Our Children's Education

[Tuly]

Now that Iam blessed with grandchildren and one more child in High School. I obviously am very much concerned with education. I found very sound advice on how to deal with issues at school that might concern any parent.

Advocating for Your Children’s Education: 10 Steps
By Onnie Shekerjian, Member, Tempe, Arizona City Council

Everywhere we turn today, we are encouraged to be more responsible for our children’s education. Most educators would agree, minimally, this means sending our children to school ready to learn with a good night’s rest and a belly full of breakfast. Being responsible for our children’s education also means advocating for them when a problem occurs at school.

Whether it’s a bully on the playground or a poor classroom performance, parents can be more effective when they have a strategy – rather than letting their emotions get the best of them. Here are 10 simple steps outlining what parents can do when a problem arises at school.

1) Define and examine your concerns.
Do your homework. It is critical to collect all the facts possible and articulate the problem clearly to be believable. Does this problem involve other children? If so, consider involving other parents in this process. There is credibility in numbers.

2) Develop possible solutions.
This sets a positive tone indicating you want to work in partnership with the school to resolve the problem. You are not merely complaining, but offering potential solutions.

3) Prepare a written document.
To an extent, the education system has forced school personnel into the role of bureaucrats and their language is paper. Having a written document makes the school take your concerns seriously. The document should contain a list of your issues, potential solutions and questions. The tone should reflect your desire to work positively with the school.

4) Meet with the teacher.
Make an appointment with the teacher. Consider having your spouse or a friend accompany you to the meeting for support. Inform the teacher who to expect at the meeting.

5) Approach the meeting with a positive attitude.
Leave your emotions outside the meeting room. Negative behavior will only discredit your message. Your behavior must stay above reproach. Using your document as the basis for the meeting’s agenda, keep an open mind and don’t be afraid to ask questions.

6) Define the next step.
At the end of the meeting, ask:
• What is the next step?
• Who will be responsible for that step?
• When (a date) will the next step occur?
This step is crucial. It keeps the meeting from being merely a gripe session and increases the likelihood of a positive outcome. Leave a copy of your written document with the teacher.

7) Document events.
Keep a record of all meetings and phone calls, including dates and people involved along with your initial document and any letters. Politely informing the school you are documenting the events lets the school know you are serious about your issue.

Follow the chain of command.
If you and the teacher are unable to resolve the problem, utilize the next link in the chain of command. Usually the chain of command looks like this: teacher, principal, superintendent, school board member. Utilize steps 1 – 7 with each person on the chain.

9) Consider all your educational options.
If your children’s school is unwilling to work with you to resolve the problem, look at the educational choices parents have in your state. Parents now have more free choices than ever before, including: public charter schools, limited private school vouchers or other district schools. Contact your state’s education department to learn more about your options.

10) Never forget that you are responsible for the education of your children.

You are the only constant from kindergarten through college in your children’s education. There is no guarantee any educational system will assure your children’s educational needs are met. Ultimately, it’s your responsibility. Don’t abdicate that responsibility to your children’s schools; delegate and oversee it. Your children’s futures depend on it.

[Steve]

So California isn't dealing with the school voucher referendum like Utah is. Lily and I go to vote on this today. Any thoughts?

[Tuly]

Parents will always need more choices in education for their children. I am pro vouchers.

[Edward]

Really? I'm kind of against them on a number of issues, the main one being that, instead of working to make our public schools better and trying to amend the flaws in the system, we're just opening the doors for parents to throw their children into schools that usually they know nothing about except that they are "private."

Now, I would trust Mom and a lot of people to use that liberty wisely, but most parents end up shipping their kids off to schools with unlicensed teachers, unqualified staff, and fewer policies to protect the rights of their children. Also, the limit is 3000 dollars--for the very poorest families, that still leaves an average of 1,500 in debt within the state of Utah, not to mention the fact that private schools do not provide transportation for the children. I am very pro-homeschooling and have good feelings about charter schools, but private schools are what worry me, and those are the vast majority here in Utah--and many are not very good. Where are the laws to give more support to the public schools, which in Utah are some of the worst in the nation? Are we going to let them decay as we abandon them in favor of these new options? I think many people are voting for this with an educational escapist mentality.

Oh, and I only say this in reference to the state of Utah. In other states the situation would be very different, but here I am not in favor of vouchers unless they rethink the way in which they will function. This bill was made too quickly, and the flaws will quickly become apparent as we see the major troubles schools end up going through if this passes.

