- Posted by David on March 30, 2009
By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=93333 [go to this link to see a 3 minute video clip of Peter Hoekstra explaining why he believes parental rights are being overlooked in the nation's capitol and why a parental rights amendment is needed]
Though efforts to pass a constitutional amendment protecting parental rights have failed in the past, two U.S. legislators are preparing to reintroduce the idea this week; and this time, they say, the effort is backed by more than 60 congressional members.
Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., who introduced a parental rights amendment by himself last year, told the Agence France-Presse that he will be joined by Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., on Tuesday as they renew the fight.
According to a statement released to AFP by Hoekstra's office, the amendment "would clearly outline in the U.S. Constitution that parents, not government or any other organization, have a fundamental right to raise their children as they see fit."
"At a time when government at every level seems to encroach upon the ability of parents to choose the best for their children," Hoekstra writes on his website, "it is important to preserve parental rights into the Constitution."
Last summer Hoekstra introduced H.J.R. 97, proposing a constitutional amendment stating that the liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right that cannot be infringed upon by federal, state, or international treaty law without demonstrating government interest "of the highest order." Hoekstra asserts that legitimate cases of abuse and neglect fall under the "demonstrated government interest" clause.
Without any co-sponsors, however, H.J.R 97 died in committee.
According to ParentalRights.org, an organization dedicated to seeing the amendment passed, this year's effort, in addition to senatorial support from DeMint, has recruited 65 U.S. representatives who have committed to joining Hoekstra in co-sponsoring a parental rights amendment.
As WND reported, the president of the world's premier homeschool advocacy organization made a case for the amendment in a Washington Times commentary published last year:
"Few dispute the vital role of parents in raising the next generation, but, regrettably, few recognize that the fundamental role of parents is under direct attack," wrote J. Michael Smith, president of the Homeschool Legal Defense Association.
Smith pointed to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, an internation treaty approved by the Clinton administration but stalled by opposition in the Senate, as one example of governmental attempts to infringe on parental rights.
"It's possible that in the near future, the United States may significantly weaken the rights of parents to raise their children," Smith wrote. "Crucial decisions that parents are accustomed to making, such as what our children read, who they associate with, what kind of discipline is used, whether we take them to church, or whether we homeschool, all become decisions for the state if the United States ratifies the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child."
He continued, "By allowing the government to define and determine what is in the 'best interests of the child,' outside the context of abuse and neglect cases, the UNCRC in effect diminishes the parental role, replacing it with government supervision."
As WND reported, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., last month urged a hurry-up timetable for adoption of the UNCRC.
"Children deserve basic human rights ... and the convention protects children's rights by setting some standards here so that the most vulnerable people of society will be protected," Boxer said, according to Fox News.
Critics like Smith, however, argue the document, which creates "the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion" usurps the role of parents in directing their children's upbringing.
Opponents of the amendment, such as those that opposed a Colorado state version proposed in the 1990's, argue that the measure would protect child abusers, make public schools a battleground for parents' ideological issues and prevent teenage students from receiving sex education and family planning services through their schools.
Rob Boston, assistant director of communications for Americans United for Separation of Church and State argued against the amendment in a blog post last month, making many of the same arguments lodged against the Colorado initiative.
Boston also argued that the amendment is a back door approach to mixing public education dollars and religion, claiming through the amendment "states would be forced to give parents tuition vouchers for private and religious schooling since the right to direct a child's education would be enshrined in the Constitution."
Sen. DeMint, who will join Hoekstra in offering the amendment, has been involved in similar legislation in the past. DeMint was a co-sponsor of the Parents' Rights Empowerment and Protection Act of 2007, which required schools to obtain written parental permission before teaching children about sex or sexuality.
DeMint's bill, like Hoekstra's in 2008, never made it out of committee.
To succeed, the amendment Hoekstra and DeMint plan to introduce Tuesday will need to pass in both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate by two-thirds majorities each, then win ratification by three-fourths of the states.
- Posted by David on March 18, 2009
LIBBY QUAID
AP Education Writer
03/18/2009
SILVER SPRING, Md. (AP) - Plenty of people dream of leaving their jobs to become teachers. Today, more people are actually doing it.
Peter Vos ran an Internet startup. Now he teaches computer science to middle school kids in Maryland.
