![[Nameplate]](http://gcdailyworld.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (24)
Many comments pertained directly to education, and I hope to address them in this response.
The first type of comment claims that many members of the community cannot pay more taxes to support education. While I agree that not everyone in a community can contribute financially, I do think the vast majority can. If we go back to the poll question, the fact remains that only 20% of the respondents would support paying more to ensure a financially secure school system. I am not na*ve enough to believe that only 20% of the community can afford an increase in taxes to support education -- I hope you are not as well.
This leads me right into my next point: I am sure that many people who claim that they cannot afford a tax increase can still afford luxury items (cigarettes, etc). In short, it all comes down to priorities. My intent of the article was to point out that only an extreme minority would be willing to pay more, when I believe it should be an extreme majority. A proper investment in education can only come to fruition if priorities are realigned.
I received an email saying that the primary reason that people are unwilling to fund education is that much of the money is spent toward socializing or sports rather than textbooks and teachers. This claim has some legitimacy. However, aren't the social and sports aspects of the educational experience an important and meaningful contribution to a child's overall education?
Personally, my education would not have been the same if I did not have the opportunity to play basketball or golf. To claim that the social aspect and involvement with athletics are not an integral part of the educational system misses the point of a well-rounded education that provides diverse opportunities for its students.
Despite the benefits, the respondent makes a good point. This is why community involvement and conversation is key to understanding where money should be allocated and what percentage should be given toward extra-curricular versus curricular activities. However, I believe the community should have trust in the local school board to allocate money appropriately (and if not, vote in members that they do) so that they are ensured that money they give toward education goes to both curricular and extra-curricular ends.
Another opposition was more philosophical in nature: What is the role of the public educational system (and should we even have one)? The respondent stated that it is the parent's responsibility to educate his or her child. Therefore, an increase in taxes could be better spent if it was allocated to each parent. In this way, the parents would have the ability to decide how to use that money to educate his or her child.
One of the many flaws in this thinking is that it assumes that each and every parent has a good knowledge base to teach his or her child in the same manner (or better) than the local school district. While I am sure that some home school parents are able to teach certain subjects with a level of expertise, it just does not work out for the general populace. Does the average home school parent possess the knowledge to teach science classes, English courses, and music? Thus, I would argue the most responsible way for a parent to educate his or her child is to send them to a strong school district where there are teachers that can instruct biology, music, and history.
Moreover, to claim that it is solely the parent's responsibility to educate his or her child disregards the community to which that child belongs. The community definitely has a stake in a child's education. He or she is part of a larger community, and this community only thrives when it ensures that its citizens are educated. Thus, while in an idealistic world people would not need government to "force" people to pay taxes in order to fund a school district, the real world dictates that this is how it must be done so that not only the individual, but also the community, flourishes. This also helps to affirm why community members who do not have a child or grandchild in the local school district should be willing to support the local school. The benefits of a well-educated youth affect all in a community.
The suggestion that most parents whose children receive an education in Greene County do not own property is disputable. Whether one is renting or owning, they are paying for property taxes, and an increase in property taxes would be distributed to all involved. Also, the point of my article was not to say that property taxes were the solution per se. The point was that the community needs to be willing to support the educational system financially and that it must be a top priority.
At Butler's graduation last May, our faculty speaker charged us to envision the world we live in otherwise. In essence, he was asking us to dream, aspire, and act for a world that is better than it is today. It is within the scope of making this world in which we live in better that we should challenge ourselves to give the youth the best opportunities to succeed.
Wouldn't the world be better otherwise if we invested more in the youth of the community? Let's rise up to the challenge and give the youth the education they deserve.
And for all who were concerned, I do pay taxes.
Caleb is a Linton-Stockton High School and Butler University graduate. He can be reached by e-mail at cnfische@gmail.com .
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
When a school system has 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 fail to graduate, it indicates a lack of interest in education by the parents. No amount of money is going to correct that, and these uneducated children will grow up to produce more uneducated children.
