the failure of a bad bill.
Come on people, this thing was not going to be the magic panacea you all claim it would have been. It would have helped relatively few people who really needed it at the expense of subsidizing many who don't. I'm proud of Utahns for not succumbing to the fear tactics employed by PCE and Patrick Byrne.
Now that it's over, let's move forward and focus on solutions to help those who really need it. A targeted voucher program to low income students who aren't being served by their local public schools may be part of the solution. I'm willing to look at any program that is not a waste of public dollars and has the proper accountability to taxpayers for their contribution to any such program.
Great post.
Utahns have said no to vouchers, but hopefully this debate will encourage our legislature to finally direct some much needed attention to our education system.
What you've written here is a reaction more of our elected officials should emulate.
Everything fight can be converted into an opportunity for discourse and progress.
Thanks for putting this up.
Steve,
Thank you for the post. It helps to know that you are willing to continue working for the betterment of public education. As for your point #3, listen carefully and you will hear a proposal from the (gulp) UEA regarding mentoring of brand new teachers. It really is a good idea and, I believe, that increasing the pool of good teachers will open up heretofore unavailable options for administrators. Also, look into the State Board’s compensation plan. It’s probably not perfect but it has workable components for performance and hazard pay.
For point #2, there is no way to sidestep the fact that we have some pretty bad schools. We even know which ones are bad. The UPASS system reports schools that are a) not meeting expectations and b) not improving. It is a short list but there are some schools on that list. We need to ask ourselves if we would send our own children to a school that isn’t performing well and is not improving. I know I wouldn’t and I also know I wouldn’t want anybody else to. This will sound very harsh but schools that stay on that list for any length of time at all need to be closed.
Perhaps Utah voters would better accept the use of education vouchers when there are targeted justifications for leaving the public schools. The one used in the voucher programs that have been established in some cities and states have been spectacular failurtes of public schools. Another could be the failure of public schools as to a particular student.
That failure could be for several reasons. One might be a need for special services to students with disabilities. Why pay extra money for adapting for a few students if they can attend a perfectly good private school that is adapted to them? I know this goes against the doctrine of "mainstreaming" but in my view mainstreaming for the severely disabled is a disservice to both the disabled student and his classmates, as well as to a teacher who tries to teach both when they have vastly different needs.
A student who has a poor record of discipline might be more successful in a private school that can appeal to a student's and family's religious beliefs to motivate him, and can remind him of those religious commitments throughout the school day rather than feeling compelled by concerns over "establishment of religion" to actually avoid the kind of moral education he needs.
Language abilities can be a crucial difference. I certainly support educating students to learn English and learn in English. At the same time, during the transition, the student is going to be severely handicapped in competing with his peers, and teachers are going to be torn between "dumbing down" the class so he can follow it, and challenging the rest of the class so it isn't bored and restless and doesn't learn.
Then there gifted students. They are able to read or do mathematics or science or languages at a level exceeding their age group. In secondary schools they can be moved to more advanced classes, up to a point. In elementary schools, though, they might get an hour a week of special instruction, and are bored and restless and not actually learning. They are being held back by the standard curriculum.
I was one of those kids. In elementary school and junior high, I was studying on my own while sitting in class. I lacked the specific directed study and peer interaction that a school that addressed my abilities could have provided. I ended up going to college instead of 12th grade.
In the wake of the refusal of the majority to endorse vouchers, Utah should examine objectively how well public schools are serving the diverse needs of students, and give parents the option of getting an education through private schools that is better adapted to each child's needs. We should not be preserving the status quo because it serves teachers and the UEA well. Students should be the first priority, and students are diverse in their educational needs.
Your item #2 warrants discussion and debate. How do we know that Utah's educational system does not prepare our children for college, the workforce and the world? How will we know when it does? How much control does our education system really have over this outcome since we are dealing with humans and not a consumable commodity? I can agree with you on points 1,3 & 4 but I would need additional clarification on #2. The old cliche "you can lead a horse to want but you can't make him drink" comes to mind.
I am rocked by the comments above. If they are at all representative of the thoughts of Utahns, then I am floored.
If the discussions we've recently had on education now allow discussion on once-tabboo topics (like paying good teachers more than bad teachers), that would be great. But I've gotta say, I don't really believe it.
Barbara,
Great question. A major jolt moved me onto the reform path. In 2001 or 2002, the then-president of UVSC told the higher education committee that 1/2 of his entering freshman had to take remedial math and 1/3 had to take remedial English. He then twisted the knife by saying that those were his Utah students, not his out-of-state students. The numbers differ between institutions, but they are similar and they are representative of the problem.