Jaime McLaughlin used to do people's taxes. Now he teaches math to sixth graders in Chicago.
Alisa Salvans was a makeup artist at Saks department store. Now she teaches high school chemistry in suburban Dallas.
These teachers, with real-life experience and often with deep knowledge of their subjects, are answering a call to service that is part of a strategy to dramatically boost the size and quality of the teaching work force.
Career switchers make up about one-third of the ranks of new teachers, and that number has jumped in the past decade. Now, as the recession deepens, even more people are deciding to become teachers.
---
For Vos, the Maryland teacher, it started with Dr. Seuss and "Winnie the Pooh." He would read to kids at his children's school - dramatic readings, with different character voices - and he loved the feeling he was making a difference. The children cried when he finished "Stuart Little."
"I actually enjoyed it a lot more than I expected, and the kids really took to it," Vos said. "The kids who really looked forward to this the most, the ones who were giving me big hugs when I showed up, were struggling readers."
Vos, 50, was hooked. His background was not in reading but in science and computers; he was a neuroscientist before starting his Internet company. He wound up at Argyle Middle School, an information technology magnet school in the Maryland suburbs of Washington.
Like Vos, McLaughlin is motivated by that "touchy-feely camaraderie" he has with his students. He teaches math at Albert R. Sabin Magnet School, a Spanish-language school in Chicago.
He dealt with people in his old job, as an accountant with two big firms. But it was always about money.
Teaching is different. "Those kids really are pretty much your family six, seven, eight hours a day," he said. "You're helping raise them."
McLaughlin, 38, had practical motivations, too. He had always wanted to be a teacher - his father and uncles are in education - but he didn't think it paid enough. Once he got married and had a son, there was a second income that would let him take a pay cut. And there was a little boy he could spend more time with, if his workday ended with the school bell.
"We have that much more time to spend together," McLaughlin said.
---
Interest has surged in becoming a teacher, and more pathways are emerging to get people there quickly.
The New Teacher Project, which helps people switch from other careers to the classroom, said 29,576 people have applied to its teaching fellows programs this year, a 44 percent increase over last year. The group was founded in 1997 by Michelle Rhee, now the schools superintendent in the District of Columbia.
There has been similar interest in Teach For America, which recruits new college graduates, although not career-switchers. The organization has received more than 35,000 applications, 42 percent more than last year.
Not everyone who applies will make it into the classroom. But the avalanche of applications is encouraging to the Obama administration, which plans to dramatically increase the number of teachers. Career-changers are an important part of the plan.
"One of the only benefits of living in such tough economic times now is that you have folks getting laid off and looking for work," Arne Duncan, President Barack Obama's education secretary, said in an interview with The Associated Press.
"There are great folks out there who are passionate, who care a lot about children, who often have great content knowledge - math, science, humanities, whatever it might be - who just didn't happen to major in education. We want to help get them into the classroom," Duncan said.
In his old job as chief executive of Chicago Public Schools, Duncan brought hundreds of career-changers, including McLaughlin, into the classroom. They went through a highly selective program that puts them through intensive summer training, then starts them full time in the fall while they keep doing evening coursework.
Duncan, together with the New Teacher Project, began the Chicago Teaching Fellows program with the help of federal grants. The economic stimulus bill signed by Obama provides even more money for getting career-changers into the classroom.
---
Programs such as Chicago's can be the answer for people who don't have the time or money to earn another college degree.
That is what Salvans, now a chemistry teacher at Richardson High School in suburban Dallas, was looking for when she decided to become a teacher. She had put herself through college as a makeup artist, which wound up paying more than entry-level jobs when she graduated with an environmental chemistry degree.
Salvans, 39, stuck with makeup until her second daughter was born. Then she decided her schedule managing a counter at Saks, combined with her husband's as a restaurant manager, was just too hectic for two kids.
Friends had always said she would make a good teacher, and Salvans thought they were right. She applied to Texas Teaching Fellows, a program like Chicago's that trains teachers in the summertime and lets them teach full time in the fall.
She had to go through a rigorous, six-hour interview.
"Part of the interview was that you had to do a teaching session for five to 10 minutes," Salvans said. "I thought, 'Well, I haven't taught science.' But what I would do all the time is teach women about makeup and their faces.
