The scramble to handle tens of thousands of displaced students provides a crucial opportunity for innovative reform.
Hurricane Harvey has left Houston’s citizens displaced, damaged, and in need of an opportunity to rebuild. Luckily, the destructive hurricanes of our country’s past have left a model for recovery that Texas is prepared to utilize. With hundreds of devastated schools, Houston must look to New Orleans for proof that school choice can provide students and parents with bright prospects following the tragedy.
Principals and administrators reported working last Monday for the first time this school year, only to find dozens of buildings with severe flood damage. NPR reports this week that as many as 25,000 students could be displaced, while administrators scramble to find bookcases and computers in this expensive cleanup.
But Houston does have options.
The Texas Tribune explains the Texas legislature should make home schooling and virtual schooling a legitimate option for enrollment for students affected by the storm. While parents are transitioning students across districts and rebuilding their homes, a virtual classroom or home schooling is one of few options to provide continuity in their child’s education.
Because Texas has a part time legislature, this can only happen if Governor Abbot (R-Tex.) calls a special session. The next scheduled legislative session is not supposed to happen in Texas until January 2019.
Houston’s school system has had problems for years; while suburban schools are improving, urban schools have been consistently under performing. This was a similar dilemma New Orleans had before Katrina.
As U.S. News of Aug. 2015 writes,
When Hurricane Katrina surged through the Gulf of Mexico into Louisiana on August 29, 2005, the 56,000-student public school system here, already crippled by corruption and incompetence, was wiped out…State authorities and school reformers saw an opportunity born of necessity. Even before the storm, Louisiana officials had set up a special state authority to take over the worst schools in a school system where only half the students earned diplomas. After Katrina, the Louisiana legislature turned over 80 percent of New Orleans’ 126 schools to the Louisiana Recovery School District with a mandate to recreate them as charter schools.”
With tragedy ravaging all of the New Orleans school systems, charter schools provided a bright spot for hope and renewal.
Just ten years after Katrina, the percentage of students passing standardized test nearly doubles to 62 percent, while the districts graduation rate climbed to 73 percent. The aforementioned U.S. News report explains, even in a city beset by poverty, the assistance of groups like Teach for America sparked new innovation into the charter schools, dramatically improving their performance.
This increased prosperity and hope for parents across the state. A report from the Education Research Alliance found that when parents were given the choice as to where they wanted their children to go to school, 86 percent chose to send their child to a school other than the nearest option.
Parent’s want control over the schools their children attend, and when they have it the improved performance is clear.
As Houston scrambles to find an education plan for thousands of students post-Harvey, implementing reforms that promote school choice is a necessity.
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has made school choice a pillar of her role, now she will finally have the chance to implement it. While Katrina was a tragedy, it taught the country that when parents are given the opportunity to educate their children in a way that works for them, they do it well.
As Houston attempt to rebuild, looking to options such as homeschooling, virtual schooling, charter schools, and open districts provides the people hope for improvement a hope they desperately need right now.
30 comments
When parents are given the opportunity to act in the interests of their children, the overwhelming majority will do so. What has stopped much needed reform is the socialist left represented by Democrats.
By the way, not only Houston, but now the entire State of Florida will have the opportunity to create a better more competitive educational system for the kids. Maybe this is one of the blessings of a couple of the most horrific natural disasters in American history.
I also suggest a read of the conservative treehouse. There is an absolutely riveting
article about what is happening in the center of Florida. The article is an onsite report and very much descriptive of the horrific nature of the situation.
Hurricanes are natures way of cleaning out the wetlands. I am with you , on the other hand they must exercise great caution oversight when it comes to money. Where there is green there is greed. There was an FBI Investegation of a Company who took Fed money to rebuild a school in LA using shoddy practices. All I can think of is the Iraqi Billions on pallets loaded on C-130’s.
The cash should hit the classroom, not the golf course!
Corruption will not be in short supply.
I trust parents fully, it is the others in line with their hand out saying; I am here to help.
I have faith in G_d
I trust my *immediate family*
I am a septic of others.
For those who wanted choice of various kinds here is your opportunity don’t screw it up , lead without blame.
Succeed or fail not; “If we only had more money”
Make the team better, don’t just put on a different uniform.
