Hey, Randi: nanny state schools don’t work
Friday, August 8, 2008Written by: Uncle Charley
Is the AFT’s new president Randi Weingarten really serious about her social welfare vision for education, or is she just giving us all a big head fake to take our eyes off reforms that really need to happen? It’s a question worth asking. From Education Week, via the blog Kitchen Table Math:
In her speech, the new president also called for a federal law that promotes community schools to serve needy children that provide all the services and activities they and their families need.
“Imagine schools that are open all day and offer after-school and evening recreational activities and homework assistance … and suppose the schools included child care and dental, medical and counseling clinics, or other services the community needs,” Ms. Weingarten said. “For example, they might offer neighborhood residents English language instruction, GED programs, or legal assistance.”
The fundamental problem with this “broader, bolder approach” is exactly the one pointed out by Matthew Ladner in his guest post on Jay Greene’s blog. Though I probably wouldn’t use the tongue-in-cheek “Cheech and Chong” analogy, Ladner’s analysis is spot-on:
Personally, I’m trying to imagine a system of public schools that could teach 4th grade kids how to read after spending $40,000 or more on their education. In 2007, 34% of American public school 4th graders scored below basic in reading on the NAEP. If we can’t trust schools to teach kids how to read, just why would we want them trying to fix our teeth or attempting to resolve our legal issues?
The approach touted by Weingarten, the Economic Policy Institute, et al is not only fraught with tenuous assumptions that should have been dispelled after The Great Society experiment, but also would distract schools from their primary purpose. Do KIPP-operated schools and others like West Denver Prep succeed because they try to be all things to their families or because they focus like a laser beam on the things that matter? Yes, the latter.
A strong education grounded in the ability to read and understand math proficiently is what will give the poor and underprivileged the tools to break free from chronic dependency. Randi Weingarten may want a nanny government to perpetuate dependency among certain classes, but individuals and our society will be better off with greater breadth and depth of knowledge. They will be worse off under centralized, government-run welfare services. Let’s promote constructive compassion through families, communities, churches, and private charities, and keep our schools from being further afflicted by the destructive tendencies of government bureaucracy.
The approach? It may be broad, it may be bold, but it’s also—at best—hopelessly naïve. Let’s look for ways to beat the odds, not to compound them. Then again, maybe Randi Weingarten has succeeded in momentarily distracting one old
August 8th, 2008 at 9:58 am
It’s a tired canard to equate calls for placing social services inside school buildings with some sort of socialist conspiracy to create dependency. No one in his or her right mind would ask a public school system to run health or dental clinics, provide counseling, etc. But school buildings belong to the public, and as such should provide space to meet a variety of public needs, assuming that space is available. Placing public health and dental clinics and public or non-profit social service agencies inside schools doesn’t represent anything approaching a “nanny government.” Doing this makes sense because it provides “one-stop shopping” for families in need of a lot of services.
There are some services the private sector doesn’t provide, in part because there’s no profit to be made. So what’s the problem with locating those public services inside the very public buildings these families already know and visit on a daily basis?