I've always been clear that I think public ed does a real good job. But, after digging into the data, I've also been clear that I think we can improve.
As many of you have noted, money is part of the equation. But it is not the sum total of the equation.
I like the idea of "failing student" vouchers, but that still doesn't address the need for more "Choice" for parents of students that aren't failing. If the people wont pass a universal voucher system, then the public schools need to step up and increase choice within the current system. This could mean more Magnet schools, IB schools, special needs schools, ESL schools... and they should do something about failing schools. Give vouchers to the students at schools that an independent agency has determined to be "failing". Maybe the parents could be involved in ascertaining whether their local public school is educating their children properly. These ideas about choice and accountability within the public school system aren't going to go away. Parents won't let them.
Don - I am not whining in defeat. I am simply asking what the voucher foes have in mind for reform. Those of us who were pro-voucher (and still are) have made a proposal. The voters spoke. Now what do those who spoke have in their pockets as suggestions for reform? We ALL concede the fact that the education system needs reform (or is flat out broken).
Matt - thank you for your post. I agree that we need something more than just a "failing student" voucher. That does not address those students who are more advanced and need more of a challenge or for the parents who truly want to send their students somewhere other than the school where they live. A family should not be restricted to sending their children to a school simply because they live within a certain area. More choice is an absolute MUST.
Steve,
I used to live in Utah and now live in your neighbor to the north.
Just an idea . .
Why not ask school districts to volunteer as educational laboratories?
I envision maybe 3-5 districts participating where each tried for three years a radically different approach to education.
Where would the ideas come from? What if players with major ideas each put together a package that was then adopted by an individual school district.
For instance, UEA could propose a program of $1000 more per student, dramatically reduced class size and enhanced teacher pay.
The Sutherland Institute could propose a structure where the schools were broken up into sub-schools, each run by groups of teachers and parents, in direct competition with each other. So, a high school might have common sports teams and lunch facilities but be broken up into 5-6 mini-schools, each run separately under the same roof --- of course with dollars following the individual student.
Each reform package would then be able for districts to pick --- but on a first-come, only one district a package basis.
They would be run full tilt for three years, each year with extensive legislative hearings.
After three years the program could be re-evaluated and expanded.
Thoughts ???
For the sake of giving suggestions:
1. Get the equalization of school buildings budget fixed right. The biggest part of that IS more funding. We have a fund that is equalized to do this. It just isn't funded enough to make much difference, and it hasn't been increased near enough to compensate for increased costs and growth. So "more money" IS a big part of fixing or "reforming" things. And please DON'T make it a state or legislature controlled building board!
2. Do whatever you can to assist the division of Jordan School District including the costs of dividing. That could be the biggest reform in public education in 100 years (when consolidation was introduced). Here we can set up a whole new district without specific traditions or power grids in place!
3. I would require one and ONLY one major test per year. Perhaps the NAEP in 4th and 8th, IOWA test in 6th and 11th, state CORE tests for all other grades AND NO MORE! Let us teach!
4. Curriculum leaders are driving us crazy with too much inservice and telling us how to teach our classes. They want teachers to individualize everything because every student is different, yet want every teacher to do things exactly alike. Teachers are different too.
5. Be careful of cries to "meet the needs of every child". To individualize everything is VERY expensive teaching - sort of like tutoring. Also it usually slows down academic advancement as everyone slows down to what feels comfortable. Learning is work! Students need to step up to the plate and do the work necessary to learn. Too many parents, who won't make their kids do the work part, have become very vocal in decrying educators, because of the constant political carping about public education. They feel justified in their complaints despite their lack of effort. This is undermining education, and too often board members and legislators listen to those complaints without seeing what is really happening.
6. The federal government (I would give up the funding to get out of NCLB.) and court decisions (and big district curriculum departments too!) are increasing the costs of education dramatically, and we (teachers) have no power to alter that. It's easy to say improve without increasing the budget, but we are falling behind because funding isn't keeping up with the increasing burden. Unless the legislature and state board can find ways to ease those increasing burdens, you MUST find more money just to keep even - without reforms. That isn't whining. It's just reality. The privatized medicine isn't staying within current budgets. How can we do so with the ever increasing burden?
I'll stop there. These are my top priorities in that order.