"So I got pencils and toothbrushes at the dollar store and taught everybody how to measure out and find the best eyebrow shape," she said.
Not all programs are as selective as those in Texas and Chicago. Of the 600 or so alternate teacher certification programs in the 50 states, many have low standards, admitting most of the people who apply.
Sandi Jacobs, vice president for policy at the National Council on Teacher Quality, said only the most qualified - those with very strong subject knowledge and high academic standing - should have a streamlined path to the classroom.
"We've seen those road markers sort of disappear; most states do not require the admission standards to be higher," Jacobs said.
At the other end of the spectrum, some require so much coursework - 30 hours, in some cases - they may as well be college degree programs. That discourages some very attractive candidates from applying, Jacobs said.
There is less dispute about the teachers themselves. A study released last month by the Education Department found students did just as well whether their teachers came through alternate routes or traditional ones.
---
All three teachers found jobs in schools with high numbers of poor and minority students. That is no accident. Teaching shortages are most acute in these schools, especially in math, science and special education. Shortages are the main reason why programs such as those in Chicago and Texas began.
Programs like them have been around for more than two decades; the first began in 1983 in New Jersey.
Being a new teacher is hard enough, but working in high-needs schools can add to the challenge.
Vos has Spanish-speaking kids who speak little if any English. While he once lived in Puerto Rico and his Spanish is good, he sometimes turns to a worn Spanish-English dictionary at the front of his classroom.
"How do you say 'slides' in Spanish?" Vos asks a couple of bilingual boys as he tries to help a Spanish-speaking girl use Microsoft PowerPoint. They shrug and shake their heads as Vos thumbs through the dictionary.
McLaughlin says his students, even in elementary school, are constantly lured by gangs and drugs. Some transfer from tough neighborhood schools where they're used to fighting: "We have to acclimate them to a situation where they don't have to fight and defend themselves every day," McLaughlin said.
---
Despite the challenges of teaching, career-changers tend to stay on the job longer than other new teachers, said Emily Feistritzer, who heads the National Center for Alternative Certification.
Their maturity makes them more prepared for teaching - they are older and wiser and often have children of their own. Their life experience is also relevant to the classroom, she said.
"It's not just theoretical knowledge," Feistritzer said. "They can bring in how it's used and use examples from the real world."
All three teachers say they are here to stay.
McLaughlin, after only two years in the classroom, can't imagine another career change. "I'm a lifer now. I'm going to be in this till the end," he said.
Neither can Vos.
"I get to play with technology all day. I'm surrounded by potential. I have a tremendous amount of latitude, because we're on the cutting edge," Vos said. "And they pay me."
- Posted by David on March 16, 2009
Julia Steiny: Use stimulus money to achieve fair school financing formula
01:00 AM EDT on Sunday, March 15, 2009
There is not enough money in the world to satisfy the vultures circling President Obama’s stimulus package.
And the very worst thing we could do with such a windfall is merely to plug our huge budget holes.
“We can not create increases [to our per-pupil expenditure] that we can’t afford two years from now. Even if the economy rebounds, we’ll still be in a worse position than we are now. We won’t be back to where we were last year or even two years ago.”
This according to John Simmons, director of the business-backed Rhode Island Expenditures Council, crusaders for rescuing Rhode Island’s sad finances.
Even so, I hereby join the vultures.
It might be that only the stimulus could help Rhode Island find its way to a predictable, equitable financing formula for public school students.
We are the only state in the nation that does not have one, the only state with no rationale for how much the state should contribute to educating each public-school child, equitably and with consideration for special needs like poverty. Without such a rationale, each year the state actually increases the inequities between financing for children in one zip code and those in another.
Now the range runs between Cumberland’s per-pupil expenditure (ppe) of $10,392 to Newport’s $18,044. (Data from Information Works.) Maddeningly, the high-spending districts aren’t necessarily investing in kids, but often in expensive, educationally-useless perks for grown-ups, like free health care and give-away sick-leave policies. Stimulus money would allow the state and districts to buy back, renegotiate, refinance and reshape their budgets so that two years from now we are no longer the obviously-mismanaged lunkheads depicted in last month’s New York Times piece about Rhode Island — “Smallest State Grapples with Oversized Problems.”
