Tag Archives: education

An Appellate Court Error

Posted on by
Reply

The 6th Circuit has this one.  Gary B v Whitmer concerns children in a really poorly performing Detroit public schools: miserable classroom conditions and abysmal test scores.

The appellate court decided, though, that this matter had nothing to do with the quality of the schools, over which the court has no jurisdiction, and everything to due process as delineated in our Constitution’s 14th Amendment, within which the court does have some jurisdiction.

Acting within that capacity, the court manufactured out of whole cloth, a brand, spanking new right: a state-funded education. Whereby this appellate court has also asserted the Federal government’s right and authority to dictate to a State on matters which the court acknowledges to belong to the State and not to the Federal government.

The Wall Street Journal noticed one of the foolishnesses of this ruling [emphasis added]:

The decision…notes there is a history of public education in the US and “a substantial relationship between access to education and access to economic and political power.” Surely the same could be said of home ownership. Does the Constitution command subsidized housing? “Property,” unlike education, is at least mentioned in the Constitution.

Indeed. And [emphasis added here, too]:

When judges invent new rights they can also damage the democratic process. The Supreme Court has warned against the Due Process Clause being “subtly transformed into the policy preferences of the Members of this Court.” Yet that’s what will happen if federal judges are put in charge of state and local education policy. The majority says poor education undermines democracy, and that’s right—but judicial imperialism threatens it even more.

That brings to mind, also, CJ Taft’s remarks in an earlier case:

The good sought in unconstitutional legislation is an insidious feature because it leads citizens and legislators of good purpose to promote it without thought of the serious breach it will make in the ark of our covenant or the harm which will come from breaking down recognized standards.

So it is, too, with extra-Constitutional judicial rulings.

The 6th Circuit’s ruling can be read here.

Teachers Unions and Online Education

Posted on by
Reply

Oregon’s public schools are closed down due to the Wuhan Virus situation, as are most of our nation’s school systems.  As a result of that, parents started flocking their children to online charter schools so as to continue their education.  The Oregon Education Association, among others, object to that, though. They’d rather the kids sit around at home (because Oregon, like many States, has instituted a stay-home policy for all the State’s citizens and others living there) twiddling their thumbs, making pests of themselves, and otherwise being bored out of their minds rather than continue their schooling. So:

Under pressure from the unions, the Oregon Department of Education stopped allowing transfers on March 27. At Oregon Connections Academy, this means some 1,600 students who had sought to transfer won’t be able to….

Whatever happened to “It’s for the children?”

Oh, wait–these are teachers unions.

Resistance to Change

Posted on by
Reply

Matthew Hennessey, writing in Sunday’s Wall Street Journal commented extensively on the current Wuhan Virus (my term, not his) situation and its impact on education, specifically the forced switch to a measure of home schooling.

Many families have found themselves running pop-up homeschools. Most students will return to traditional classrooms when the crisis passes. But some families—perhaps many—will come away from this involuntary experiment with a new appreciation for home-based education. They may even decide that homeschooling is not only a plausible option, but a superior one.

It’s that last bit, coupled with the article’s subheadline, that drew my attention. That subhead was

Education has long been resistant to change, but it can’t dodge the pandemic.

Education can’t dodge the pandemic any more than any of the rest of us can.  But it isn’t education that’s resistant to change.  The rapidly increasing demand for voucher schools, charter schools, straight-up homeschooling, and other variants to providing education for our K-12 children demonstrates the error of that claim.

It’s the parents who are pushing for those changes, and they’re supported by a few politicians and a few State and local governments who are, if not pushing for these changes, at least are staying out of their way.

It’s many other State governments and especially teachers unions who are actively opposing these changes. It’s the managers of education systems who have been long resistant to change, and remain so. The consumers of education systems, and especially their parents, are clamoring for these and an unfettered expansion of these changes.

Holding Some Back

Posted on by
Reply

Forty-three million students are doing homework at home due to the current Wuhan virus situation.

Here’s the shocker about that:

Some public schools are calling online work “enrichment,” not part of the curriculum, because they can’t guarantee that all students will have access to it.

The work, which was part of the curriculum when school was in session, won’t be graded, won’t count.  This is another example of the Left’s view of equality: hold back the successful because the less successful don’t, or can’t, keep up.  Don’t take steps to help the less successful do better. No, that’s too hard.

Remember this view of equality next November.

No VoTech in Public Schools

Posted on by
Reply

That seems to be the cry of those who object to a potential requirement that students should learn to code by the time they graduate from high school.

The Wall Street Journal ran another of its point-counterpoint debates, this time on the subject of learning coding—the rudiments of  programming—over the weekend.

Supporters argue

The idea is that such a skill will be invaluable in a world that increasingly runs on computer technology. What’s more, many companies report shortages of workers with programming skills.

Detractors, in addition to crying crocodile tears over supporters having ties to industry, argue

adding a coding requirement for graduation is at odds with the very purpose of public education, and its focus on humanistic values.

Extend the detractors’ logic a skosh. It would seem they don’t want any form of Vocational-Technical classes in public education. Get rid of the VoTech classes in high school that would so prepare these students, with no desire for college, for earning their way in the workaday world (earning more than many college graduates). Get rid of VoTech classes in the public junior colleges, too—after all, these two-year colleges are only for the college-bound looking for a cheaper entry into college and for already working middle-aged adults looking to improve their business skills.

Extend the detractors’ logic a small bit further than that skosh. Computers are as ubiquitous a tool in today’s world as are pens, pencils, and keyboards. Knowing the rudiments of programming is as critical to getting along in the world—now especially for engineers and theoreticians (yes, including feminist studiers)—as is basic writing.  Maybe we should stop wasting grade school money on writing and junior and senior high school money on essay writing.  After all, we have computers for that.

Or, maybe those supporters have the better argument.