________________________________________  THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT August 01, 2005 - Vol. 5, No. 29 ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯  Covering education news in Vermont and beyond... Informative, provocative, unique... Published by Vermonters for Better Education  VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.com NEWS & ANALYSIS... SHARING THE CREDIT...OR THE BLAME? A curious thing happened last week. Rep. George Cross (D-Winooski), chairman of the House Education Committee, penned an op/ed piece on early education where he ostensibly tried to share the credit for this expansion of public school with Sen. Wendy Wilton (R-Rutland). "The early education language passed by the Legislature this year," Cross wrote at the end of his piece, "was introduced by Sen. Wendy Wilton (R-Rutland) after at least three specific discussions in the Senate Education Committee." Here's what's wrong with that claim.... Sen. Wilton did not support the early education language that spelled out the funding formula for public preschool inserted in the budget bill. She wasn't even a co-sponsor of S.132, the early education bill that stayed in committee this year. What she did sponsor was an AMENDMENT - an amendment that desperately tried to stop the negative impact the early ed language would likely have on private providers. Perhaps it isn't credit Rep. Cross is so eager to share. Maybe it's blame. This theory is bolstered by the fact that it appears that Rep. Harry Chen (D-Mendon) recently wrote a plea for help to one of his colleagues (best guess - Rep. Martha Heath) because of heat from his constituents on the early ed language in the budget bill. The following is an email from "Harry" to "Martha" received last week in the VER email box by mistake: "Hi Martha, Can you help me respond to Libby's column? (Editor's note: the Vermont Education Report followed the email.) I have several constituents angry about the budget language. I hope you are well and thanks. Harry" Rep. Cross rides to the rescue with an op/ed in the Rutland Herald. The op/ed also appeared in the Stowe Reporter. The claim that Sen. Wilton "introduced" the early ed language wasn't the only thing wrong with Rep. Cross's commentary. In an attempt to justify the legal authority for early ed funding, he spends four paragraphs outlining the history of early ed spending in the state. As asked before on these electronic pages - if it was already legal, why did the legislature have to add it to statute? Why the big rush and fancy maneuvering to get it into the budget bill if it was already there to begin with? Rep. Cross also claims taxes won't go up and private providers will be protected. Here, however, is a piece of irony. He cites the Burlington area as a good example of public/private collaborations. The Burlington school district, he writes, "passed through more than $447,000 to private providers during the last school year." He fails to mention the recent news of Burlington's school budget shortfall and the possible need to raise taxes to cover it. To read his entire op/ed, go to: http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050728/NEWS/507280304/1039/OPINION03 To read a letter written by the editor of this newsletter in response to Rep. Cross's commentary, go to: http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050730/NEWS/507300306/1037/OPINION02 After reading the op/ed, readers who are so inclined can send letters to the Rutland Herald at: letters@rutlandherald.com or to the Stowe Report at: news@stowereporter.com Or, readers who wish to point out Rep. Cross's inaccurate understanding of the early education language might want to consider writing to his own district's paper, the Winooski Eagle at: Editor@OurEagle.org If readers see Rep. Cross's op/ed appear in other papers in their area, please notify the VER at VTBetterEd@aol.com FREEDOMWORKS DIRECTOR RESPONDS The executive director of FreedomWorks, Rob Roper, also responded to Rep. Cross's commentary on early education. Roper's letter, which as of this writing has not yet appeared in the Rutland Herald, is printed below: To the Editor: A recent commentary by Rep George Cross (D-Winooski) regarding publicly financed preschool programs is misleading and inaccurate. Since space is limited, I'll correct only the most egregious errors: Cross says that the schools have been working hard with private providers of early childhood programs. The reality is that until an independent organization, FreedomWorks, alerted private providers to this legislation, the majority of private providers had no idea this expansion of the public school system was even taking place. There was no effort at communication let alone cooperation. Cross implies dishonestly that this will not raise taxes. At a forum in St. Albans back in June, I personally heard several public school administrators and Senator Don Collins declare that, "To do this right it is going to be expensive." In the limited places where these programs are going on, they are