The downside to sports is that the long hours of practice year-round take a lot of time away from studying. I believe the requirements for participation in sports should be much higher, maybe a B average over the preceding three semesters. I also think that student participation should be limited to one or two sports and absolutely no practices except physical conditioning on days when class is not scheduled to be in session.
Another good, well written article Caleb. It is nice to see that there is a different point of view from someone on here. I believe the best thing a community can invest in is the education of the not only the children but the whole community. While it is true that not all people pay property taxes directly, many pay more than their fair share and many also do not even have a child that goes to a local school, but that is besides the point. The point of saying that every one benefits from a strong school system hits the nail on the head! Property values go up, more people moving to the community, ect. However, what many people that argued your points forget is that money does not buy everything. For instance there have been countless studies done that show the more the community is involved in the local school the better the school does. Also they show the more parents are involved, not financially but are physically there and supportive drastically improves a students success levels. So therefor the argument that people do not have the money is not exactly as stable as they would like to believe. Perhaps people would be more willing to give their time and effort rather than writing a check? Perhaps if they would not like to give your money maybe they could consider volunteering there time or special skills? Just some of my thoughts...
Sorry about the repetition, crazy computers...
newspeak08,
Why do you say that? What negative role have unions played in education? Define "over paid".
LOL_Noob--that was about the dumbest thing you could say...Don't educate our children because they might leave if they get too smart?? WOW!
While it is true that some leave, it is also true that some return to work at Crane, and in the future, WestGate. Some live here and commute to other cities. Not all kids are going to go to college to be Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers or Scientist. Many are going to be nurses, farmers,computer techs and general labor. They still need local schools to provide good education to them.
Indiana has 92 counties.
Greene County is ranked 80th in median household income.
Greene County is ranked 78th in unemployment rate.
"If we go back to the poll question, the fact remains that only 20% of the respondents would support paying more to ensure a financially secure school system. I am not na*ve enough to believe that only 20% of the community can afford an increase in taxes to support education -- I hope you are not as well. "
You may want to rethink your position.
As a retired teacher, I can tell you throwing money at the problem will not make it better.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/03/05/why-w...
Can Caleb explain why I should pay more for a school that in recent years lowered their grading standard.
Can Caleb explain why I should pay more for a school that allows a student who is failing all classes to participate in extra curricular activities.
Financially sound does not mean better schools.
I just wanted to respond to the portion of Mr. Fishcer's response that relates to my comments on his previous article.
1.) Parental Responsibility
"The respondent stated that it is the parent's responsibility to educate his or her child."
-- I could have been more clear in explaining this point. I did, however, explain a little further to another respondent that raised the same concerns as Mr. Fishcer. The parent is indeed responsible for providing a quality education for their child. This can be done through government education, private education, homeschooling, tutoring, etc. e.g. If my child is not receiving a quality education at Eastern Greene, then it is my responsibility to ensure that they get the quality education they deserve. This could conceivably be done through lobbying the school board to cut unnecessary expenses to be able to hire better teachers, supplementing my child's government education with some at-home tutelage, or, if I have the means, sending them to a suitable district or private school. But in the end it is my responsibility.
2.) Parental Ability
In this day and age, with resources available to even the pauper that make the Library of Alexandria look insignificant, I don't believe there is much of an argument here. I have, over my lifetime, had several teachers who, although they had intimate knowledge of their subject area, failed to impart that knowledge to their students. Isn't imparting the love of learning to the child more important than imparting the knowledge of a certain subject? Mr. Fishcer quotes a poet as saying "Education is not the filling of a bucket but the lighting of a fire." I could not agree more. When my wife is discouraged at a perceived lack of her ability to teach a certain subject I tell her that it is more important to teach them how to learn on their own, by appealing to their God-given curiosity, than to make sure all of the knowledge from a certain book is uploaded to their brains.
Teach the child love of learning, because in this modern age everyone has access to knowledge.