Where it has been tried, educational competition has generally, but not perfectly, succeeded. When the government gets out of the way and lets innovation take hold, the kids tend to succeed.
Because education is handled on the local level with state involvement, it is truly foolhardy to assign partisan politics — especially the fringe socialist left — as a villain in school reform. Neither party has a monopoly on the folly that can constitute public education, nor is either party excluded from the innovation and good ideas that can arise from the best intentions.
Warmac, we know you hate Democrats, that you blame them for the fringe “socialist left” and see little to no blame for Republicans or the fringe right that attaches itself. It gets old, especially when its as big a crock as it is when talking about public education. Plenty of Republican controlled states and localities to prove otherwise, and yet the US south is hardly a bedrock of innovative excellent education.
So, to you, the Department of Education with a budget of $70B and about 4500 employees has no impact on public education. Since its inception, the DOEd bureaucracy has effectively stonewalled public education innovation outside the government monopoly, and Reagan knew it and tried to get it abolished. The DoEd has been instrumental in the forced implementation of common core as its latest and greatest debacle.
As far as who is the villain in the stonewalling, there is no question that the various teachers unions, supported almost exclusively by the Democrat Party, resist reform. About the only time a reform of any magnitude outside the hallowed confines of the current public system monopoly occurs, it is a Republican or a natural disaster that is its impetus.
As far as Democrats are concerned, I don’t hate them as Americans, I hate the damage they are inflicting in the name of social justice. To the Democrat leaders and many Democrats themselves, educational excellence is secondary to diversity in education – happening right now in my neck of the woods as the schools try redistricting to achieve greater diversity. Imagine, educational excellence is secondary to diversity – let that sink in for a minute.
Your comment that neither party has a monopoly on the folly that is public education is blatantly untrue. The public schools in virtually every major city in the USA are controlled by Democrats. The best schools tend to be in suburban areas where educated parents fill in the blanks for their kids, or have the resources to take them out of failure.
My prediction is that all public education will eventually yield to technology. In Virginia, I can write a letter stating that my child will in the future be homeschooled. The resources online are extensive and many parents organize into small homeschooling groups. I can send my child to a private school. It can be Christian, Classic, Montessori, Catholic, Secular, etc. What private and homeschooler parents don’t have is a voucher to help with costs or, for that matter, access to extracurricular programs at public schools. And, guess what, it is the Democrats who are stonewalling the extracurricular access.
In Houston and Florida, the public education system will have to yield to the innovation that has been resisted by politicians of the left for so many years now. I hope every American child reaches his or her potential. Without it, the country will become less and less competitive in a very competitive world.
Mac,
Not saying anything derogatory about childeren but if you home school and you desire your child to play on a public school sports team be careful what you wish for. I coach ball I know.
There are some home school parents that I know formed their own Travel Baseball Team playing USSSA tournaments, I think that they are much happier than having their childeren on the public school team. Mine are public school , we do travel ball also. Pass the law if you will but the reward is sweeter outside of it, speaking from experience.
In my area, we have kids baseball leagues that not associated with the public schools. They have been very successful.
That is one thing about Democrats that really pisses me off. When it comes to the children of those who entered the country illegally, Democrats remind us that “children should never suffer for the choices made by their parents.” BUT those same bleeping Democrats, hypocrites that they are, will fight tooth and nail to keep homeschooled kids off of public school teams. When it comes to white, homeschooled kids, and let’s not kid ourselves, MOST homeschooled kids are white, the Democrats make the kids pay for the choices made by their parents. I think even the effectively obfuscating Mr. Swinford could not defend Democratic hypocrisy on that one.
The hypocrisy is obvious and that is why when confronted by it, Democrats have to scream and change the subject. The Republicans are clearly on the right side of this argument but it is difficult to penetrate the utter dominance of the leftist ideology. As I said before here, technology is going to force changes to the failed public school system regardless of the left’s protestations.
Within the next decade, the need for centralized educational facilities will give way to virtual learning environments. The only question is who will do the k-12 babysitting when the parents are at work. Will we see collectives as we see with Kindercare? Will we extend it to Elementarycare where 20 kids get together in a local learning store – I saw this with a lego operation in my area. I guess somebody is studying this and maybe even exploring business opportunities – and I hope it is the Home School Associations of America.