David
The UEA is not the bad guy. It is an association of educators whose proposals to improve education actually work - they are research-based and other states implement them, giving their public schools the opportunity to provide top-rate educations. Their proposals are: 1. reduce class size. Believe it or not, it makes a difference. When 5 students leave my classroom (out of 25), it is amazing how much more one-on-one I can provide. Many states have legislated a maximum amount a classroom can have. Utah needs to do the same, for all grades. This costs money, but it will increase student learning, the ultimate goal. 2. UEA has proposed professional pay for quality teachers. Wyoming and Colorado associations, in cooperation with their state legislatures, have raised starting teacher salaries to $40,000. This attracts quality candidates to the profession. Experienced teachers with masters degrees, who have demonstrated student learning, earn $80,000. Most teachers, and their associations, like the idea of merit pay. The problem arises, though, when you just tie it to test scores. Teachers and the school are only 1/3 a part of the equation of a child's quality of education. The child himself (personal motivation/ability), and homelife/parental support and involvement are the other 2/3s that teachers have no control over. When places like DC spend so much money on education, and yet have low test scores, it is because of the parts of the equation that educators cannot control. You can't tie their pay to issues they will never be able to overcome. If Utahns and the legislature stopped blaming the UEA (whose members are teachers who care about kids) for all of education's shortcomings, and instead treated them as professionals with the expertise to know what works, progress can be made.
Rep. Urquhart,
Thank you for the gracious demeanor of your posts. Your communication style engenders trust even though I have strongly disagreed with many of your ideas. I think anyone taking a side on an issue has to be careful of an echo chamber. As the sponsor of HB 148 in the county that had the closest vote on the referendum, your audience will almost certainly over represent the pro-voucher side of the argument compared to the general population. I’m seeing arguments and suggestions made from certain base assumptions.
The base assumptions here that our school system is “failing” are not absolute truths; the money “thrown” at a constantly growing school system has never caught up with demand or been “wasted.” The cost of living: housing, gas, groceries, utilities, and the tuition and salaries at our “free market” colleges have all increased roughly on par with the higher amount of funding per student in K-12 since the eighties. We get by, and I feel very fortunate to own a modest home (We could have netted $50-70,000 by selling our home 6 months after buying because of the astronomical price inflation. That bubble has popped a little bit, but we still couldn’t afford to buy our own home on today’s market.), but it is insulting and inaccurate to claim teachers are whiners for needing at least a measure of predictability and security as we try to plan for college costs, retirement, etc. If my second child had been born a year earlier, my fourth year teacher salary would have qualified my family to be federally subsidized through the WIC program.
The UEA bashing is a strawman. Most of those 62% against Ref. 1 were educated in Utah public schools. They knew horrible teachers, but also were challenged and uplifted by teachers such as those who inspired me to choose my profession. After speaking with my senator, I think we may be working from a completely different perception of public sympathy. Utahns had great teachers in school; enjoy great teachers as neighbors; go to church with great teachers; and personally know teachers’ families well enough to not buy the money and power stuff. The altered tone of the KSL and D-news message boards today (both those boards ran heavily pro-voucher, pro-legislature during the last few months) about the proposal to raise legislative pay 7.7% while still retaining automatic cost-of-living increases and the lengthy (lifetime?) free healthcare perk shows that we generally identify with the common man.
Schools can’t solve all of society’s problems; teachers actually do care; honest disagreements on the best methods to accomplish the incredibly complex task of educating young people do exist; “union power” is a false label for the widespread support of publicly funded education being for the common good; good proposals can take hold if all of us put our defenses aside a little bit. (I’ve got some of this in my blog and plan to add more over the next couple weeks, including something I think would help both the teacher improvement and removal aspects of your pt. #3.)
Thanks,
UtahTeacher
Some things that need to happen to improve education in Utah include:
1. A starting salary for teachers that would not qualify a family of four for welfare.
2. Get rid of NCLB. The State can come up with a better way to hold teachers, students and parents accountable for the students' learning.
3. The Legislature shouldn't spend time on bills that change "UEA Break" to "Fall Recess". Instead spend time on bills that promote research-based education practices.
4. Parents and students need to remember or be taught how to respect those in authority.
Unfortunately #4 would be the one that would have the most immediate and visible impact, but needs to be done in the home before the children start school, and it cannot be legislated.
Some of the legislators who supported the bill have expressed the sentiment that they need to explain the bill better. I find that to be an attitude of some arrogance. I think that they have it wrong. They don't need to speak more or more loudly - they need to listen. The people are indeed speaking and did so before the voting took place. The referendum was a virtual shout, and I hope that at least a few of the legislators have listened and will seek solutions that are more in line with what the people of the state want (not just certain special interests).
Post a Comment
<< Home