3. Government Education, should it exist?
It must. It is dictated in Article 8 of the Indiana Constitution that:
"Knowledge and learning, generally diffused throughout a community, being essential to the preservation of a free government; it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to encourage, by all suitable means, moral, intellectual, scientific, and agricultural improvement; and to provide, by law, for a general and uniform system of Common Schools, wherein tuition shall be without charge, and equally open to all."
Look at the purpose of this education though, as stated by our State's founders: "Knowledge and learning, generally diffused throughout a community, being essential to the preservation of a free government;". Thus it comes back to the exercise of free government, the preservation of our liberties. This is what gets lost in the discussion. Should the State act as a nanny, or should people exercise personal liberty and responsibility to make sure their children are properly raised? As my online handle may suggest, I am for liberty, and liberty requires personal responsibility. Throwing more money at the problems within government schools will not solve them.
LOL_N00b,
Are you suggesting that farmers and our hard-working men and women of Greene county are uneducated? Some of the most learned people I know are in our general work force. There are few jobs in existence today that don't require at least a high school diploma or GED.
I'm confused LOL_Noob. I truly don't mean any disrespect but are you saying that our children should aspire to no other calling than those that require the bare minimum? Are you saying that there is not more than corn in Indiana?
LOL-Noob---"The current level of education being provided is adequate."
That was never said in any of your post.
I would agree with those that say money alone will not solve the current issues in our education system. In fact, I think we should remove the unions that allow poor, unmotivated teachers to remain in our school system when they don't perform, because that is quite honestly, not the way it is in the real world. You perform, you keep your job. Yes parents should help and do more than most do today, but the issue is to teach a child and make them want to learn the material.
We should eliminate politicians and people with agendas from our education boards both state and locally. These people decide what is to be taught in the class. They are responsible for standardized testing that serves no purpose but to give the teachers more paperwork to fill out and less time to teach.
I'm growing weary of a common falsehood spouted every single time education comes up here in the blog.
You're seriously not going to like this but teacher's unions do not fight for/ support "bad teachers". Unions *do* make sure that laws and contracts are followed. That said, you'll believe what you want to about teacher's unions. I'll put my 23 years in the trenches against your opinion any day concerning unions.
I agree money is not necessarily the answer to all things but if you've truly been paying attention to any of the political discourse on MyMan, Tony the B and the rest of the anti-teacher politicians you'd know all schools are suffering from lack of money. The results are bigger classes and less one on one attention.
All the while we educators have the joy of listening to people outside of the reality of public schools bang their pulpits and blog their blogs about what a lousy job we are doing.
I have a great idea. Come walk in our shoes for a day. Take the abuse you dole out so willingly towards those of us in the fields. You know what? You couldn't take it! You'd fold like a wet sack.
You want to change the face of education? Change your attitude!! Pray for us and your kids. Have our backs for once in a row! We wouldn't need unions if you did those two things!!
You are wrong on many fronts. I have researched extensively and cannot find a credable study that shows class size helps learning. It is a myth like the ones you speak of. I can find many studies showing that competition among teachers promotes better teaching. I can find many that show firing the worst ones makes the system better. 85% of all class size studies show that bigger classes make no difference. 10% of the studies show no difference and the rest show some improvement. This is from a harvard analysis of all class size studies. Currently the guidelines to fire a teacher are over 95 pages long. We have employment laws and they are good enough for the rest of us. Teacher however feel the need to insulate themselves from the rules the rest of us live by. I have walked in your show for over 40 years and you are part of the problem that causes poor teachers to remain with a job.
Music Man---First of all thanks for your 23 yrs of teaching. Secondly you make some assumptions, and being a teacher, you should know what that makes you and me.
My attitude doesn't need changed and I don't have time to watch political TV. I have several family members on both sides that have taught and are teaching. I have the utmost respect for those that teach and do it for the right reasons. I have not doled out one single word of "abuse" to you or anyone that teaches and I do pray for our teachers and students. To ignore this part of the problem is to be blind to all of the issues. It's kind of like saying that building a border fence will solve all the immigration issues.