[Steve]

Let parents do as they will. If they are only sending their children to a school because it's considered "private," so be it. That's up to them.

Where do you get the idea that these private schools would be run by unlicensed teachers, unqualified staff, etc.? I would very much like to see the source for that information. A private school with lousy teachers isn't going to stay in business very long, is it? Especially when it's competing with other "non-lousy" schools.

Private schools are in the vast majority? Compared to what? And how do you know, Edward, that the private schools aren't very good?

Furthermore, look at why Utah schools struggle so much. Utahns have more children per tax-paying parent than any other state. And Utah is also in the top 10 in total spending on public education. We can't just keep dumping money into public schools and assume that this alone is going to change everything. We need motivation for those involved in the industry. For better or worse, capitalism has been a huge motivating factor in this nation. Nothing fuels innovation like competition (besides righteousness hehe).

Hehe, and where in the referendum does it say anything about abandoning public schools? Have you actually read it? Do you find it a little odd that lawmakers have already passed it? That Governor Huntsman is willing to put his name behind something like this when he could easily let things go as they have been and hold public favor?

At any rate, don't worry, I am quickly realizing that this is probably not going to pass, and more than anything, I believe the reason is because people fear change. We complain and complain about education, yet do nothing to change it beyond arguing that parks/recreation/transportation/etc. funds should be going to schools. Show me the state where spending alone has created a Utopian school system.

[Lily]

Edward, I disagree on a few of your points, and am curious of where you received your information from. How quickly was the bill made? What makes Utah public schools "some of the worst in the nation?" Are private schools the majority in Utah? Reveal your source! Are your teaching buddies brainwashing you? hehe.

Also, if you read the proposed legislation, there ARE standards and accountability written in for the private schools. The school must "employ or contract with teachers who hold baccalaureate or higher degrees; or have special skills, knowledge or expertise that qualifies them to provide instruction in the subjects taught." They must also "provide to parents the teaching credentials of the school's teachers." If a parent chooses to send their child to a school with non-accredited teachers, so be it. Let them choose. Think of how many homeschooled children had non-accredited parents as their teachers.

Transportation? Who cares. Stay with the public school then.

Personally I think this law is designed to promote better public school education. If a parent wants to take their child out of the system into a private school, and the State will subsidize the public school for 5 years "whilst" that child is in that private school, by all means....

This has been such a crazy hot topic, and I think there are flaws on both sides. For instance, I'm a little wary of the fact that some of these "scholarships" will be going from the hands of parents directly to the hands of some religiously-affiliated schools. I can just see our tax dollars going to loads and loads of Establishment Clause litigation. But in general, I support the idea, and feel that the bill is in the best interest of the children. Think of the children!

I don't think this thing is going to pass since everyone here in Utah is either a teacher or is related to a teacher. So don't fret Edward.

Oh. And I see Steve has already tackled this one. We've been researching and talking about this one all week. Obviously.

Read the bill. See what you think.

Link

[Bryn]

I think it often can be difficult to communicate effectively on the web site. I could be very wrong, but the tone in the last two posts seemed a little patronizing and even belittling. This could be because it's an important topic, and it seems that it's something that we can get passionate about, but the posts came off as being somewhat disrespectful. Again, maybe I'm misreading. I know that there is no malicious intent, but it hard sometimes to read the tone of a written dialog. What were you trying to express? Are there no flaws in the bill?

I think we all are more capable of respectfully disagreeing with each other. I also think that we agree on certain topics more than we realize. I thinks it's worth trying to find what our commonalities are. Well, whatever, I'm no preacher. Err, it's hard to write things the way you mean them, you know?

[Ian]

i don't know how good the private schools are in utah, but i think it's naive for steve to say that the bad schools would already be out of business. i don't think most parents really know how good or bad these schools are. if a school markets itself well, it will succeed. steve's other arguments are even weaker. who cares if the governor supports the vouchers? what's with the "fear of change" argument?

lily, i have heard and read from many sources that utah public schools stink, so i don't think edward pulled that out of a hat. you talk about the standards and accountability written into the legislation, but i don't see any accountability. just legal mumbo jumbo. where does it say a teacher gets fired if they stink at teaching? the school just signs an affidavit saying "yes we are a good school." wow, tough standard. everyone knows the standards are looser than for public schools, and public schools get away with all kinds of garbage.

i think a likely result of this legislation would be that the rich kids would go to private schools and the poor kids would go to public schools, because the vouchers would not cover full tuition. yet the whole purpose of the vouchers are to help poor people, isn't it? how will that improve the public schools? parents already have the power to choose, don't they? am i missing something?