already draining $14 -24 million out of the education fund. In the Burlington area (which Cross cites as an example of good public/private collaborations), the school district is currently suffering a $2.3 million budget shortfall that will require massive cuts or massive tax increases. In a telephone conversation with a FreedomWorks member, Cross himself admitted that these programs will raise property taxes. Private providers are losing business under this program. In a story done by VPR, a Public School Principal admitted that the program she ran was siphoning four-year-olds away from private providers. In reality, the percentage of private providers who benefit from this program is very small. Most inexcusably, Cross tries to shift responsibility for this ill-conceived and poorly executed policy onto Senator Wendy Wilton (R-Rutland). Senator Wilton was the lone elected official to stand up to the cabal of Senators Collins, Condos and Bartlett as those three conspired to sneak this policy into law through the back door using the Budget Bill. Representative Cross owes Senator Wilton an apology. I suspect that Cross is covering for his colleagues as Vermonters begin to realize what an expensive, poorly planned, and badly timed policy this is. Respectfully, Robert Roper, Executive Director FreedomWorks Vermont  FUNDRAISING BONUSES! Thanks to those who've responded to our annual plea for money! We still need more, though, to support the efforts of Vermonters for Better Education. Remember, we're one part-time staffer and a volunteer board - yet we've been able to play a major role in education policy in the state. Here's a special offer of thanks to donors who send in a check of $100 or more.... We'll send you a signed copy of David Kirkpatrick's 1997 booklet "School Choice: An Idea that Can't be Conquered." Kirkpatrick's columns frequently appear in this newsletter. We feature one today (below). This 30-page booklet was originally published by the Milton and Rose Friedman Foundation. For donors who contribute $300 or more... We'll send you a signed copy of a teen mystery inscribed to the child of your choice (provide the name with your donation) by the Edgar-nominated author herself (who also happens to be the editor of this newsletter). Bonus thank-you gifts are available while supplies last. Donors who sent in contributions in the past two months may request one of the bonus gifts by emailing VTBetterEd@aol.com Send in your check today: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, Vermont 05701. (If you'd prefer not to receive the thank-you bonuses, please let us know.) Thanks!  THE GOVERNOR TALKS ABOUT EDUCATION - IN IOWA Governor Jim Douglas attended the National Governors Association Annual Meeting last month, prompting his communications office to send out a July 13 press release with the following opening: "As states confront new national education requirements, including ensuring that every child has access to a highly qualified teacher, governors will focus on the critical issue of teacher recruitment, pay and retention during the upcoming 2005 National Governors Association (NGA) Annual Meeting in Des Moines, Iowa, July 15-18. "Governor Jim Douglas, a member of the committee, joined the NGA today in announcing that 'Strategies to Recruit, Reward and Retain Teachers' will headline NGA's Education, Early Childhood and Workforce Committee meeting Sunday, July 17." According to the release, Governor Douglas says, "We are fortunate in Vermont to have schools full of dedicated educators, but we must continue to recruit talented people to become teachers by creating incentives and reducing barriers that keep successful, qualified and motivated people out of this important profession." VER couldn't agree more. So we asked what the governor is doing to bolster the ranks of highly-qualified teachers on his home turf in Vermont. His spokesperson provided this response: "One of the areas the Governor is most interested in is promoting and enhancing alternative certification routes. He's particularly interested in the success of the TAP program in Essex. We'll be talking more about this and other education issues when the Governor announces his priorities for the upcoming legislative session." Here's the backstory: TAP is a Teacher Apprenticeship Program begun by a teacher in the Chittenden Supervisory Union. This fine program is designed to provide faster and easier access to the teaching profession for those who already have degrees in other fields and involves intensive mentoring. A story appeared about it in the Burlington Free Press a few years ago and then VER did its own story, then brought the program to the attention of the governor when a US Department of Education Office of Innovation official was about to visit the state. Cheerleading for an already-existing program he was barely aware of doesn't bode well for those who hoped for a more vigorous championing of alternative teacher certification techniques from the governor.  *   *   * FROM ELSEWHERE... From the U.S. Freedom Foundation On the web at: http://www.freedomfoundation.us COUNTERING SCHOOL CHOICE REQUIRES ACTIONS NOT WORDS by David W. Kirkpatrick, Senior Education Fellow Few institutions are as sensitive to criticism as the public schools. Any suggestion that things are less than perfect brings forth cries for its defenders that the schools are being "bashed."  There are positive things to be said for public education, and most students will remain where they are regardless of other options. Few defenders of the current system, however, would argue that it meets the needs of all students; or even 90%. If that should be true, the remaining 10% are nearly 5 million students.  Since parents have a constitutional right to select the school for their children, all should be in a position to exercise that right. The issue is money. If you have it, you have choice. To say vouchers take money away from public schools is to argue that schools should be funded for students they don't have. From 1972 to 1997, enrollment in Cleveland's public schools declined from 150,000 to 75,000, and there was no voucher program. Should the state have continued to reimburse the district for 150,000 students? This argument also ignores the fact that school districts lose no local funding when a student leaves. Such money, mostly from the property tax, is not raised on a per-student basis. A district only loses state and federal per-student funding when a voucher student leaves. It actually has more funding per-pupil for those who remain. Private schools are also charged with "creaming. This ignores the fact that, while they can reject students, they rarely do so. They also do not limit student attendance to a specific geographic area. Further, while they can more easily expel students, they rarely do that either. Typically, space available, schools of choice accept and graduate virtually all applicants, whereas public schools only accept those students they must. Once enrolled, dropout rates run in excess of 50% for many urban schools. It is said students don't pick a private school, such schools pick students. No school can pick students who do not apply and most students get their first choice. Actually, it is the public schools that pick students since the school district establishes its schools, defines their attendance boundaries, and tells the students which one they must attend.  Nor do public schools have to educate everyone, as commonly claimed. No state has a compulsory education requirement. What is mandated are such things as attendance, the number of hours in a school day and the number of days in the school year. Even then, students are not required to attend 100% of the time. Furthermore, as many as 700,000 drop out each year and perhaps as many more graduate minimally educated. Another unverified charge is that vouchers lead to fly-by-night schools. Where? How many? And, even if that should happen, since no voucher student is assigned to a school, those that are inadequate usually pay the price as students leave. Public schools, however unsuccessful, receive more students each year, and the money that comes with them. It is claimed that nonpublic schools are not as accountable as the public ones. In fact, they are more accountable to those who matter, students and parents. Public schools are not accountable for results, only the money trail, and sometimes not even that. Nonpublic schools, and public schools of choice, such as magnet, alternative and charter schools, are accountable for both. As for a level playing field, it is true that public schools are more heavily regulated, but try to deregulate them and see who blocks these moves -- the same groups who complain about the regulations. Finally, if a level playing field is the goal, why don't nonpublic schools receive as much money as the public schools? The typical nonpublic school operates at a cost -- cost, not tuition -- of one-half to one-third that of the public schools.  The only chance the public school establishment has to stop the growing school choice movement is to make public schools so good no one will want to leave, although that probably won't work either. Even among equally good nonpublic schools, or colleges, people have their own reasons for selecting one rather than another. In a free society, that's the way it should be. David Kirkpatrick is a Bennington native who now lives in Pennsylvania. He is a former public school teacher and officer in the Pennsylvania NEA.  *   *   * WHO COVERS EDUCATION IN VERMONT? We do! Consider a gift to Vermonters for Better Education, the publisher of the weekly Vermont Education Report, Vermont's ONLY continual source of education news. Send donations to: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, Vermont 05701. VBE is a nonprofit organization and contributions are tax-deductible.  *   *   * The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.   Subscribe Here SubscribeRemove

---

Return to Education Report Index | Return to VBE Index | Vermonters for Better Education Homepage

---

........