Money is an issue and I have no problem personally with paying more if that is what is needed. I will stand on my comments about unions though, because while unions may make sure the laws and the contracts are followed they do in fact support their teachers good or bad.
There are no performance standards for teachers, so unless a teacher does something illegal the union will fight for them. If you deny that then you are denying the truth. Everyone knows there are better teachers than others. There are those that connect and those that do not. There are teachers whose kids outperform other teachers in the same grade, yet we treat all teachers the same. We do not reward those that excel and we do not put in place measures to cause those below standard to improve. Your unions make sure they work according to the contract but unless they do something illegal your union will support them completely irregardless of their ability to teach!
I must agree, I find if very hard to swallow when a teacher that does a poor job gets the EXACT same treatment as a good teacher. We need competion and to be able to get rid of the bad apples with the same rules every other workplace uses. I have also done some reading on class size and was very surprised to find that most studies show smaller classes get no better education.
Thanks masonjim...I suppose I should take that personally eh? Just remember how bad the teacher's union is as you collect your teacher's retirement check each month won't you? Amazing...simply amazing...
Music Man--I addressed your assumptions about me and your biased statements about unions. Apparently, since you know my statements about them are true and you can't dispute them, you decide to go after one of your own, a retired teacher. WOW! YOU are exactly what is wrong with unions!! YOU don't care for any other viewpoint but your own.
I have never chosen to be a member of the union. I have lobbied against some of it's tactics for many years. I read long ago that teachers salary's were 18% higher due to the Union. I have always and continue to give 25% of my salary/retirement to charity, just because of people like you.
I'll let you have the last word I suppose...
Thanks for the encouragement.
I do think that most teachers do a fantastic job and are underpaid. I also don't understand why a teacher (music man) would have such a hard time understanding the reasons some think the union has gone to far. It would not be a travesty to admit that creating incentives to make teachers strive to be better is not a bad idea. A good teacher has nothing to worry about, we need them more than ever. If I were a good teacher I would be shouting for performance based pay. If I were a bad one I would fight it like the devil. I do believe that for our schools to get better more than money will be needed.
John,
It's not that. I am for incentives. The rub is this, who determines what is a good teacher and a bad teacher. I've seen this in the realm of band directors several times. One director is a perfect fit for the program and the program florishes while another equally skill director might not fit the program. Seniority is not a perfect way to assess which teacher should get what job but it's all we have that doesn't involve good-ol-boy politics. FYI I've been burned by seniority myself. The point in all this rattling of cages is truly this; I work hard and sharpen my axe constantly for the benefit of my students, but it sure would be nice to have people encourage me. I have found no such encouragement here!!
Music Man---Either you wear your feelings on your sleeve or you are reading way more into my comments than are there. I never made this personal and never made comments directed towards you or any teacher specifically in my original post. I simply stated that this is more than about money, and unions and all the stuff that goes with them are a part of that solution.
You state that the current seniority system is the only way we have now, and my question is why? The system in place is decades old and it needs to change. It protects subpar teachers and those that don't fit into certain situations. Why keep it? Doesn't it make sense for the teachers unions and the administrations to sit down and come up with a system that rewards those teachers that excel and puts systems in place to help the ones that don't meet the standards? I would think that a great teacher would never fear a system like this.
I personally think that good teachers are underpaid and I commend you for sharpening your axe as you say, but not all teachers do that as well as others. I want the best education that my tax dollars can buy, but I also don't want to be asked to pay more for a system that I believe needs revamped.
As a taxpayer I have no ability to change how unions deal with teachers, but you do. The only power I have is to vote for school boards and state administration officials and hope they do what they say they will do. The other option I have is to resist throwing more money at the current system.
"who determines what is a good teacher and a bad teacher"
That is a simple question, the teachers. I think all would be happy with an evaluation system designed by teachers, for teachers. All I am asking is for YOU to create a performance based system. No one wants some idiot to come in and fired the people they don't like.