[Steve]

Woah, woah, woah! Who was being disrespectful or condescending? I thought we already discussed...well...discussing! I simply challenged Edward's comment (and I think Lily did the same). Truthfully, I'm not all that passionate about this subject, particularly since I already knew the referendum would not pass and hey, my children probably won't even attend a Utah school until college (hehe). Like I said, I was just challenging Edward's tendency to passionately defend something like this without providing documentation to support his claims. It's certainly nothing personal.

You didn't see me calling Edward "naive", did you? So please, everyone, lower your weapons! We mean you no harm! hehe

Ian, you misunderstand the purpose of a voucher. Its sole purpose is not to help poor people gain access to private schools, though a little help would certainly make that more feasible. By reducing class sizes and re-allocating funds to those who remain in public schools, it seems as if it would help all parties.

I don't think it's so silly of me to say that bad schools are going to have a harder time keeping students. And whether or not you care about the governor's opinion, my point is that there's obviously more to consider here than normal, as elected leadership has taken a controversial stand that doesn't appeal to the popular vote. It's worth investigating why they'd do that, regardless of your initial opinions based on word-of-mouth.

The "fear of change" argument is a valid one. You have a body of citizens that's furious over the present condition of education in their state. They don't want new taxes--they want funds to magically appear. They don't actively participate or get involved in their school systems on a personal basis. And many of them would rather encourage their child to be on time to their soccer match than to do their homework. So what exactly do they expect is going to miraculously happen to remedy the situation? They demand a dramatic turnaround without a dramatically different approach.

If things are as awful in Utah public schools as the sources you mention say they are, wouldn't they welcome a new approach that offers more choice? If not, what exactly are they suggesting that we do about it?


Just in closing, both Lily and I remain puzzled by Bryn's accusation, so I can't help but make a final comment on it. Not that I mind a little reminder to be kind to one another, but I am curious why you chose this instance to chime in with a remark on respect and condescension...what phrase or comment sparked this response? For one, as mentioned, nobody even said anything in a mean or disrespectful manner. We simply disagreed with his position. Second, I can think of many instances in this forum where things were said in an explicitly disrespectful tone toward various parties and no intervention was made...check the private threads. To be honest, at first I thought you were kidding around, but after a few lines, I realized that you were not. We've talked about disagreeing on this board before, and we all know that nobody's making personal attacks on any individual. So hope that clarifies things!

And as a sidenote:

Bryn: I know that there is no malicious intent, but it hard sometimes to read the tone of a written dialog. What were you trying to express? Are there no flaws in the bill?

Lily: This has been such a crazy hot topic, and I think there are flaws on both sides.

[Ian]

steve, you havent' been providing much documentation yourself, but i don't think that's necessary. maybe a little more explanation would be helpful, since you and lily have apparently done a great deal of research on this issue. what is the purpose of vouchers? i thought it was to give more choices to poor people. steve has talked a little about capitalism and decreasing class size, but are vouchers the way to accomplish those goals? don't we already have a capitalism? rich kids go to private schools even as we speak. and even if vouchers decrease class size in public schools, they'll still have under-paid teachers and even less money.

steve and lily seem to be promoting change for the sake of change. it seems to me that vouchers would just take money away from schools that are already underfunded and put that money into private schools with low standards and little or no accountability.

utah voted this down by a large margin yesterday, so maybe this discussion is moot, although it'll probably come up again. it's interesting to think about though, i hadn't considered this issue very much before.

[Steve]

Ian, I agree that I haven't been citing my sources, but really, for the most part, my comments have been my own personal reaction and interpretation. From what I can see, I haven't made any claims that would require a citation, beyond perhaps the data regarding Utah's education spending (which can be found on publicly-accessible government web sites). At any rate, does anyone challenge my information? If so, I'd be happy to provide sources. I expect the same in return, which is all I asked of Edward, as he made several bold claims in his post. There's nothing wrong with asking him for his source.

Vouchers do give more choice, particularly to the lower-income families seeking private schools, but in vacating seats in public schools, they also assist with those students who remain behind. Based on initial estimates found in the state's "Impartial Analysis" of the referendum, school districts will save up to $11,500,000 during the first year, and up to $28,000,000 during the thirteenth year, because "school districts will have fewer students to educate as some students transfer from public to private schools." So I'm not sure why you think these schools would have less money.