There are also school choice advocates who fear the state’s intrusion into vouchers. Those who think that vouchers are free of state restraints and busybody activities need to look at what they are getting and what they have to give in terms of vouchers. It vouchers are not free of strings, look out.
Again, Warmac, you extrapolate to falsehood. No, I do not discount federal impact, but there can be no question about the notion that local interests rule education with both state and federal trailing far behind in addressing that which local voters have properly reserved for their own control.
If Democrats control local politics, it is because voters choose for them to do so, and yet this is clearly not the case throughout the South. By your notion, schools in the South should be outperforming those in the North, and yet the opposite is true.
You are partisan to a fault. You carry a hammer and everything appears to you as a nail, your credibility shot. Let’s make outcomes the criteria upon which we judge education efforts and stop partisan bickering about the inputs.
My outcome is a better educated child. Your outcome appears to be an excuse for public school failure. I favor competition to achieve this. You appear to favor continuation of a failed monopoly.
I certainly will not apologize for being a republican and a constitutional conservative. Partisanship is not the bad thing you make it out to be. Change doesn’t come from the do nothing middle who are complacent and willing to accept excuses for continuing failure.
An example of monopoly abuse in my area. Elementary school fails to meet state standards. School board is required to make provisions for parents to go to other schools. School board allows one choice – a school farthest away and one that was on the failure borderline. A parent choosing the alternative had to provide own transportation. In other words, failure led to greater failure for parents and children.
You Intentionally disgust with your ad hominem attack. Even the barest suggestion that I excuse public school failure to the detriment of children is an outrageous lie.
You are not a Republican. You do not support Republicans as the party requires. Instead you run them down, dividing to the point of inaction. I needn’t employ cut and paste to prove the point, it is well-established that you excoriate Republican legislators despite your partisan rhetoric.
There is no education monopoly. In fact you can choose and have many choices.
There are great schools all around the country and partisan control bears little relationship to outcomes. Everyone wants the best schools possible for their children.
You have spent most of your time commenting about how I was wrong even when I wasn’t. As far as not being a republican, I am certainly not an establishment republican most of whom are far more comfortable with globalist interests than American citizen interests. (Trump won because the citizens of the USA had enough of the anti-American drivel coming from the Obama administration and the anemic behavior of the Bush administration. The hope was that the GOPe could make America great again. They have failed.)
Yes, there are great schools around the country. There are also great parents who tire of constant problems with the average school and the horrific problems associated with the poorest of schools. (I had a cab ride with a somali cab driver. He lived in a city slum with his wife, an educated woman. He was terrified about the future of his children and asked if I had any suggestions. I asked if he had a computer and also found out that his wife had been a teacher. I suggested he check out home schooling assets on line. He had never heard about them before and thought the government would arrest him if he home schooled. Democrats are really great at scaring people into submission. Oh, that is a distinctly partisan comment.)
Your comment about public education not being a monopoly is false on its face. Upwards of 98% of kids go to government provided schools at a cost of $15,000 plus or minus a couple of $K.
Your comment about many choices is simply ridiculous. Children are assigned to public schools based on geography and little else. If a kid has a real problem in a school, the school will assign a counselor of some type even when the school culture itself is the problem. About the only way a kid can escape failure is to become so massive a problem that the school has no choice but to move him or her out. (By the way, this actually happened in my neck of the woods. A girl student became so disruptive that the school was forced to concede defeat and let her go elsewhere. She went to another school and loved it. She was even written about in the local newspaper as an example of how her failure became a great success story. Nothing about the school except it was lauded for “helping” her adjust to a different environment. Frankly, an utter bunch of garbage if you actually read the article and thought about what it was telling you).
Many choices, including private schools and home schooling. In addition, population mobility inspires movement to better schools, and some districts permit choice within the district. Teachers, too, have choices.
Neither party can claim success along partisan lines. Blaming Democrats or Republicans is hardly the point, else finding school success stories would be simple. It is not.
Virginia has one of the nations most vibrant home school operations and a huge largely unreported success story for Virginia’s kids. For your information, there are local stores that specifically cater to home schoolers because of this and their are annual meetings as well.
