The Public School Monopoly Forces Kids to Learn Secular Humanism. We Need More Options

President Donald Trump issued a proclamation declaring this week, Jan. 20-26, as National School Choice Week.

The proclamation expresses concern about performance of U.S. students in international surveys: 24th in reading, 25th in science, 40th in math. And it ascribes the cause of these disappointing statistics to the “consequences of the limitations imposed by a largely one-size-fits-all approach to education.”

It makes all the sense in the world to appreciate the value of bringing the marketplace and competition to education. Free markets serve us extremely well in delivering goods and services. Why shouldn’t one of our nation’s most important institutions—education—also benefit from competition?

It is ironic that the political left extols the importance of diversity while also wanting government monopolies.

The conclusion should be the opposite. The more diverse a customer base, ethnically or any other way, the more diversity you need among suppliers to meet and serve the unique needs of different communities. This can only be achieved in free, private markets.

Statistics on the changing ethnic profile of the students in our public schools speak for themselves.

In 1997, 63.4 percent of the students in our public schools were white and 36.6 percent were minority—black, Hispanic, Asian, and multiracial—students. By 2014, 49.5 percent were white and 50.5 percent were minority.

The projection from the National Center for Education Statistics is that by 2026, 45 percent of public school students will be white and 55 percent will be minority.

Parents of these minority communities should have freedom to choose an educational framework for the diverse needs of their children. Suppliers in a dynamic marketplace will listen to those parents, try to understand the unique needs of their children, and serve them.

This is exactly the opposite of what you get with a government-controlled monopoly and union bureaucrats.

However, the country is not just becoming increasingly ethnically diverse. It is also becoming increasingly diverse regarding values.

At the nation’s founding, it was almost universally accepted that education would include the Bible. “One great advantage of the Christian religion,” said John Adams, “is that … the duties and rights of the man and citizen are thus taught from early infancy to every creature.”

The Northwest Ordinance, passed in America’s first Congress in 1789 said: “Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.”

This sentiment carried well into the 20th century, until court decisions began, step by step, purging any presence of the Bible in public education.

Did these decisions improve our public schools, making them more value neutral? Certainly not. They simply politicized education, replacing Judeo-Christian values with prevailing politically correct secular humanist values.

Currently, 24 states and the District of Columbia mandate sex education in their public schools. According the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 72 percent of schools in large urban districts provide education regarding pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

What exactly are the values, the worldview, through which issues such as marriage, sex, and pregnancy are being taught in these schools?

Black communities have already been hurt by the secular humanism of the welfare state. Since the 1960s, the incidence of single-parent black households has tripled.

It makes sense that black parents would want to send their children to Christian schools so that these values are transmitted as part of their education. Shouldn’t parents have this right?

In a country with widely growing diversity in religious identification and values, the only answer is parental choice in education. It brings the efficiencies of the marketplace and the principle of religious freedom to schools.

Parents must fight for the right to choose where to send their children to school.

SOURCE 






How School Choice Is Lifting Thousands of Kids Across America

It’s amazing how far school choice has come since the first National School Choice Week was held in 2011. That year, 18 states and Washington, D.C., offered 31 school choice programs (vouchers, tax credits, and education savings accounts) enabling some 212,000 students to attend a private school of choice.

Today, 65 private school choice options are operating in 29 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. More than 482,000 students across the country are exercising private school choice—more than double the number of programs and students since National School Choice Week first launched in 2011.

It’s why this week, we’re celebrating the ninth annual School Choice Week to keep the progress going.

Innovative Options Across the Country

Not only have the number of schooling options swelled in recent years, but so has innovation within the education sector. Education savings accounts, also established in 2011, enable families to direct the funds that would have been spent by the state on their child in the public system.

State funds for each pupil are deposited directly into a parent-controlled account, and families can then use those funds to pay for private school tuition, online learning, special education services and therapies, private tutoring, and a host of other education-related services, products, and providers.

The innovation afforded through education savings accounts can put children on an entirely different educational trajectory.

Take Alexa Bloom, whose son, Julian, was diagnosed at 18 months with autism and a severe sensory and auditory processing disorder. Although the district system said he would need to be in the maximum restrictive environment in school, Bloom wanted something different.

She entered Arizona’s education savings account program, and uses Julian’s account to pay for personal tutors, specially tailored curriculum, and art and music specialists. Thanks to education choice, Julian is getting a customized education that is helping him reach his full potential.

A total of five states—Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, Tennessee, and North Carolina—currently have education savings account options in place, and several other states are seriously considering them this year.

