Morning Shots

Last Friday, Utah made history by passing the nation’s first universal scholarship program.  This is the transcript of remarks given on the floor of the Senate by Sen. Robert A. Stevenson during the final vote on the legislation.  -ed.

I’d like to explain my vote, and my vote will be the vote that pushes this over the top.  

First, to Sen. McCoy’s comment: when we voted on Divine Strake, there was no time certain, there was no forewarning.  With this, everyone—the public, all members of this body—were notified more than 24 hours ago that this would occur, so it wasn’t a surprise to any of us.  And it established the efficiency of the system, so that we don’t go through this two times, and use up valuable time even though we all know that the result is not going to change.  And so I support our leadership and this body in establishing a time certain so that everybody in this state would know exactly when this bill was to be considered.  There are people who are tuned in because they were given notice, and this is an appropriate use of suspension of the rules.  

When I was elected in 1992, the first thing I did was to file a bill for tuition tax credits.  Senate Bill 258 was sponsored in the 1993 general session of the Legislature, and as you know, it failed.  But even before that, some legislators had sponsored legislation to give parents the right to choose how and where their children are educated without having to pay twice for their children’s education.  

In 1983, you all remember the “Nation at Risk” report, which was published by the Reagan Administration with the able assistance of two Utahans: Terrel Bell, former state superintendent of schools, former leader

Read More …

In a speech that met alternatively with applause and silence from a standing-room-only crowd at Chancellor’s Hall in the historic State Education Building in Albany, Gov. Spitzer outlined an agenda for transforming public education in New York.

The established special interests represented in the room were much happier about Spitzer’s promise to increase school funding than they were about his call to pair this spending with much higher accountability.

Spitzer’s speech was strikingly unusual by Albany standards. Rather than offer the bland platitudes we’ve heard for years, he admitted that New York’s public schools offer "our children an education that is nowhere near the top."

Even more refreshing, he warned that, while "accountability without resources is a false promise, resources without accountability are a recipe for waste." He also spoke plainly about "poor performance" and "morally indefensible inequality."

Blunt, politically incorrect – and true.

What exactly did the governor propose?

• Billions of dollars in new aid for New York public schools.
• Abolition of New York’s convoluted school-aid formula.
• An increase in the number of charter schools statewide, with new state aid to help districts (such as Albany and Buffalo) that lose many students to charters handle the transition.
• A focus on driving more educational dollars to preschool and smaller class sizes.
• Support for parents who send their children to nonpublic schools.
• Holding districts to five-year performance contracts, with school closures and the dismissal of principals and school boards a consequence for persistent failure.

The speech was significant in five ways. First, Spitzer would finally resolve the Campaign for Fiscal Equity case. For two decades, Republicans and Democrats alike ducked a resolution of the issue, not for any philosophical reason but because any solution requires making very controversial political decisions.

I don’t think Spitzer’s answer – kicking in significantly

Read More …

New York City is trying some new methods this winter for figuring out which children belong in the city’s gifted programs. Unlike many big cities, New York has a long tradition of offering gifted education; indeed, the city’s public magnet schools for the gifted are among the best accommodations in the country for such special learners (think Stuyvesant High School, profiled in Genius Denied). The city also starts gifted education in kindergarten, while some districts insist (wrongly) that it’s impossible to tell the difference until 3rd grade.

This year, the city is promoting a test for 4- and 5-year-olds to choose students for spots in the limited number of kindergarten and first grade gifted programs. The school system has been aggressively promoting the test in neighborhoods where parents may not be as savvy about these things. So far so good.

But this is New York, one of the most competitive cities in the country. And given the general weakness of the public school system, this test has suddenly become quite high stakes.  The New York Daily News recently ran a story on the issue.

I sympathize with Anna Commitante, head of NYC’s gifted program. She notes in the article that "It’s unfortunate that it’s turned into the belief that this is the only way to get a quality public education… Gifted doesn’t mean the classes are better or the kids are better. … These children learn differently and need modifications to their education program."

She’s absolutely right. One of the problems with gifted education in this country is that so much of the rest of education is so mediocre. In many schools parents perceive, rightly, that the gifted classes are the only ones where academic expectations are kept high. But all children deserve to be challenged to the extent of

Read More …