Yes, we have capitalism in a sense, but increasing the opportunities for more parents to select their school increases the amount of attention given to quality. Truthfully, my biggest concern with this is that the measurements of quality may be skewed, as a perfectly capable teacher over a class with a disproportionately high concentration of learning disabled will most likely not receive the positive evaluation he/she rightfully deserved.

I am not sure why private schools would encourage low standards. And what makes them unaccountable? And how do vouchers take money from schools?

Yeah, like I thought, it was voted down. And it's not so much that I think vouchers would have been the perfect solution. I don't think they were a cure-all by any means. But I'm just eager to know what opponents think would actually solve the problems they complain about. Ok, vouchers have been voted down. Now what?

[Ian]

accountability: i was only refuting lily's comment that standards and accountability were written into the legislation. private schools are not required to have school districts, superintendents, school boards, or anything like that. they can do pretty much what they want. that can be good, but it also removes accountability. the teachers might be educated, and they might not. there is no school board to fire teachers or determine the curriculum, which might be a good thing, but it can also be bad. personally i don't mind lack of accountability for homeschooling, etc., but it can be a cause for concern at private schools.

money: steve cited estimates that public schools would save money if kids went to private schools. that may be true, but the public schools would also be receiving less money from the government. public schools receive funding based on the number of students. so even though they might save on expenses, they would also have less money coming in. steve's numbers told only part of the story, i think.

to improve the education in utah, they can start by improving the curriculum. no child left behind doesn't seem to help. they need to focus on fundamentals and remove all the extra fat. they also need to pay teachers more. bottom line is it's a big problem, and if the schools aren't cutting it, go for homeschooling.

[Tuly]

Warning!!this message cites no sources. Only what I have seen and read in my past experience with education. My understanding is that the No Child Left Behind allowed the concept of vouchers depending on each state choosing to do it or not. I'm actually surprised Utah voted it down - considering all of the home schoolers and charter schools, but now that I think of it this kind of voucher would not necessarily help home schoolers who claim their home as a private school. But I could see how it could benefit charter schools. I have always found it amazing that teachers don't necessarily have to be accredited to teach in a private school. Also interesting that PTA and NEA (National Education Association) is against vouchers that would seem obvious, but I never trust the NEA they have an agenda that is not with the best interest of families in mind - trust me is this one, you should check out who their conferences and workshops are geared to. Unfortunately, most poor people have no idea what vouchers are and how it could benefit them. You need to be a very involved( in the schools) poor parent to speak for your rights and to apply for voucher benefits even then there are very long forms that totally turn off the poor. The rich would hire some one to do it, or just pay out of their pocket for a private school if they are dissatisfied with their public schools. It's always fun to find out where the president of the U.S send their kids to school not to mention some of the people that write some of these bills. Bottom line the schools don't know what to do with their extra money, it never really ends up going to the children, the money goes indirectly to the children by way of materials, school district maintenance, school upkeep, and paper for lots and lots of forms. I have noticed in school board meetings unnecessary spending. Sports always getting more funding than the arts and even academics. The private schools around us are very impressive but the tuition for them are as much as an ivy league school...o.k I'm kidding but they are very, very expensive. Vouchers are another choice that parents need. It wont be wasted money on children.

[Steve]

they can do pretty much what they want. that can be good, but it also removes accountability.

From what I understand, though, they are required to administer achievement testing by an independent party with national comparisons, so their creative instruction must still yield results. What's more, there are additional requirements laid out for schools in order to be eligible for this program.

the teachers might be educated, and they might not.

They're required to hire teachers with degrees or that have skills/knowledge that qualify them to teach. That seems broad, I suppose, but they're also required by law to provide parents with the teaching credentials of those hired as well as a statement indicating what accreditation the school has received. So still, it's up to the parents to make an educated choice. Nobody's forcing them into a particular private school.

public schools receive funding based on the number of students.

Part of the bill is intended to allow schools to retain some per-student funding even for those who've transferred to private schools. In other words, the bill is intended to change to a degree the criteria for public funding of public schools.

I agree with you that the curriculum is key, particularly the fundamentals that you mention. Paying teachers more involves funding from somewhere, and nobody is willing to provide those funds.

And regarding homeschooling...one of Edward's biggest arguments, and yours from what I can tell, is the worry over unlicensed teachers and unqualified staff. Yet most homeschool teachers would fall under that very category. And homeschool teachers have no accountability at all.

[Ian]

homeschool teachers are parents. they are accountable before God. it says so in the scriptures.