2005_04_24_archive

Heritage Foundation Choice Report

The Heritage Foundation is all gushy over school choice. Their annual

"Progress Report" can be found here.

Progressives in the politics of education have to find ways to side

with those parents -- usually urban minorities -- who are disgusted

with the public school system while not caving to conservative

interests who would hand our public schools over to private companies

or religious entities. There are good ways to do this. But we

absolutely cannot let the conservatives -- here represented by the

arch-conservative Heritage Foundation -- own this issue. We cannot

simply advocate the status quo (or even the status quo plus more

funding). Some choice is good, but only choice that will benefit and

strengthen our public system of education.

posted by Education at the Brink at 11:50 PM 0 comments

Cause and effect

Chris Correa links to some interesting data about teacher practices in

the NCLB math classroom. Projects are on the way out. Multiple choice

questions are ascendent. Are we surpised?

posted by Education at the Brink at 11:39 PM 0 comments

Courts and schools

The state Supreme Courts have played a key role in increasing funds

for public education over the last few decades. But with new political

pressure to rein in "judicial activism", three red-state courts will

have to make very difficult decisions very soon.

First, Kansas has approved $127 million in new funds for schools. The

Republican legislature insists it's enough; Democratic Governor

insists it's not.

In Montana, rising Democratic star Governor Schweitzer led a

Democratic legislature to increase school funding by $32 million, the

largest increase in over 10 years. The courts had ruled that the

school finance system itself was unconstitutional, though, so the work

there is by no means done. There will be a special session in the

fall.

And in Texas, where I have a front row seat to the disturbing

proceedings, the school finance plan will be hammered out in

conference committee sometime in the coming week. There is an eminent

possibility that no compromise will be reached, which would force a

special session. The Texas Supreme Court will hear the school finance

case in early July.

In this climate of a harsh conservative attack on the courts, it would

be highly unlikely that any court would mandate a dollar amount or a

specific school finance program. They realize that those tasks are

best left to the elected legislatures. (For example, Justice DeGrasse

of New York overreached when he ruled last year that New York City

schools must receive $30 billion new dollars. I agree with him in

principle, but clearly, courts should not be mandating details.)

However, the Courts can -- and should -- articulate broad principles

that will lead legislatures towards constitutional systems. I don't

envy them in trying to walk that tightrope, though.

posted by Education at the Brink at 10:27 AM 0 comments

Education for children of illegal immigrants

There's a nice editorial in today's Kansas City Star about an upcoming

court case that will decide if children of illegal immigrants can

receive in-state tuition rates in Kansas. The author argues that the

children should not be punished for their parents' lawbreaking. It's

something I hadn't thought about before. Find it here (and go to

bugmenot.com for a login).

Here's a sample:

Kansas is well known for a legal battle in which it argued that

some children do not deserve access to a public education.

More than 50 years after Brown vs. the Topeka Board of Education,

Kansas is preparing to do legal battle again - in support of the

children of illegal immigrants.

This time, Kansas is on the right side of the argument.

Recall in Brown that Kansas fought to keep its schools segregated.

The Supreme Court settled that one. This latest fight isn't likely

to go that far.

Eight other states are like Kansas. The states had the foresight to

offer the children of illegal immigrants the ability to pay

in-state college tuition fees, rather than the sometimes three

times higher out-of-state rates. At least seven other states are

also considering similar legislation.

The lower in-state rate makes college financially feasible for

these students, most of whom are poor. How society treats the

children of illegal immigrants is a sideline issue of immigration

reform. The children did not choose their plight.

Yet some argue that they should pay for their parents' mistakes.

They say offering the children the opportunity to pay for college

is akin to "rewarding illegal behavior."

If that rationale were extended to other criminals, the educational

opportunities of all children with a parent convicted of a crime

would be taken away. No one proposes that solution because it is

illogical. Immigrant children are simply an easier target.

Among the lawyers who will argue for Kansas at a hearing May 10 is

the man who laid the legal groundwork to get these children a

kindergarten-through-12th-grade education, Peter Roos. In 1982, Mr.

Roos successfully won a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Plyler vs.

Doe, a case based in Texas.

In Plyler, the court found it unfair to sentence undocumented

children to "a lifetime of hardship" by denying them the