Republican Assault on Public Education (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    MT15

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Mar 13, 2019
    Messages
    19,457
    Reaction score
    26,663
    Location
    Midwest
    Offline
    This probably needs its own thread. It ties in with a lot of different R culture wars: Attacks on universities, attacks on CRT and “woke”. Classifying teachers and librarians as “groomers”. Pushing vouchers to send tax money to private, often religious, schools. Betsy DeVos was an advocate for all these policies that will weaken public education, and there are several billionaires who also want to dismantle public education. Public education may have its faults, but it is responsible for an amazing amount of upward mobility. Kids from poor areas can still get a college prep education in a public school.

    Vouchers (sometimes disguised as “school choice”) are a particular peeve of mine. Public money is diverted from poor schools to wealthy private schools, which aren’t required to offer accommodations for special needs or challenged students. Families with special needs kids are left out. Rural areas often suffer disproportionately because there are no private schools to attend, but their public schools still see the reduction in funding. Often the families who take advantage of the voucher money are upper class and the private schools simply raise tuition knowing the families are getting taxpayer money now.

    Greg Abbot is being particularly vile in this area. No surprise. Voters will have to make a statement about public education. If we want to halt the growing divide in this country between the “haves” and “have-nots”, we need to pay attention to public education.

     
    This should be publicized far and wide. Public funds given to well-to-do families and removed from public schools.

     
    Tennessee is a mess. I still have lots of friends there after spending 4 years going to school in Knoxville. And most of those I am still in contact with are really worried.
     
    They are just now figuring out what their laws will actually allow ….. just not too bright.

     
    They are just now figuring out what their laws will actually allow ….. just not too bright.


    Looks like you are following a lot of the same people/topics I am, at least on voucher issues. There's a LOT of idiocy out there about vouchers and the people in favor of them spout almost all of the nonsense one after the other.
     
    Phil Williams liked my reply!!
    1702577285552.png
     
    guess I'll put this here


    No other state spends less on school infrastructure per student than Idaho. As a result, many students, especially those in rural districts, deal with leaking ceilings, freezing classrooms and discolored drinking water. Some students have to miss school when the power or heat goes out.
     
    guess I'll put this here


    No other state spends less on school infrastructure per student than Idaho. As a result, many students, especially those in rural districts, deal with leaking ceilings, freezing classrooms and discolored drinking water. Some students have to miss school when the power or heat goes out.

    If a state doesn't want to participate in providing basic necessities to its citizens, especially the children, can we just kick them the hell out of the country?
     
    guess this can go here
    ================

    When Melanie Elsey stepped up to the lectern at the Ohio Statehouse in April, it looked like a triumphant season for home-schoolers.

    Lawmakers would soon roll back what little oversight the state exercised over its booming population of home educators. Now they were discussing what should have been an equally welcome policy. As part of an expansive school-choice bill, Republican legislators wanted to offer home-schoolers thousands of dollars in taxpayer funding each year.

    Yet Elsey, a former home-school mom representing Christian Home Educators of Ohio — the state’s oldest and most influential home-schooling association — delivered a surprising message to members of a House education committee: Home-schoolers didn’t want the money.

    “These families value their freedom to direct and provide educational opportunities for their children,” she said. Ohio home-schooling leaders worried that if they accepted government funding they would also be forced to accept government regulation of the kind that the home-schooling movement had spent decades dismantling.

    The situation in Ohio illustrates the extraordinary moment at which America’s home-schooling movement finds itself after nearly a half-century of activism.

    Few causes have enjoyed more success. In the 1980s, it was illegal in most of the United States for parents who weren’t trained educators to teach their children at home.

    Only three states impose mandatory testing on most home-schooled children. A majority of states don’t require any form of academic assessment — and even in those that do, the results are often ignored. Over the summer, Vermont Education Agency officials persuaded legislators to end a requirement that home-schoolers send instructional plans and assessment results to the state, saying it lacked the staff to review them.

    The number of families in this largely unmonitored educational landscape has soared, growing at a rate far faster than the population of public or private schools. A Washington Post analysis estimated there could be as many as 2.7 million home-schooled children in the United States, up from about 1.5 million before the pandemic.

    But there are signs that the mainstream may be a less comfortable place than the margins for the activists who shaped America’s hands-off approach to home education...........

     
    Ohio requires schools to teach students that having a child outside of marriage is bad for them, their child and society overall.

    Two school districts pushed back.

    Kadee Anstadt, superintendent of Washington Local School District near Toledo, said she won't tell children that they are doomed to be unsuccessful because of their family structure.

    "All kids can be successful, regardless of the kinds of families they come from, and our kids come from all kinds of families," Anstadt told the USA TODAY Network Ohio Bureau. "We cannot be sitting in judgment of what people's families look like, and I'm certainly not going to put that in curriculum."

    For that stance, Washington Local School District was marked "noncompliant" with Ohio's standards for venereal disease and sexual education instruction on an annual state report. It was joined by Ridgewood Local Schools near Coshocton, which indicated: "We do not agree with teaching all the information below."

    They were the only two districts out of more than 600 to raise issues with the curriculum requirements. In Ohio, 42.6% of children are born to unmarried parents and more than one-third of children live with one parent.

    Besides a phone call and a letter, there are no practical consequences for not complying. The school district doesn't lose money and won't get a lower grade on their next report card. Anstadt quipped that she probably wouldn't be named superintendent of the year.

    Anstadt said she doesn't want anyone to think the district's sexual education is lacking because of its "noncompliant" status. "I would put our health curriculum and teachers up against anybody in the state. They are amazing, but we're not telling kids they can't be successful because of where they came from."

    What are Ohio schools required to teach about sex?​

    Ohio law requires schools to teach these concepts:

    • Stress that students should abstain from sexual activity until after marriage.
    • Teach the potential physical, psychological, emotional and social side effects of participating in sexual activity outside of marriage.
    • Teach that conceiving children out of wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child's parents and society...................



     
    • Stress that students should abstain from sexual activity until after marriage.
    • Teach the potential physical, psychological, emotional and social side effects of participating in sexual activity outside of marriage.
    • Teach that conceiving children out of wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child's parents and society...................
    following one and two equel making 3 more likely.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom