JUNEAU — An expansion of school choice programs available to Alaskans is one step closer to becoming a reality, but a 4-3 vote by the House Education Committee this week and concerns raised by legislators suggest the road ahead for the bill could be rough.
Rep. Wes Keller, R-Wasilla, envisions in HB145 a program that would give state funded “scholarships” for students to attend private or religious schools. In testimony before the committee, Keller said the approach would bring several benefits, including giving parents a greater ability to send their kids to private school if they opt for that over public school.
He said another plus is that increased competition would force schools to enact positive changes or lose out on students and funding.
Keller, in his sponsor statement, called his bill “the next critical step in allowing today’s Alaskan children to compete with the world on an equal footing educationally.”
Critics tell a different story.
Both Democrats on the committee, Reps. Sharon Cissna and Scott Kawasaki, voted in opposition. So did Rep. Paul Seaton, R-Homer, who raised constitutional concerns. The state constitution prohibits use of public money for the direct benefit of any religious or other private educational institution.
Keller has said HB145 is predicated upon passage of a companion resolution that would strike that requirement from the constitution. But Seaton, in a recent letter to constituents, said the process is out of order
“We are working on a bill that is currently unconstitutional,” Seaton said in a recent newsletter to his constituents. “The proponents should get the constitution changed before we advance the bill.”
Seaton also criticized the bill for requiring the state to give more money to private schools than public schools, in that the state would pay to offset expenses for rural students shifting to urban schools. He also said the state would fund implementation at the district level and that private correspondence schools would get more funding than their public counterparts under the bill.
The bill is now pending before the House Finance Committee; so is the resolution on a constitutional amendment, HJR16. Any change to the constitution must be approved by voters in a general election.
Anchorage Democrat Sen. Bettye Davis, who is vice-chair of the Senate Education Committee, said in an interview Thursday that she is not following Keller’s bill closely unless it lands in front of her committee. But she said she is prepared to oppose the bill if it makes it that far.
Most troubling, according to Davis, a former president of the Anchorage School Board, is the effect such a program could have on cash-strapped districts like the one she used to serve, which recently announced an expected budget shortfall of around $19 million next year.
She also pointed to the existing 27 charter schools in the state as examples of choice and said students already have a way out if they attend a struggling school. The federal No Child Left Behind Act, she said, allows students to get funding to attend school elsewhere if performance standards.
Keller countered, saying, “The good public schools will have no problem (getting enough funding).” He adding that his bill is more about extending more options to parents than current policies provide.
Whether or not the bill eventually becomes law, Rep. Alan Dick, chairman of the Education Committee, said the most important takeaway is that the state needs to turn its attention to the root problems that affect education instead of trying efforts that failed in the past.
School choice, he said, is a worthwhile attempt that has drawn support from the Alaska Federation of Natives because they acknowledge the state’s current approach as broken.
“This bill is destined to be controversial,” Dick, said. “But there is an undercurrent of malaise that won’t go away until we shine the spotlight on all these issues around education that affect the classroom.”
Comments (23)
Add commentFlying spaghetti monster daycare coming right up!
Thank goodness the state will help pay the tuition for the madrasah I want to send my kids to! Or the state could help send my kids to a faith only, no science catholic high school. Does this mean my kid's Scientology courses will be covered by the state? Woohoo!
just rediculious
A bill to give "Scholarships" with no scholar requirement is a nonsense attempt to raid the coffers. Where is the control on where the funds can be used for. Given the opportunity to take the money and claim you are a school is going to become a major problem should this ever come to pass. The unfortunate reality is: there are those who will exploit this.
I have no issue with private schools. I just want proof the school is not simply a day care providing nothing more than a place to hide your kids while you are working.
If I were a private school...
I would NOT WANT government money. What would be the purpose of being a private school if you have to live by the rules of those who fund you? Greed is where it is at anymore.
Alaska given an F in science
2012 State Science Standards from the Thomas B Fordham Institute (via Scientific American article).
Four main factors:
1. Undermining of evolution
2. Vague goals
3. Inadequate guidance for teachers on integration of history of science and the concept of scientific inquiry into their lessons
4. Not enough math instruction
I know the answer on how to get Alaska a better grade in science! Government funding of religious schools! Not.
Mike
OMG, what are these guys
OMG, what are these guys thinking? Clearly, the doofus rate per capita in Wasilla is dangerously high.
Let's try it!
Lord knows it would not hurt to try this approach to education. The current system is not serving us well. Just look at the money we spend on it year after year and test scores and literacy continue to drop. It really could not hurt to try it for 15 years or so. So long as all citizen's children are eligible, what's the beef?
It is critical that we break
It is critical that we break the back of the teachers union, & the rest of the "education industrial complex", & this legislation is a great first step.
That says it all Madison...
...and is exactly what this bill is meant to do, at a commensurate cost to public education and our children's future.
The "right" is so busy taking aggressive swipes at what they perceive as the "liberal" power base, they're either forgetting or ignoring the social costs (and considering social factors would be socialism so who cares, right?): A disembowelled middle class, hardening class divisions resulting in ever-widening income, education, and social inequalities; and the systematic dismantling of government for anything other than the maintenance of a police-state and a purveyor for business opportunities in the Third World
Choice
I really fail to see the problem with school choice. We see this mantra in other areas such a woman's right to choose. I think it is great that we are finally taking a look at a different approach to education. And yes there are going to be winners (students) and losers (unions) in this endeavor. If the education system was doing a better job of educating we would not be at this juncture. That's life; win some lose some. We sure are losing plenty of kids as it is in the current system; change is what we have been asking for for over 25 years. It is time to try vouchers; it's for the children; it's for the future!
Wow, jamison - I couldn't
Wow, jamison - I couldn't have summed up what the progressives have done and plan to do to our country any better than what you wrote. However, you've got it backwards - the conservatives are trying to correct the social ills that have fomented for a couple of generations now.
Socialism or any other ism can't really exist for too long without destroying the middle class. The elites in those schemes use the middle class to prop up the lower class through taxes, etc. but eventually there isn't enough money and the middle class loses their standing in the society. Notice how the elites are always left standing though?
Socialism is an insidious game the "rulers" play. It's not good for the human psyche and it never turns out well. That's what's so discouraging about the progressives in our country propping Europe up as the model to end all models. Well, look how that's turning out. The isms aren't sustainable.
In a society everyone needs to be working up to their ability and then everyone prospers. 47% of Americans don't pay any federal income tax. How long can the productive middle class pull that group along? I think you're seeing the beginning of the end now. Over 40% of Americans are getting some kind of government assistance. Who's paying for those welfare programs. Yeah, you and me.
Sorry for the rant, but it's just so clear in my mind and I can't fathom how the other side thinks where we're headed is good.
Can you explain it to me?
There are two kinds of people in this world, Calypso:
Those who think there are two kinds of people and everyone else.
Your understanding of socialism is misguided, as is your understanding of capitalism, if you think the service provided by private schools needs the help of the government to compete.
It is about choice
Calypso has hit the mark; thank you for bring this forward.
And for the record jamison, dividing people into groups is as saul alinsky as one ismist(sp) can get if you ask me.
For economic purposes though there are actually 4 main groups of consequence:
1) Those that produce more than they consume like industrialist, investors, miners, loggers, farmers, and the like. These folks do not create a load on the system but a surplus made available to the economy. We need more of these people.
2) Those that consume what they produce; like group 1 these folks, mostly middle class carry their own water and do not create a load on the system, trading their time and productivity for the other items they need or want. We must keep all of these people and then add to their ranks.
3) those that produce less than they use. Now, this group is less productive and has need of resources and/or products from groups 1 & 2. This group should be reduced and move into groups 1 or 2 using, yes education, and economic development through, yes production of some sort.
4) those that produce nothing; this group in entirely dependent on groups 1 & 2. We are a very wealthy Nation. It is within our power to provide assistance to those not able to provide it to themselves. This group of people, handicap, mentally ill, mangled war vets and so on have been dealt a less than productive hand. It is not their fault and as result of nature or our heroes doing our nations bidding. We can and should care for them!
But when I see able bodied, pants dragging people sucking on the entitlements, living in public housing, wearing the latest nikes, the newest $500.00 phone, big flat screens, $8.00 a pack cigarettes, having what seems like time on their hands, it causes me to pause and ask why are these people able to afford this stuff when I have to plan my next tank of gas, turn my thermostat down to afford the heating oil, budget groceries and work a 40 to 50 hour week?
Our Nations education level has dropped dramatically when compared to other industrialized nations for generations now. Just days ago, the big O said the reason we are promoting immigration of engineers is because we don't have enough. And why is that? Well, if Johnny can't read, write or add than he becomes disadvantaged and then qualifies for special entitlements. Of course Johnny soon discovers he's a loser for life, destined for service work. He then also discovers that he can just as easily suck off the government tit and get by just fine.
I say education choice can't hurt. let's give it a try!
@jamison - you missed my
@jamison - you missed my point entirely.
The education system in America is funded by taxpayers, you and me. So where exactly does it say that my tax dollars can't be used somewhere else besides the government run education system? Our education system has become a giant, expensive behemoth that is producing dismal results. Any business run like that would have been out of business long ago.
That's where vouchers come into the picture. People thinking outside of the government box are floating the idea of trying something else. It has nothing to do "with the service provided by private schools needs the help of the government to compete".
When something is broke, a logically thinking person tries to fix it.
@akjustice - great tutorial!
@ Calypso et el
Thanks. Your points are so very valid. Resistance to change is so often tied to fear of the unknown. Many are comforted by the shared misery of failure with no accountability. Further, should private education prove to provide better results, there would be question of the need for large public education. I really do not think they need fear the private sector as there will always be a need for public schools.
I believe this because there are many children that have very special needs that most private schools could not provide. I know this statement opens the door for the isms to say, "See, private schools don't want handicap or AFS or other children with issues." The truth is that some private schools will specialize in these types of issues and some will not. The free market can and will address these problems given the opportunity to do so.
Vouchers just help to level the playing field so to speak. Many parents are afraid to send their children into the public schools because of the shear number of dysfunctional students, drug problems, discipline problems and the students that require entirely too much of the instructor's time. Not to mention the high PTRs. In a more private setting classrooms tend to have lower PTRs. Problem children are dealt with in an agreed manner by the school and parents. Parents are normally more engaged with the private educators as the parents feel more like they have control over the, in their view, proper rearing of their children. I remind the reader that this is not just a Christian view but a value highly regarded by most caring parents. The vouchers would help parents not able to afford a better education for their children. Providing better education leads to a more stable, productive and profitable society.
This vouch issue is not a Christian issue and anyone who tries to make it such is just kicking up dust to cloud the real issue. I believe the real issue here is about power. Who has it, who wields it and how to keep it. Really, the only way to change the current direction of education is to make changes that are not part of the paradigm of the current model.
Change can be hard; change can be scary; but without change there is no chance for improvement. Let's try the voucher. What can it hurt?
AKjustice
Your idea (actually, not yours, but we'll pretend you thought of it yourself) that vouchers will allow greater choice of schools is flawed, and it's obvious you come from a privileged position, because you don't even seen cognizant of the fact that the people whose children attend the worst schools are also the people who don't have the resources to move somewhere else (and thus send their kids to a different school). You're assuming that school vouchers will turn every student into a middle-class child, which is pretty ridiculous. The system fails kids who belong to the poor because they lack the support systems the more fortunate have. Vouchers won't change anything about this, but it may encourage the formation of more private schools, which put profit before education, by definition, which is an excellent way to educate.
Furthermore, your statement earlier: "when I see able bodied, pants dragging people sucking on the entitlements, living in public housing, wearing the latest nikes, the newest $500.00 phone, big flat screens, having what seems like time on their hands, it causes me to pause and ask why are these people able to afford this stuff when I have to plan my next tank of gas, turn my thermostat down to afford the heating oil, budget groceries and work a 40 to 50 hour week?"
What a load of crap. Do you consider yourself to be a moral, upstanding person? Because saying something like this should give you pause. First of all, you're repeating the same crap you can find on conservative blogs all over the internet. You have not spent appreciable time with the poor, because if you had, you'd realize that this is a load of crap. So you're either lying about what you've seen, or you're making a judgment without having enough information to do so, which is as bad as lying.
Second, you're obviously completely oblivious to the actual numbers. Do you think welfare recipients get more money than you do working a job? Obviously if the poor are able to afford ALL THESE LUXURIES, that's what you're saying. And that would be either a lie or a completely ignorant statement. Take your pick.
And third, if you really do budget your groceries and you fuel expenses, then you're probably aware of the difference between a repeating payment (let's say $300 for groceries, $75 for electricity, $100 for heating oil, and so on, monthly) and a one-time payment. $500 phones, flat-screen TVs, and shoes fall within the realm of "one-time payments," and over the course of a year, add up to very little of a person's total expenses. Unless you're saying they buy these things new every few months or so, which is ludicrous. And of course you saying this crap also implies you've inspected many a low-income home and kept a tally of the high-end consumer devices you've seen. Highly unlikely, unless your job involves finding ways to villify people poorer than yourself.
To sum up: you're inventing an issue to get angry about (well, not really, but let's again pretend you thought this stuff up yourself), you're then deliberately misconstruing said issue, and then completely misunderstanding the issue.
Congratulations! You have managed to craft a piece of rhetoric shrouded in not one, not two, but THREE levels of duplicity!
I Called This One Right...
As predicted, an elite member of the left has read into what was a clear and understandable opinion, their attempt at being divisive. It is amusing and the vilification attempts are noted.
For some, no matter how clear the evidence, no matter how simple the facts, no matter how much information one provides some people can not (do not have the ability) to understand ideas and concepts they have no reference point for.
An example of this is the previous rant designed to lead one to believe that only privileged or middle class families will be eligible for vouchers. Or further still, that poor people will have to move to get to better schools. Such drivel is just not credible! These vouchers will be for all citizens and what better place to set up a private school than in and area that has a failing school. This simple yet logical conclusion is the way we business people solve problems. We do not need committees or coalitions to tell us how to get things done. We are able to look at needs, the current and future market, the law and local conditions and then develop services to accomplish the goals.
Always remember that when people begin name calling and foul language that they have lost their perspective on the issue. Which is to provide quality education for our children. Notice how all of sudden my morality is called into question by an individual that is afraid Christian schools might qualify for vouchers. Go figure, who would of thought.
The real advantage will be that for the first time ever, all children in our community will be able to attend a different school if one is available in their neighborhood. It is true that some families may have to transport their children but that is what we parents do for our children. We try to make life better for them in the hopes that their future will be better than ours.
It is clear that vouchers are not the end all solution for all of societies ills but it is a good start towards a more civil society with a better chance at competing with the other developing countries for the better positions in life.
AKjustice
You assume that every parent has the resources to be involved in their kids' education and to transport them to another school if one isn't available in the area. This is patently false and shows that you are speaking from a position of privilege. And you have the gall to call me an elitist (which is what I assume you meant by "elite," since the two words are different--the former means I'm an out of touch snob, while the latter means I'm exceptionally skilled)!
The kids who need help are precisely the kids whose parents don't have the resources or inclination to help them with school. Contrary to what you may believe, many of the poor don't have vehicles with which to drive their children to better schools, and many live in poor urban areas that don't have access to public transportation. And because these poor areas are not pleasant to live in, most teachers elect to teach elsewhere if they can help it, resulting in largely lesser quality teachers in these schools.
Your magical vouchers won't change this.
And I am calling your morality into question, because you are either flat out lying or you are making judgments without the knowledge needed to do so. Note how I referred to your own statements to justify this.
And this statement: "the real advantage will be that for the first time ever, all children in our community will be able to attend a different school if one is available in their neighborhood."
News flash: the public schools that exist in areas with private alternatives aren't the schools that are underperforming. Again, it's the schools in poor and rural areas that are struggling.
Your opinion is clear and understandable. It's also wrong. I bet you even believe our school system is one of the worst of all the developed nations, but this is only true when factoring all schools together. If you take out schools from low-income areas, our schools hold their own against those of other countries. The problem with our school system is social and has little to do with the schools themselves.
Of course, if nothing is wrong with the schools themselves, then you can't advocate for a tasty government handout to the private sector, so maybe you, as a "businessman" (who apparently has trouble making ends meet even while working 50 hours a week), are not looking at education levels at all.
@PP
Tell us, do you have anything positive to add to this conversation?
It is quite obvious that you are so very skilled at skinning people alive in these blogs. It is not constructive.
And for your information there bucko, your insults, superior attitude and continual condescending tones are boring.
Further, I came from a family of hard working people, mostly dems and Oblamer supporters. My education was limited to the 6th week of the 10th grade. I left school because it was not safe as the Mexican and Black students were at war and both dis-liked whites. After serving our country I returned to school and completed high school. It is painfully clear to all that you can articulate the language and beat most people up. I am OK with this as I do not take it personal and attribute it to either poor up bringing or your just plain jaded at the world and your miserable life. Take your pick.
My wife and boys work hard. We run a great business. We provide a good quality service to our community. We do what ever it takes to succeed and we don't allow negative people like you to influence us. We keep our eyes on the goal and move forward to attain them. Our only privileged is that we were born Americans and have taken full advantage of the capitalism you so loathe.
You would do well to take a look at yourself and ask this question: Do I really want my children to be like me? Think about it; there is a moral imperative there son!
In closing, as you seem to need to vilify and condemn nearly any view I or people of conservative stripes should have, please be civil enough to at least use your considerable writing skills to write a more open letter in a more positive and constructive manner. This petty litany of yours tends to drive people away that would like to contribute but instead stay away, afraid of being crucified as you have attempted to do to me.
You now have the opportunity to have the last word. I am signing off and will not be subjected to your nasty drivel any longer.
This bill does nothing
but divert public funds to private schools, at the cost of public education: The vaunted "choice" will soon not include the "public" option, as already underfunded schools are forced to fire teachers, increase class sizes, and cut curriculum to survive.
The degradation of public schools will increase geometrically as parents jump ship, driving the growth of private schools until the very concept of public education is considered untenable: The end result will be education available at a price, one which the poor will be increasingly unable to afford.
This knife in the back to the concept of public education has politics and class warfare written all over it, unabashedly dividing opportunity into the "haves" and the "have nots;" all for the purpose of kicking the stool from under the NEA and denying the democrats a source of campaign funding.
Can we afford to play these political games with our children's future? The proponents of this measure think so, and have made it plain what they think of the concept of public school
jamison
You forgot to include the religious element. This plan is also a gift to the creationist crowd.
religion has always been about control
whether it's in a madras or a christian school, on the dollar bill or the pledge of allegiance---Steering public funds to private religious schools is a coup de grace to the concept of egalitarianism and a secular society, as the people pushing this measure know quite well.
War against the poor
That's all this is ...class warfare. Really? The ones that get screwed here are the poor left in underfunded schools while the wealthy get a little bonus for moving their kids into expensive schools that teach the 'agenda'
If you want a private education for your kids...do what you want me to do with my healthcare...PAY FOR IT YOURSELF and bag this unfair voucher idea. I dont want my taxpayer dollars funding your churches hate agenda anymore than you want to fund my abortion. DOG GONNE double standards!!!
Reality is Public Schools are not cutting the Mustard
I'm all for it. I love Alaska, I love my kids and our community, and I would love to be able to send my kids to public school. However, the reality is that the current method of teaching the masses to the level of the slowest or less capable student will not help Alaska achieve its goals into the future. Our future is in today's youth and we need to help our youth shoot for the stars and not settle for average (or as the Federal standard rates Alaska education...less than average students in comparison to the rest of the states). Sorry to tell all of you who think this is a bad idea, but your tax paying dollars are already helping those of us homeschoolers achieve greatness! What's the difference if the State refunds the parents for paying for home school supplies or refunds them for paying for private school as long as the amount stays the same across the distribution board. I say go for it!!! Good on ya Rep. Wes Keller!!! You sound like someone who has morales, is rightfully concerned for our kids, and the future of the State of Alaska.
Reality is Public Schools are not cutting the Mustard
I'm all for it. I love Alaska, I love my kids and our community, and I would love to be able to send my kids to public school. However, the reality is that the current method of teaching the masses to the level of the slowest or less capable student will not help Alaska achieve its goals into the future. Our future is in today's youth and we need to help our youth shoot for the stars and not settle for average (or as the Federal standard rates Alaska education...less than average students in comparison to the rest of the states). Sorry to tell all of you who think this is a bad idea, but your tax paying dollars are already helping those of us homeschoolers achieve greatness! What's the difference if the State refunds the parents for paying for home school supplies or refunds them for paying for private school as long as the amount stays the same across the distribution board. I say go for it!!! Good on ya Rep. Wes Keller!!! You sound like someone who has morales, is rightfully concerned for our kids, and the future of the State of Alaska.