Happily, state Senate Majority Leader M. Teresa Paiva Weed says, “A fair funding formula is a priority for the Senate this year.”
And the Board of Regents has approved a straightforward list of principles for creating a new formula that provides predictable financing, equitably applied, “with a money-follows-the-student methodology,” which means the financing is attached to the child, who might choose a charter or vocational school, and not the home district.
Then why is getting to a formula so hard here?
Ten years ago, the General Assembly stopped using the formula they had. The state was struggling financially, so legislators squabbled about how to distribute school aid. They all believed their own districts deserved more money, for a variety of reasons.
Their solution was to give all districts a percentage increase over whatever they’d spent the prior year, typically 3 percent, though last year it was zero. That base, set 10 years ago, was never adjusted for changes in student enrollment.
Since 1999, Rhode Island’s student enrollment dropped by 6.8 percent.
Three districts have had increases, if you include the two additional students in Block Island, who expanded their system by 1.4 percent. The other gains were in Barrington, with 2.4 percent (79 students more than in 1999) and Burrillville, with 1.6 (41 students).
As Barrington grew, its tiny allocation from the state did not. Their per-pupil share from the state, already quite small, effectively got smaller.
Barrington illustrates how little money correlates to the quality of education. As the fifth lowest-spending district, it has arguably the best schools. Yes, the community is well-heeled, but so are others that spend more for weaker student achievement and less parent satisfaction. Barrington’s secret has been to negotiate “thin” labor contracts that only cover the basics. The staff makes decisions for students, instead of cementing educationally dubious practices in fat, legally-binding contracts. Labor peace was not purchased with perks that drained money from the core mission of the schools.
Conversely, where student population declined, the state’s share per pupil effectively got larger. Five districts had double-digit declines. Newport lost almost a quarter of its students. Newport, and other districts, built the accidental bonus into their budget, mainly with raises and perks for the adults.
Surely their most galling expense is the just-under $1,500 of each per-pupil expenditure that goes to lifetime health benefits for Newport’s retirees, something other districts never dreamed of. Newport curtailed this practice in 2005 and is trying to get new retirees to accept larger co-pays. But even if the benefit dropped to zero tomorrow, they will be paying for this decision for many years to come. Bristol-Warren stopped a similar benefit back in mid-1990s, and now they’re down to paying $800 out of each student’s per-pupil expenditure to cover that cost.
But you can’t just take the money away from Newport, or any other district on the grounds that it was naughty of them to hand out irresponsible perks in the first place. To do so would kill the district. The students would take it in the neck, not the miscreants who signed away their money. In otherwise rich Newport, the majority of public school students are low-income.
Paiva Weed, who represents Newport, says, “What we don’t want to see happen is a leveling down, pitting suburban against urban districts. We’ve seen too many floor fights of urban versus suburban.”
“Leveling down” means taking money away from some districts and redistributing it to others through the formula. She’d like the state to leave the share of the overspending districts where it is until the lowerspending districts catch up. Very expensive. I give Paiva Weed a ton of credit for having the guts to sponsor the often-hated tax cap bill called 3050, which finally forced some spending restraints on schools and towns. But politically she’s caught between a real financing formula and her town’s bad financial decisions.
The state could use the stimulus money to, for example, buy off those retirees so the district can start fresh. Newport’s retiree benefit shows why the state should get involved with standardizing and financing benefits — to bring about public accountability, large, cost-effective insurance pools, and equity among the adults. Almost every district suffers from budget-busting decisions, like Newport’s, that contribute nothing to education. They’ll need help digging themselves out of their self-made holes. In two years they’ll need lower, more manageable costs.
Paiva Weed says, “The most important thing about the stimulus is that we can not create a cliff to fall off of in two years.”
Well yes. And simultaneously, we need to shift the focus of school financing to the needs of the kids, via a financing formula, and away from grown-ups’ political power.
Julia Steiny, a former member of the Providence School Board, consults for government agencies and schools; she is co-director of Information Works!, Rhode Island’s school-accountability project. She can be reached at juliasteiny@cox.net , or c/o EdWatch, The Providence Journal, 75 Fountain St., Providence, R.I. 02902.