Now, who is it who proposed a Tebow bill for the kids. Who is it who opposed the Tebow bill for the kids. The former is a Republican. The latter is a Democrat. The truth is that the Democrats have resisted school choice and vouchers across the nation and in Virginia as well.
You see issues as Democrat vs Republican, Warmac. It’s almost if not clearly pathological. Because Democrats control in some areas, Republicans in others, we’d see causal statistics to support your claims, but it’s not so clear as you make it.
One thing is clear: Virginia offers ample home schooling options. It’s an important choice available to parents.
We have a front row seat for the other issue.
“No this new School better have 3 bathrooms” Wait and see the recipe of the crap pie is just now being baked.
Gentleman,
I am positive that the both of you a fabulous individuals let’s not let the baffoons in politics categorize men like you.
Well, I am humbled by your generosity – at least I presume you imply me as one of the participants. If I am wrong, then disregard this comment. By the way, there is really a need for something like 80 different bathrooms for all the genders identified to this point. I am sure Fairfax County will lead in this regard.
Yes, it was for you also
*I truly enjoy this site and it’s participants*. It is enlightening to have other points of view, sometimes it causes me to reevaluate mine.
I like Jim P. , a while back his solution to the bathrooms was just 1 and everyone uses it , I agree with him.
Are you aware that there is a college that caters to home schooled children?
More than one — there are more than a few. Which makes sense, the market offers choice.
Well, I know I can name one in Virginia. Mary Baldwin caters to gifted and talented early teens regardless of prior education. Patrick Henry very much recruits home schooled kids. Don’t know of any other Virginia schools that do this.
I’ve looked hard but I don’t see the “extrapolation to falsehood”. I do see schools, locally and nationally, that have too much administration, too much social issue agenda, and too little “reading, writing and arithmetic”. The source of these adverse influences on education might be debated, but unless you include progressive policies and the federal government, it will be a difficult debate. If defense of the existing system is based on “that’s what the voters chose”, then it seems completely hypocritical to deny parents the choice of where and how their children are educated. That sort of hypocrisy is, of course, a trademark of today’s Democrat party and policy.
It is difficult for parents to fight back when they are shut out of the discussion. My example of a failed elementary school and the response of the local school board is an example where the parents were punished because the school failed. Try going to a school board meeting and asking them to study options to a proposed new high school facility. They are so used to doing more of the same that the idea of doing something different is treated with blank stares at best.
And yes, it is a form of hypocrisy to scream “we are doing it for the children” when the result is ever worsening education for children. As Spock would say “illogical”.
There are many examples of where diversity rather than focus on need dominates. One of my recent favorites concerns a major university who was trying to recruit black high school students for medical school. In the beginning, the flunk out rate was astronomical. The university decided that a summer course for blacks only would be the answer. When a white student complained, he was told that there would be no change in the admissions. The white student’s response was that this was racial discrimination and the dean of the department admitted it was. Things remained the same for a while, and then the course which had been successful at helping black students stay in med school was eliminated. You might ask why the change – a summer course in how to study was substituted for a summer course in anatomy. The how to study course was taught by a black professor from another school.
Extrapolation to falsehood: I did not write that the federal government has no impact, only that school control is primarily local. Parents do have choice. There are both private and public schools and in some districts choice within the public school system. All in addition to the right to home school.
We are close to agreement on this statement.
Notably, a public school in my area is about to experiment with a Montessori classroom environment. This will occur sometime in 2018. My only question is one of appropriateness and unfair competition. To some extent this is a theft of a very successful private operation, one that profits from that success both in terms of its well developed kids and in terms of dollars. The public schools can put this operation out of business and then close the program at the whim of a school board.
I do not think it inappropriate or unfair in any way. I do not consider it theft at all. It’s all about execution, not the idea. Indeed, I am pleased that all cars have windshield wipers, the clutch on the left, gas on the right, brake in the middle. Competition is the essential core of a market-based economy. There is and should be choice aplenty.
Everything you mention is within the sphere of private competition. When the government, with its virtually unlimited resources, goes into competition with the private sector it skews the market and can even destroy it. It is no surprise that the fortune 100 companies have major lobbying organizations in DC to protect their interests.
By the way, Obama virtually destroyed the entire coal industry so one has to wary of government interference via money and regulations.