Federal Spotlight

National School Choice Week is also a great opportunity to consider possibilities for federal policymakers to advance education choice. Although education is primarily a state and local issue, the federal government does have a constitutional warrant to advance education choice options for a few special student populations: children from military families, children living in Washington, D.C., and Native American students on tribal lands.

Last year, Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., and Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., introduced a proposal to provide children of military families with education savings accounts. Providing education choice to military families is sound education policy and meets a critical national security need.

In 2017, the Military Times conducted a survey of its readers in which 35 percent of respondents said that dissatisfaction with their child’s education was a “significant factor” in their decision to remain in or leave military service. And in a nationally representative survey of active-duty and veteran families conducted by EdChoice last year, three-quarters of active-duty respondents supported the idea of providing their children with education savings accounts to ensure they can find education options that are the right fit for them.

Making 2019 a Record Year for School Choice

Across the country, states like Texas, West Virginia, Oklahoma, and Indiana are considering establishing education savings accounts to provide education flexibility to as many families as possible. And at the federal level, the Trump administration’s support for parental choice in education bodes well for federally appropriate options, such as education savings accounts for military families.

We Americans experience choice and customization in nearly all aspects of our lives—from food delivery and television to transportation and even tele-medicine—so choice and customization in education should be the norm, rather than the exception.

Education choice improves academic outcomes, leads to more satisfaction among parents, enhances school safety, reduces criminal behavior, and can have positive impacts on later life outcomes, such as earnings.

This National School Choice Week, let’s renew our work to extend those benefits to every single child in America.

SOURCE 






Australia: New $40million 'school of the future' with no year levels and 'campfires' instead of classrooms is set to open in Australia - but not everyone is convinced by the modern concept

"Modern" and "Future" are a laugh.  Most of the ideas behind this are as old as the hills -- going back at least to Maria Montessori -- and were tried many times in the 20th century with indifferent success. I taught in a "progressive" school much like this and it worked reasonably well for brighter kids with a motivated home background but the majority learned next to nothing and failed their final High School exams

Next week, 350 Australian pupils will step through the doors of a new type of school - a school that doesn't have classrooms, exams or levels.

Lindfield Learning Village located in Sydney's North Shore is the first of it's kind in Australia and this year the new facility, which cost the NSW Government $40million to build, is offering places to kids from kindergarten age through to Year 10.

The 'school of the future' teaches children through project-based activities and aims to give them the skills to solve 'real world problems'

This means instead of learning subjects in a single fashion, a child will learn in a collaborative way about multiple disciplines.

Although there will be teachers, children will be also be mentored by others who are older than them as well as learn from mixed aged peers.

There aren't assessments either - at least not in a formal sense.

Principal Stephanie McConnell told the ABC pupils will be evaluated 'but perhaps not in the way we understand assessment in a traditional environment'.

'A student might choose a particular point in time when they feel they can demonstrate the learning required to meet a particular learning outcome.'

The sprawling campus, set on the site old University of Technology site at Ku-ring-gai, has also gone without classrooms.

Rather, teaching will happen around 'waterholes' which are spaces dedicated to big groups, 'campfires' - spaces for small groups working with a teacher and 'caves' - spaces for children who want to work on their own.

While there is capacity for up to 2000 students, this year, only 350 students were eligible to enrol.

One parent, Mario Trinco, who is sending his three daughters to the school, told the ABC the school's progressive approach is in step with technological advancements. 'Things have changed so much in the last 20 years, with social media [and] the internet - and the education system hasn't kept up.'

While the ABC clip about the school and its opening was viewed by more than 32,000 people on Facebook, those leaving comments said they weren't convinced this type of educational system was a solution to current learning problems.

One woman Ashleigh wrote: 'I sort of cringed while watching this. I think giving kids real life problem solving skills is great but there's so many aspects of this model that are unrealistic.

'Wouldn't this model be better if it was paired with traditional learning, particularly English and maths so they actually have the foundational knowledge to be able to solve the problems?'

Another, Kylie, questioned the school's model of progressing children by ability rather than by age and assessment.

She said while this might give brighter kids a confidence boost because they'd get a chance to work on advanced projects with older kids, she wanted to know how other children might feel having to work on simpler tasks with those below their age level.

'The problem with these educational fads is that they think they have to abandon everything that is 'old' when in reality the answer is somewhere in the middle.'

A third, Melinda, said she thought the idea behind the school was great. However, she noted only time would tell whether the system would work well for the majority.

'I taught in a school with a similar approach/philosophy. It was beneficial for some students, but for many, it failed the students, which is why I had to leave after 2 years.

'Let's hope this new school has done their research. I hope it works well and is a great success because our current education system needs an overhaul.'

SOURCE